A Comparative Analysis of Policies Introducing Foreign Care Workers in Elderly Care Services in South Korea and Japan: Focusing on Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework

Background and Purpose

This study investigates the policy formation processes of introducing migrant care workers in South Korea and Japan, two rapidly aging societies facing severe care labor shortages. Using Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Framework(MSF), it explores how institutional capacity, political momentum, and cultural context influence divergent policy trajectories. Although both countries adopted policies to address demographic challenges, Japan institutionalized early, while Korea’s approach remains experimental. This comparison aims to offer theoretical and practical insights for aging societies.

Methods

A qualitative comparative case study method was employed, applying Kingdon’s MSF to analyze how the problem, policy, and politics streams converged in each country. The study is based on secondary data sources, including government documents, academic literature, and policy reports. The analysis also identifies the role of policy entrepreneurs in opening policy windows and shaping agenda-setting.

Results

The findings highlight stark differences in policy design and institutional readiness. Japan’s model includes structured language training, professional licensing support, and centralized coordination led by national agencies. These efforts have enabled proactive integration of migrant workers. In contrast, South Korea relies mainly on international students and graduates under temporary visa schemes, lacking systemic support for adaptation and retention. The absence of standardized training and dedicated care institutions in Korea limits the quality and sustainability of care services.

Conclusions and Limitations

To ensure long-term sustainability, Korea must shift from a reactive to a strategic policy approach. Recommendations include the development of adaptation infrastructure such as vocational Korean language education, cultural integration programs, and mentoring systems. Korea’s visa and employment schemes should be expanded to include a broader range of migrant care workers. Policy monitoring and flexible adjustments are also essential.

However, the study is limited by its reliance on secondary data and its focus on policy formation rather than post-implementation outcomes. As Korea’s policy was only formally implemented in 2024, future research should incorporate empirical methods such as interviews and longitudinal analysis to assess real-world impacts and inform future revisions.