The following is a guest article written by Joan Benedict, a student from Indonesia studying at the School of International Liberal Studies at Waseda University in Japan. Joan enrolled in the 2025 SPICE/Stanford–Waseda Intensive Course: Exploring Peace in East Asia and Beyond Through the Lenses of Cultural Understanding, Education, and International Relations, which was organized by SPICE and Waseda’s Faculty of Social Sciences and taught by Meiko Kotani. The course brought together students from the Graduate School of Social Sciences, the School of Social Sciences, the Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies, the School of International Liberal Studies, and the School of Political Science and Economics. With participants from Japan and international students representing 10 different countries, the course created a truly dynamic and diverse learning environment.

During this year’s spring break, I had the opportunity to attend the SPICE–Waseda Intensive Course, held under the theme “Exploring Peace in East Asia and Beyond Through the Lenses of Cultural Understanding, Education, and International Relations.” The course brought together passionate students from diverse countries and backgrounds, all united by shared international experiences and a curiosity for understanding our world beyond borders. Over five days, I had eye-opening discussions with lecturers and peers that reshaped how I view peace, history, and empathy.

On the first day, Dr. Gary Mukai opened the course with a compelling session on cultural understanding through the history of Japanese American incarceration. He shared the experiences of his parents growing up as Nisei, or second-generation Japanese American, and the painful stories of families separated by national loyalty during World War II. Years later, he attempted to reconnect with his relatives in Japan, uncovering stories long buried in silence. What struck me most was how genuine and human these stories were. I realized that history is so much more complex and emotional than what formal education often conveys. Understanding the emotional weight of historical events helped me move beyond just considering what happened and how it affected my nation, and instead reflect on what it meant for the families and people who lived through it.

This theme was continued on Day 2 in Mr. Rylan Sekiguchi’s lecture. His lecture helped me understand how historical bias is often not born out of malice but from the gaps in what we’re taught. In a workshop, we read descriptions of the same historical event from four different countries. The differences in tone, word choice, and framing made me question the reliability of the “truth” I thought I knew. What moved me even more was the conversation that followed. Beyond national resentment, the participating students became genuinely curious about how others saw the same events. It made me realize that history is not just a list of facts but a collection of narratives shaped by perspective. That insight alone changed how I now view historical events and interpret news.

On Day 3, we shifted from the past to modern history and present realities with Dr. Shuoyang Meng’s lecture on transnational academic mobility. He explained how academic migration has long been a catalyst for change and intellectual development across borders. After discussing the benefits of student mobility, he also touched on the struggles international students face today, particularly around career trajectories under current policies. His lecture resonated deeply with me as an international student. It pushed me to think more critically about today’s education systems, review how international interactions unfold in the job market, and recognize the importance of cultural understanding beyond just historical context.

On Day 4, Ambassador Karl Eikenberry delivered an insightful and impactful lecture on the U.S.–China security landscape. What left the deepest impression on me was his diplomatic presence—the way he communicated complex and sensitive issues with calm, clarity, and respect. He spoke about the value of strategic empathy: the ability to understand another country’s fears, intentions, and internal logic. It made me reflect on how peace is not only shaped by policy, but also by the tone and manner in which we engage with others. His sincerity and warmth were unmistakable, grounded in decades of experience across different regions and roles. Meeting someone who doesn’t just talk about peace, but truly lives it, was a rare and inspiring experience. Wrapping up the lecture, he left with a piece of advice to step outside our comfort zones, to take risks, and to explore broadly while we are still students.

Image

Building on everything we learned throughout the week, we ended the course by presenting our peace projects. The outcomes were as diverse as our experiences, including an international charity initiative, a healthier approach to social media, and a platform for objective media coverage. Each project represented both personal reflection and a collective commitment to reimagining peace on our own terms.

By the end of this intensive course, I was able to gain new insights and challenge my assumptions about peace: that peace is not simply the absence of conflict but the presence of empathy, trust, and genuine understanding. It is built over time through conversation, learning, and meaningful connection. What I appreciated most was how every session invited me to reflect not just on global issues but also on my own position within them—how my perspective was constructed, how my history informs my interactions, and how I can choose to respond with more care and openness.

I entered this course expecting to study diplomacy and international relations. I left with something more enduring: a community of admirable students from diverse backgrounds and experiences and the realization that peace begins with how we choose to engage—with our words, our listening, our questions, and our actions. More than an academic experience, it was a personal journey toward becoming a more thoughtful and responsible global citizen.

To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram.

The following is a guest article written by Ryoya Shinozaki, who traveled to the San Francisco Bay Area with other graduate students from the University of Tokyo—under the leadership of Professor Hideto Fukudome—in January 2025. SPICE/Stanford collaborates closely with the Graduate School of Education at the University of Tokyo and met with the students during their visit to the Bay Area.

Mariko Yang-Yoshihara’s lecture on STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics) education encouraged me to think about the relationship between language and interdisciplinary learning in a new way. Instead of asking how STEAM can support English education, I began to ask whether language education—particularly through CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning)—could offer something valuable to STEAM education itself, highlighting the need to integrate a human-centered perspective into the traditional STEM framework.

Image

CLIL and STEAM differ in their main objectives. CLIL focuses on learning both content and language simultaneously, often grounded in language acquisition theories such as Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory. STEAM, in contrast, emphasizes creative and integrated thinking across science, technology, engineering, the arts, and mathematics. Yang-Yoshihara’s lecture emphasized that the “A” in STEAM more precisely represents a human-centered perspective rooted in a liberal arts education. Language is typically seen as a communication tool, not a learning target. However, the two approaches share several features, including real-world relevance, student-centered learning, and compatibility with project-based formats.

If integrated carefully, a CLIL-STEAM model could support a wide range of learners. Students preparing for global careers could benefit from learning technical content in English. STEM-strong but English-challenged students might gain confidence through contextual language use. Vocational students could develop workplace-relevant communication skills by engaging in collaborative STEAM tasks. CLIL also offers techniques that could enhance students’ experiences in STEAM-focused learning. One is scaffolding, which helps learners express complex ideas through sentence frames, model texts, and structured support. Another is the practice of dual objectives, where teachers set both content and language goals. Finally, dual-focused assessment allows instructors to evaluate both what students know and how effectively they communicate it.

Image

These strategies could help make English-medium STEAM learning more accessible and effective. During our conversation, Yang-Yoshihara reflected on the STEAM-focused educational interventions used at SKY Labo, a non-profit initiative she co-founded. In SKY Labo’s bilingual design thinking workshops targeting middle and high school-aged students in Japan, responses have been mixed—some appreciated the immersive English environment and signed up for the program for that reason, while others felt that the complex topics required deeper understanding through their own native language. This tension highlights the importance of flexible program design that balances linguistic immersion with accessibility, based on students’ experiences in STEAM-focused learning.

To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram.

Urgent Rethink Needed on U.S-China Trade and Technological Competition
Stein also pushed back against long-held assumptions that the U.S. market alone can dictate global business trends. The notion that “the only market that matters is the U.S. market” no longer holds, noting that Chinese consumers and innovation ecosystems now play a decisive role in shaping product development and global supply chains. He noted that European businesses have expressed a radical shift in strategy, they said, “we've been in China for Asia, in North America, for the Americas…We're now going from that model to what could very well become an, ‘in China for China and the world minus one.’ And the minus one is, of course, the U.S. market.”

On the technology front, he offered a candid evaluation of the U.S.-China competition. Stein reflected on the current state of artificial intelligence in China and the U.S., he said, “ at the end of the day it's not who has the best model; a good enough model is a good enough model, where it really makes a difference is in the application…and I see China racing ahead in the application of AI.” 

Know Your Competitor
Stein concluded with a call for more measured and constructive engagement. He urged both Washington and Beijing to establish clearer rules of the road, maintain open lines of communication, and invest in policy solutions that reduce uncertainty rather than amplify it.

Stein’s keynote offered a business-grounded counterpoint to prevailing narratives of decoupling and confrontation. His insights reinforced the importance of understanding the full complexity of economic interdependence, as well as China’s capacity for global market disruption, and the costs of miscalculation. As part of the broader SCCEI China Conference, his remarks served as a reminder that if America does not properly understand its competitor, efforts to stay ahead may well backfire and erode U.S. strength and global standing. 

A full recording of Sean Stein’s keynote is available on YouTube and below.

China’s Global Ambitions
In response to a question posed by Professor Li, Economy said, “I think, under Xi Jinping, there are big ambitions.” She followed by listing out several of China’s objectives including:

1. Become the dominant power in the Indo-Pacific, which begins with China's sovereignty claims around Taiwan, Hong Kong and the South China Sea;
2. Continue to have the international business community be dependent on China for parts of its supply chain;
3. Create an insulated domestic economy that is protected from pressures of the global economy but at the same time exerts enormous influence on it;
4. Shape the geostrategic and political landscape in new ways through programs like the Belt and Road Initiative and through its behavior in international institutions;
5. De-dollarize the global economy and increase the role of the Chinese currency.

Economy concluded by sharing that China has “a number of big ambitions, none of which actually coincides with us,” and although there are certainly areas for collaboration between China and the U.S., she’s not sure the current U.S. administration is interested in exploring them.

Economy’s address was a highlight of the SCCEI China Conference, which featured panels and presentations from leading scholars and practitioners on China’s economy, governance, and international strategy. The event reflects SCCEI’s mission to promote policy-relevant research and open dialogue on China’s role in the global economy.

A full recording of Dr. Economy’s talk is available on YouTube and below.

The following is a guest article written by Yuri Tsutsumi, who traveled to the San Francisco Bay Area with other graduate students from the University of Tokyo—under the leadership of Professor Hideto Fukudome—in January 2025. SPICE/Stanford collaborates closely with the Graduate School of Education at the University of Tokyo and met with the students during their visit to the Bay Area.

Arriving at Jtown Pizza Co. on North 6th Street, our meeting place for the Japantown study tour in Downtown San Jose led by Dr. Gary Mukai, I noticed a striking contrast between the scenery to the east and west sides of the street. On the east side stood brand-new, reinforced-concrete construction apartment buildings, while on the west side was an ivory-colored, two-story wooden building with an archaic balcony. Right beside it, I spotted a restaurant sign reading “Minato,” a familiar Japanese proper name. As I walked out onto Jackson Street, I saw more signboards of stores and restaurants related to Japan and Hawaii. In the United States, it’s probably not unusual for the atmosphere of a neighborhood to noticeably change just bygoing straight down a street, but here it felt especially distinctive. Photo of Jtown Pizza Co. (below) courtesy the Graduate School of Education at the University of Tokyo. 

Image

The few-block area known as “Nihonmachi”—Japantown in Downtown San Jose—has retained much of its original appearance to this day. Local Japanese American organizations—as well as non-Japanese Americans, including Chinese Americans—have made great efforts to preserve and revitalize Japantown, including its once neighboring Heinlenville, a former site of a Chinatown in San Jose. Jtown Pizza Co. now occupies what was once a Chinese restaurant called Ken Ying Low. In addition to preserving Japantown as a historic area, the Japanese American Museum of San Jose was established in 1987. The museum showcases Japanese American life from the earliest generation of immigrants to the postwar period. Artifacts like soy sauce barrels and numerous farming tools offered me a glimpse into the lives of 19th-century Japanese American farmers. A wide range of historical archives on wartime internment, along with a recreated barracks room interior and exterior from one of the camps that gave off a dusty smell, allowed me to imagine the harsh conditions endured by internees. Through this study tour, I came to realize that, although many years have passed and the environment surrounding Japanese Americans has drastically changed, the everyday lives of 19th-century Japanese American farmers and those interned during the war shared much in common with our lives in Japan today—e.g., keeping a soy sauce barrel for planting, playing baseball and sumo with close friends and neighbors on weekends, going to a local bathhouse, and so on. Thanks to the people dedicated to preserving Japantown’s heritage and passing it down to future generations, I was able to catch a glimpse of what everyday life was like back then.

In graduate school, I came to appreciate once again how much I can learn from academic books and papers digitally archived in the university library. Those learnings were, of course, invaluable—yet at the same time, this study tour made me realize how much more I could learn by engaging all five senses. During the tour, there were the firsthand stories of Japanese Americans, the scent of dust in the reconstructed camp room at the museum, the umami-rich taste of loco moco gravy at the Hawaiian restaurant Hukilau where we had lunch during the tour, the strong California sunlight breaking through the clouds, and the texture of the wooden buildings. Although there are many ways and tools to learn, stepping beyond the university library to immerse myself in other people’s lives holds deeply important meaning. What makes this kind of learning possible are the people who continue to play a crucial role in maintaining the vitality of Japantown, the museum that collects, preserves and shares Japanese American history, and the generous financial support that sustain these efforts. I am truly grateful for this opportunity and hope that these learning experiences, which gave me insight into past generations of Japanese Americans, will continue to be offered to future generations.

To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram.

Since 2022, SPICE has had the honor of collaborating with CatchLight, a visual-first media organization that leverages the power of visual storytelling to inform, connect, and transform communities. CatchLight Global fellowship, launched in 2017, supports creative leaders who want to cultivate significant audience engagement through inventive distribution methods that will increase the impact of their work.

To help support the distribution of the visuals produced by CatchLight Global Fellows to schools, SPICE has been producing teacher guides in collaboration with several of the Fellows. This work has been made possible and generously supported by the Chao Minami Family Fund.

One of the 2019 CatchLight Global Fellows with whom SPICE has collaborated is Sparsh Ahuja, Founder and CEO of Project Dastaan. On April 17, 2025, the Asian Art Museum in San Francisco hosted an Opening Celebration of a Project Dastaan exhibit. This special presentation at the Asian Art Museum is Project Dastaan’s first showing in the United States.

Dr. Padma Dorje Maitland, Malavalli Family Foundation Associate Curator of the Art of the Indian Subcontinent at the Asian Art Museum, introduced artists Sparsh Ahuja and Sam Dalrymple of Project Dastaan. Padma Dorje Maitland noted “Project Dastaan is an exciting example of global citizens using digital media to explore a difficult subject with sensitivity and compassion. This program offers an accessible, interactive space for individuals and families of South Asian diasporas to reflect on the Partition’s intergenerational impact. For audiences beyond these diasporas, it’s a chance both to learn about the Partition and to consider the moments of ‘partition’ in their own histories.” This comment prompted Amanda Minami—member of CatchLight Board of Directors and philanthropist promoting innovation at the intersection of science and the arts—and I to discuss how our Japanese American relatives were impacted following the Pearl Harbor attack and forced by the U.S. government to leave their homes on the West Coast to incarceration camps. 

Image

During a moving presentation by Sparsh Ahuja and Sam Dalrymple, they shared that “Project Dastaan is a peacebuilding initiative which examines the human impact of global migration through the lens of the largest forced migration in recorded history, the 1947 Partition of India and Pakistan. Project Dastaan is a homage to the legacy of the millions of refugees in the subcontinent who had their lives changed overnight.” Photo above: Sparsh Ahuja and Sam Dalrymple projecting an image of Sparsh’s grandfather holding photos of himself and his wife; photo courtesy, Padma Dorje Maitland. They noted that “These stories are but a snapshot of the countless individual journeys taken by refugees during the crisis.”

To encourage educators to use Project Dastaan’s films in their classrooms, SPICE Curriculum Writers Irene Bryant, Stefanie Orrick, and Waka Takahashi Brown developed a guide for Project Dastaan. A free classroom-friendly teacher’s guide is available for download on the SPICE website and the CatchLight website. Activities in this guide include a pre-test, informational handout and assignment, and an exercise in conflict analysis. In addition, there is an extension activity that tasks students to research different modern-day conflicts, as well as an optional activity where students view one or two short films and engage in a post-viewing discussion.

Image

The SPICE staff highly encourages educators and students to visit the Project Dastaan Virtual Reality (VR) experience at the Asian Art Museum; photo above courtesy, Sree Sripathy. It is offered every Thursday night from 5:00 to 7:00pm, April 17–May 29, 2025.

SPICE is grateful to Amanda Minami, Elodie Mailliet Storm (CEO, CatchLight), and Erica Garber (Vice President of Development & Public Programs, CatchLight) for their unwavering support of SPICE’s collaboration with CatchLight and its Global Fellows.

To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram.

Jessie Kong: Every year, SJEC puts on a week-long, entirely student-run, exchange program for 20-25 visiting Japanese students from Keio, Doshisha, and Kyoto Universities. Through this programming, we strive to provide authentic insights into Stanford academics, extracurriculars, and lifestyle by having the Japanese students join our lives and develop bonding experiences. 

As one of the co-presidents of SJEC this year, my work has centered around coordinating the entire team of Stanford officers, delegating tasks between teams, communicating with and preparing the Japanese students, and facilitating activities during the conference.

Through leading SJEC this year, I have realized the importance of dedication and commitment when planning these activities. My previous years in SJEC leading the social team has also shown me how to plan events from start to finish in an efficient way that leverages the capabilities of everyone on the team while focusing on the experience for the Japanese students. I think being able to put the group's interest above my own was also a good skill I learned while in the co-president position.

Socially, I have been able to build connections both for myself and other Stanford students with the Japanese student community. Starting with SJEC, I was able to meet and take care of visiting Japanese students at Stanford, and this effort was reciprocated when I went to study abroad through the BOSP Kyoto program. Being able to feel the reciprocity of my efforts in SJEC only makes me more motivated to continue working in SJEC to create a good experience for more Japanese students who visit in the future.
 

Yifei Cheng: The main event from our organization this year is the FACES annual summit that took place in January 2025. We invited 40 college students from Chinese and American universities to engage in dialogue about US-China relations on Stanford campus. As the president of FACES, I was involved in candidate selection and planning the summit schedule. I also took the initiative to organize the summit field trip at the Angel Island Immigration Facility. 

Through the lecture of Professor Gordon H. Chang on the persecution of Chinese scientists during the McCarthy Era, I learned about the repeated interlocks between politics and academia in the US, which has significant contemporary repercussions with the current administration's restrictions of student visas and immigration process. 

The FACES summit also enhanced my understanding of diplomacy on a personal level. This experience taught me that cultural exchange isn’t about reaching agreement—it’s about creating a shared space where different truths can coexist. I learned to listen across differences, become comfortable with discomfort, and see the value in ambiguity. These lessons have reshaped how I engage in conversations not only about geopolitics, but also about identity, equity, and belonging more broadly.

I gained concrete organizational skills with managing timelines, delegating tasks, and staying calm when things went wrong—like when the hotel rooming list gets wrong and messy. I also learned that leadership is less about control and more about creating the conditions for others to grow. I facilitated the daily reflection session during the summit. As the discussion facilitator, I found it rewarding to moderate discussions where sometimes disagreements arise. I think this is a valuable skill for my academic and professional development. 
 

Aimen Ejaz and Luv Jawahrani: This year, in its inaugural term, the Stanford Indo-Pak Dosti Forum (SIPDF)achieved what many said was impossible: bringing together Indians and Pakistanis in the same room – voluntarily – twice a week.

In the fall, we launched INTNL REL 47SI: Bridging the Divide, a student-initiated course focused on the political and economic dimensions of India-Pakistan relations. The class brought together prominent individuals concerned about peace-building, ranging from former Indian and Pakistani ambassadors who’d been involved in negotiating peace to professors from the Stanford Graduate School of Business (GSB), to research fellows at the Hoover Institute and the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), and veteran journalists who have covered the subcontinent for decades.

In spring, we co-taught GLOBAL 47SI: Building Bridges—a course that spotlights cross-border entrepreneurship as a tool for soft diplomacy. We invited legendary South Asian entrepreneurs and venture capitalists from both sides of the border: Mamoon Hamid (Managing Director at Kleiner Perkins), Samir Kaul (Managing Director at Khosla Ventures), Amit Patel (Managing Director at Owl Ventures), Bilal Zuberi (Partner at Lux Capital), and Anand Swaminathan (Senior Partner at McKinsey), among others. The goal? To explore how venture-building, innovation, and chai-fueled resilience can outpace political gridlock.

Academically, co-leading our student-led initiative taught us more than any textbook ever could, mostly because we had to build the syllabus ourselves. And we didn’t just co-lead — we co-dreamed and co-hustled, getting the syllabi approved by multiple departments and cold-emailing, even chasing down, speakers from across the U.S.

In designing INTNL REL 47SI: Bridging the Divide, we dove headfirst into the complexities of India-Pakistan political and economic relations. But we didn’t stop at reading IR theory. We debated it with the very diplomats and policymakers who once shaped those theories in real time. Every week became a crash course in postcolonial statecraft, regional security, and the surprisingly human side of high diplomacy.

Then came GLOBAL 47SI: Building Bridges, where we shifted from conflict to collaboration, exploring how entrepreneurship can serve as a tool of soft power. Through case studies, guest lectures, and our own classroom debates, we began asking whether a startup pitch can accomplish  what politicians can't. What happens when innovation moves faster than diplomacy? And what does it mean when the biggest South Asian venture capitalist in the world funds a startup founded by someone from the "other" side?

More than anything, we learned how to turn theory into action. Whether it was teaching concepts like diaspora diplomacy or moderating discussions between venture capitalists and undergrads, we were constantly translating complex ideas into real-world conversations. We didn’t just learn. We taught, we built, and we questioned everything along the way.

Culturally and socially, our student-led initiative felt less like organizing a class and more like hosting weekly peace talks, with chai and biryani. We came in thinking we were building a curriculum; we ended up navigating generations of silence, suspicion, and identity.

We learned that Partition isn’t just a historical event–it’s a living memory passed down through stories and subconscious hesitation. It’s in the way some students avoid eye contact when the topic turns political, or how others lower their voices when mentioning where their family is really from. But we also learned that these barriers can soften when people feel safe enough to speak, and laugh, together.

We watched students from India and Pakistan, often meeting for the first time, begin to open up. Conversations that started stiffly turned into long debates, jokes, shared Desi Spotify playlists, and sometimes even plans to visit each other’s cities, if our countries ever allow it. We learned that vulnerability—especially in a region taught to fear it—is a radical act. And that our generation is more ready than we think to rewrite the script we inherited.

There were moments when we questioned whether this initiative was worth it. When we received backlash online for platforming certain voices. When a class discussion got tense and uncomfortable. When friends warned us that this was “too political,” “too idealistic,” “too risky.” And we didn’t always have the perfect response.

But leadership, we realized, isn’t about always being right. It’s about being rooted in a vision that peace isn’t naïve — it’s necessary. That bridging divides isn’t weakness—it’s the only strength that can outlast hate. And when things fell apart — when a high-profile speaker pulled out at the last minute, or a student pushed back hard in class — we didn’t pivot away from our mission. We dug deeper. We turned cancellations into teachable moments. We turned criticism into conversation. Most importantly, we learned to trust ourselves and to trust that our generation doesn’t have to inherit the silence, the suspicion, and the separation.

Demographic shifts worldwide have increased the number of older workers, and many economies are facing a critical question: Are their labor markets ready to support older workers?

Researchers have found that, in the United States, the surge of older workers has gone hand–in-hand with an increase in the number of “age-friendly jobs” – roles with working conditions more suitable for aging employees, such as placing fewer physical demands or offering greater scheduling flexibility. Yet it remains unclear whether comparable trends have taken hold in other aging economies.

A new study, published in the Journal of the Economics of Ageing, helps fill in this gap by examining the evolution of age-friendly jobs in South Korea (hereafter Korea), where the number of workers aged 50 and over increased by 165 percent from 2000 to 2023. Korea is now officially considered a "super-aged" society, and the government is doubling down on its efforts to bolster the workforce.

The study, co-authored by Hyeongsuk Kim and Chulhee Lee, both of Seoul National University, and Stanford health economist Karen Eggleston, the director of APARC’s Asia Health Policy Program, examines Korea’s workforce and economy to determine whether the nation significantly expanded its 50+ workforce by creating job opportunities favorable for older workers or if some other mechanism is at play. 

The co-authors examined the job characteristics experienced by older Koreans relative to their younger counterparts and U.S. older workers. Second, they analyzed data collected in 2020 about Korean workers, evaluating their jobs based on various parameters in the Age-Friendliness Index (AFI), a tool that measures the degree to which jobs are more suitable for older workers. The researchers considered AFI factors such as the requirement for heavy physical activity, the pace of the job, and the possibility of telecommuting. They also examined how the number of age-friendly jobs changed from 2000 to 2020.

• Sign up for APARC newsletters to receive our scholars' research updates >

• Learn more about Dr. Eggleston's related research project, "Innovation for Healthy Aging" >

  ---

The study finds that, while age-friendly jobs have increased in Korea, the number grew more slowly than in the United States, indicating that the U.S. market responded more quickly to changes in workforce demographics. Furthermore, the study indicates that older Koreans were not the main beneficiaries of age-friendly jobs. Instead, women and college-educated workers benefited more from these jobs, while non-college-educated men have seen fewer gains. “These results highlight the uneven adaptation of Korea’s labor market to demographic change and suggest that social norms and labor market frictions shape age-friendly job creation and who benefits from those jobs,” the researchers write.

The study also unveils that, in Korea, the working conditions of employees aged 50–61 differ significantly from those aged 62 or older. Despite the nation's high employment rates for those aged 65 and older, the researchers discovered that a third of working Koreans over the age of 62 held jobs requiring heavy physical activity and earned lower wages. Additionally, only a little over one-fifth of them had jobs that allowed for “mostly sitting.”

Labor Market Frictions

The study’s authors propose several explanations for why Korea’s economy, despite a significant increase in older workers, has not adapted as quickly as the United States in placing these workers in age-friendly occupations. One reason is Korea's comparatively low level of pension support, which forces workers to fill a disproportionate number of low-skilled, temporary, and day jobs. It may be that many older workers are forced to work, regardless of whether the jobs are friendly to their needs. Another reason may be the rigidities of the labor market, including strong protections against employees being laid off. Such protections are beneficial for workers, but they restrict companies' ability to restructure their workforce. Moreover, the role of chaebol, or large corporations, may also be significant. Although chaebol are producing and selling more, they have also increased automation and resorted to outsourcing instead of hiring additional workers.

Older workers in Korea are also facing competition from women for age-friendly jobs. The researchers noted significant gender-related changes in the country's education and employment levels. In 2009, the percentage of women enrolling in college surpassed that of men, and the percentage of women in the workforce increased by 2.5% from 2000 to 2023. Korean women are likely to have an even stronger preference for the flexibility of age-friendly jobs than American women because of gendered responsibilities for household production.

The study’s results, researchers said, reinforce key findings from previous studies: "that 'age-friendly' jobs appeal to many kinds of workers, not just older adults; and that labor market frictions shape who benefits from age-friendly jobs."

As governments grapple with rising life expectancies and shrinking traditional working-age populations, ensuring that older adults can continue working safely and with dignity is key to sustaining economic growth and social stability. According to the study, South Korea has made impressive strides in keeping older people in the workforce, but the next challenge is ensuring work itself evolves to meet their needs.