Amid growing global skepticism toward “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI), Japanese universities are rapidly embracing surprisingly radical DEI measures. In Japan’s university admissions, admission quotas for females (Joshi-waku, literally “Girls’ Quotas”) grant eligibility exclusively to women and are being introduced successively in highly competitive STEM programs. Both national and private institutions employ this scheme. Typically, applicants under female admission quotas face either a less rigorous written examination than the regular track or no written test at all.
The rationales vary: Japan’s exceptionally low percentage of women in STEM among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) members, mounting global pressure on universities to promote DEI, Japan’s low ranking in the Global Gender Gap Index, and the oft‑repeated maxim that “diversity matters.” The phrase “let’s follow the world’s lead” has become a stock slogan to justify these radical measures.
Because Japan is ethnically homogeneous compared with the United States and EU member states, DEI targets are effectively limited to women. Although women’s higher‑education enrollment rate already exceeds that of men, only “women in STEM” receive relief through the extreme measure of quotas (Fig.1). Other significant barriers—such as those faced by students from rural areas or low‑income backgrounds—are largely ignored except for a handful of special scholarships; they are never addressed through such drastic devices as quotas. (Faculties that train physicians or teachers do maintain “regional quotas,” which require graduates to serve for a fixed period in designated areas to alleviate local shortages. These do not constitute affirmative action.)
Fig.1 Scatter Plot of High School Graduate Advancement/Employment. Image from the paper
University admissions are a zero‑sum game. If affirmative action is to be adopted, diverse disadvantages should be weighted appropriately, yet such efforts are entirely absent.
Japan’s affirmative‑action policies have long trailed American and European precedents. Universities often cite “international standards” when adopting admission quotas for females. Yet, to the best of my knowledge, quotas of this kind in university admissions are illegal sex discrimination in advanced economies such as the United States and the EU. Even before the 2023 SFFA v. Harvard decision, both the 1978 UC v. Bakke ruling and Title IX of 1972 made admission quotas for females unlawful. By 2000, the EU had established that sex-based quotas constituted illegal discrimination. (One private university in France still operates an admission quota for females, but this is a legacy exception stemming from its origins as a women’s college.)
Proponents of admission quotas for females never mention these facts, repeatedly insisting that “affirmative action is common at universities worldwide.” Indeed, some jurisdictions in the West allow milder forms—tie‑break preferences, bonus points, special scholarships, or preparatory programs—but the extreme measure of quotas in admissions remains illegal discrimination throughout advanced Western nations. While advocates invoke comparisons with the West to justify their objectives, they simultaneously employ methods that diverge sharply from Western human‑rights norms. The result is an ideologically driven double standard that is indefensible academically. Unfortunately, Japanese scholars critical of admission quotas for females are exceedingly few.
In U.S. academia, conservative skepticism toward DEI has reportedly been underestimated for years; Japan surpasses that margin by far. If ideology‑based discrimination continues to be institutionalized, the academic damage will become impossible to ignore, and the future of the academy will be in jeopardy. The unprecedented practice of cherry‑picking, distorting, or fabricating Western examples to justify overt discrimination is historically unparalleled.
Our hope lies in the backlash from high‑school students themselves. A 2024 survey (n = 3,762, ± 1.9 %) by the major prep‑school group Kawai‑Juku shows that nearly 45 percent of students oppose admission quotas for females, up from about 35 percent (n = 2,412, ± 1.6 %) in 2023—a ten‑point jump in a single year that reflects mounting resistance to rapidly expanding quotas. Among the male students who are the victims of this discrimination, the opposition rate would certainly be much higher.
When the Civil Aviation College, Japan’s premier pilot-training institution, announced that roughly 20 percent of its seats would go to women without the usual written examinations, the story was picked up by mainstream media and ignited nationwide debate. People who normally pay little attention to university admissions objected on public-safety grounds, noting that the college customarily requires rigorous English and science tests; many aviation experts voiced concern about admitting pilots who bypass the English exam in a country whose official language is Japanese.
To sound the alarm from an academic standpoint, I have published two peer‑reviewed articles on the discrimination in Japanese university admissions described above. [1,2] I hope that persistent, evidence‑based scrutiny will help protect students’ human rights. Researchers and journalists interested in Japan’s radical pursuit of DEI are encouraged to get in touch. Urgent international pressure on Japan to respect human rights is needed. [email protected]
To universities that continue the discriminatory custom of admission quotas for females, I appeal: shall we not, in earnest, follow the world’s lead?
Explore our Minding the World column for insights on higher education worldwide, offering news, op-eds, and analysis.
[1]Kunitake, Yuto. “Affirmative Action in Japanese Higher Education: A Critical Examination of DEI Implementation.” Social Sciences & Humanities Open 11 (2025): 101312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101312.
[2]Kunitake, Yuto. “Implications of SFFA v. Harvard for Japan: Affirmative Action and DEI in STEM Fields.” Journal of JSEE 73, no. 2 (2025): 2_2–2_6. Published online March 20, 2025. https://doi.org/10.4307/jsee.73.2_2.
Image: “Nara Institute of Science and Technology Japan-UC Davis Thermodynamic Challenge” by UC Davis College of Engineering on Flickr
