Skip to main content

This page has been translated using TexTra by NICT. Please note that the translation may not be completely accurate.
If you find any mistranslations, we appreciate your feedback on the "Request form for improving the automatic translation ".

Data Strategy Promotion Working Group (6th)

Overview

  • Date and time: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 (2023) from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
  • Location: Online
  • Agenda:
    1. Opening
    2. Proceedings
      1. Expansion and structure of base registry and open data
      2. Efforts toward the Embodiment of DFFT
      3. Organizing a Comprehensive Data Strategy
      4. Arrangement of Sub-Working Groups, etc. under the Data Strategy Promotion Working Group
    3. Exchange of opinions
    4. Adjournment

Event Information

Materials

References

Relevant policies

Summary of proceedings

Date

Tuesday, February 28, 2023 (2023), from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

Location

Online Meetings

Attendees

  • Masafumi Mori, Special Advisor to the Prime Minister (Chief Inspector)
  • Kim Shin Ichiro SUNA (Executive Officer, AI Company, Company CEO, LINE Corporation)
  • Nobuhiro Endo (Vice Chairman of Japan Business Federation, Chairman cybersecurity / Special Advisor of NEC Corporation) * Absence
  • Naoki Ota (Representative Director of NewStories Co., Ltd.)
  • Noboru Koshizuka (Professor, The University of Tokyo)
  • GOTO Atsuhiro (President, security Graduate University of Information)
  • Yutaka Saito (Executive Director of the Information-Technology Promotion Agency Digital Architecture and Design Center)
  • Sayoko Shimoyama (Representative Director of Link Data / Director of Info Lounge Co., Ltd.)
  • Masahiko Shoji, Professor, Musashi University
  • Satoru Tezuka (Professor, Keio University) * Absence
  • Hideo Tomioka (Executive Director of Policy Planning Department, New Economy Federation)
  • Jun Murai (Professor, Keio University)
  • Toshiya Watanabe, Professor, The University of Tokyo Institute for Future Initiatives
  • Takashi Asanuma (Chief Officer of the Digital Agency, Digital Agency)
  • Koichi Akaishi (Chief Officer for Digital Policy, Digital Agency)
  • Tatsuya Honmaru (Digital Agency CA)
  • Masaki Fujimoto, Digital Agency CTO
  • HIRAMOTO Kenji (Digital Agency Senior Expert (Data Strategy))
  • Masanori Kusunoki (Director-General of Digital Agency (in charge of digital society common functions))
  • Keisuke Murakami (Director-General of Digital Agency (in charge of services for citizens)) * Absence
  • Tatsuharu Narita (Deputy Executive Director of the Digital Market Competition Headquarters of the Cabinet Secretariat) * Absent
  • Yasuki Matsuo (Executive Director of the Science, Technology and Innovation Promotion Office, Cabinet Office
  • Shuichi Sakamoto (Deputy Director-General of the Secretariat for the Promotion of Science, Technology and
  • Shigeaki Tanaka (Executive Director of the Intellectual Property Strategy Promotion Office of the Cabinet Office) *
  • Katsu Yamasumi (Deputy Director General of the Personal Information Protection Commission Secretariat)
  • Shin'ya Suzuki, Director-General for Policy Coordination of Minister's Secretariat of Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (in charge of information and communications)
  • Masanobu MORITA (cybersecurity of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) Minister's Secretariat, Director General for Policy Planning) * Absent
  • NOHARA Satoshi (Director-General, Commercial Information Policy Bureau

Summary of proceedings

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, The 6th "Data Strategy Promotion Working Group" will be held from now.

Thank you for taking the time to come here today.
My name is Mishima, and I am Counsellor Digital Agency. I will be chairing the meeting today. Nice to meet you.
Before the opening of the Working Group, I would like to receive an address from Special Advisor to the Prime Minister Masafumi Mori, the chief investigator of the Working Group.

Special Advisor Mori, nice to meet you.

Assistant to Prime Minister Mori: Officer Today is the sixth meeting of the Data Strategy Promotion Working Group. Thank you for participating.

There have been various discussions on the review of the Data Strategy, but this time, it seems that the Base Registry will be reviewed and the draft outline of the Data Strategy will be discussed.

With regard to the review of the base registry, discussions on the base registry for basic corporate information are also being held in Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee. In this working group, we would like to have discussions centered on the review of the designation of the base registry and the operation system.

In addition, with regard to DFFT, I have heard that the Government of Japan must firmly promote this idea, and that consideration is currently being accelerated toward the G7 in May this year.

In addition, based on the discussions in the Working Group so far, the Secretariat has submitted a proposal for the structure of the data strategy this time, so we would like to ask for this as well.

We would appreciate it if you could give us your opinions based on your knowledge.

That's all. Thank you very much.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, regarding the introduction of the members of this working group, due to time constraints, I would like to distribute a list of names instead of introducing them.
Please note that Members Endo and Tezuka will be absent today.

Today's meeting will be held online. We ask all members to turn on the camera, mute the microphone, and unmute the microphone only when you speak.
In addition, we will use the Teams live event to publish it, so please understand it.

Now, I would like to move on to the agenda.
Today, the secretariat will explain all the materials.

In addition, due to the fact that Special Advisor Mori will be leaving the meeting in the middle of his official duties, the order of the meeting will be changed, and after the Secretariat explains the proceedings (1) and (4), Special Advisor Mori will give an address and leave the meeting. We plan to proceed with the flow of exchanging opinions on the proceedings (1) and (4), and after the Secretariat explains the proceedings (2) and (3), we will exchange opinions.

Then, Hiramoto Digital Agency, Senior Expert (Data Strategy), will explain Agenda (1) "Expansion and System of Base Registry and Open Data" based on Material 1.
Thank you very much.

Mr. Hiramoto, Senior Expert (Data Strategy): Mr. Koshizuka Then, I will explain based on Material 1.

Based on what we have learned so far, at the fourth meeting, we will discuss with you our efforts over the past year. At the fifth meeting, we will discuss Data Space and data connections Infrastructure. This time, I would like to talk about data, which is the main subject.

So, it says "Base Registry, Expansion of Open Data and Systems." On page 3, first of all, I would like to talk about the overall picture of administrative information. There are Base Registry and Open Data, and not only these two, as written here, there are various rules. The basic information on the left, such as government information, is information that has been agreed upon by each ministry and agency to be posted on websites, and this information is defined in web guides and the like. In addition, Base Registry. Geospatial and statistics have been treated as extremely important data for a long time, and in fact, the G8 has defined local government as Open Data local government as a dataset recommended by recommended datasets. There are other data, and depending on the passage of time, it is said that a list of domains and a list of codes are necessary, and there is such an overall picture.

On page 4, each of them has a purpose and is defined. Although there are some overlaps, I have presented a Venn diagram on page 5 to see if it can be organized into the Basic Administrative Data / Base Registry and the High Value Data Set.

In addition to administrative data, which is generally submitted for administrative procedures, there is also information such as the number of transactions. In addition to such general administrative data, what is called a high-value data set, which appears on page 31, is data with economic and social value that should be used by everyone. In the previous table, there are high-value data sets such as statistics and geographic information, and among them are basic administrative data and base registry, which should be provided on the web. This time, I would like you to intensively discuss the base registry. In addition, although it is not the data itself, we have been promoting open data as a policy to make it public, so I would like to talk about it.

It is page 6. This is a definition, so you can take a look at it later. To put it simply, the Basic Administrative Data at the top is data published on the website to ensure transparency. In addition, the Base Registry is data that is used as the basis for various information, such as data used once and only as the basis data for society. In addition, the High Value Data Set is data that creates value by widely spreading in society. The rest is general data.

Page 7. Regarding the base registry, first of all, I would like to talk about the review of "definition" and "designation".

On page 9. First of all, regarding the reason for the review of the base registry, we have been working on the base registry for a little more than one year, but as we advance our efforts, Issue and others are coming into sight. Until now, it has been specified on a file-by-file basis, so it has not been clear how much corporate data is included. Therefore, as stated in "2. Measures," regarding the designation, we will define the data items and the method of information source and information distribution. In addition, there are a mixture of those that have been developed and those that are being developed, so we will classify them to manage their status properly, and what should be done is different for each, so we will discuss how to use them for one time only in cooperation with Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee.

On page 10, the current Base Registry has been divided into Category 1 and Category 2 from the perspective of immediate effectiveness and in the future in order to produce high-quality data.

It is page 11. This is also for reference, and I have designated this much data until now.

Page 12. Regarding the revision of the definition, the current base registry defines the content in the form of persons, corporations, land, etc. that are registered and disclosed by public institutions, etc. and referenced in various situations. However, after the revision, we will focus on the function. The base registry is a group of data designated by Digital Agency as a group of data that should or can be used as a common basis for services in the administration or private sector, collected by public institutions, etc. based on their legitimate authority, and satisfies qualities such as currency, standard conformance, and availability based on reliable information from the viewpoints of accuracy and completeness. We will write this down in order to clearly define the specifications or content, and to make it clear that we will share it with everyone, and Digital Agency will specify it.

It is page 13. This is also for your reference, so I hope you can take a look at it later.

On page 14, I would like to talk about the concept of the components of the base registry. I mentioned information sources earlier. For example, in terms of corporate information, when a corporation is registered, it is entered in the database of registration as a commercial registration. In some cases, a function to aggregate and provide information is necessary in the form of this information source and the person who actually provides it is the National Tax Administration Agency or the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. Therefore, I think it is better to clarify the hub function as an aggregation function by clarifying the information source and the data that can be provided.

On page 15, this is the specification of the base registry, and it has been developed. Developed means that it has already been used. Currently, as written on the left, in terms of corporate basic information, first of all, corporate 3 information will be used, and financial statements can be used by some companies, and law can be used by e-LAWS. In addition, the character information infrastructure can be used by the Council, so it is in the phase of using what can already be used.

On page 16, as part of the review, a new framework has been created that is currently being developed, but it has not yet been fully developed. For example, addresses and other information are currently being provided in the Base Registry on a trial basis, and they will be fully registered in local government and distributed. This is why the framework is still being developed, but it has been organized in this way.

This is page 17. We will consider the establishment of such a registry in the future. There are still some parts of the system that we are considering. For example, real estate ID has established rules for the provision of data, but there are issues such as whether or not to make it a base registry. In that sense, we are developing the registry in three stages.

On page 18, I would like to talk about the aggregation of base registry information. First of all, it says "Develop a registry catalog." However clean the base registry is, it is difficult to use it because you don't know where it is or it is difficult to download it. In that sense, we will develop a catalog. At the same time, I introduced a base registry for an individual public authorities. It should be used commonly by corporations, land, any industry, or any area. There are base registries that we want to create by area or by industry, and we are thinking of creating them individually and linking them so that they can be used by society as a whole.

It is page 19. It is the provision system of the base registry.

Page 20. First of all, what is "data that can be provided" in the base registry? When you update your database from the base registry, it is difficult if it is not complete and it is not the latest. If it is not accurate and compliant with the standard, it is difficult to use it. In the form of availability and recoverability, it can be used at any time. Therefore, you must secure an information source that meets these conditions.
Page 21. That is why we are talking about quality. What we are focusing on is the data quality model called ISO/IEC25012. From this perspective, and in particular, what is written on the previous page is important, we would like to create a system that can improve the quality items as much as possible.

It is page 22. In foreign countries, there are many cases where the information sources and the provision functions are separated. In some cases, it may be better to provide information by aggregating the information held by various sources, such as credentials. In other countries, there is a method of two stage data release, such as having a cache function to prevent data operations from being stopped. In one case, Digital Agency's roles are large, from the provision of data to the cooperation function. In another case, the digital promotion authority's roles are small, and the cleansed data is collected for the cooperation function. This is one of the ways, but I think it is necessary to consider this in the future.

This is page 23. These are the requirements for the data operation system. We are promoting the base registry. Digital Agency itself will continue to promote the policy, but if we are to actually operate the data without stopping for 24 hours, a fairly robust operation system will be required, so I have organized them here as the requirements for that.

First of all, if you look at the items, they should be provided in a stable manner, and they should be transparent about whether they are being done properly. General-purpose data. It should be possible to respond to a variety of data, not to special data. It is important to be able to operate stably, and to be able to operate BCPs stably even in emergencies. It is important to ensure that security is properly secured and that it is not taken by anyone or tampered with. In real time, the base registry has daily applications, so the updated data can be managed on a daily basis according to them. In addition, it is written as "data cleansing", but there are cases where the address is written differently, so we are thinking about making it possible to cleanse the data.

It is page 25. In terms of open data, open data has been around for about 10 years, but it has not been sufficiently spread. There are still many people who say that this data is closed and cannot be issued as open data. In addition, many places in local government have created catalog sites, but they have not been updated, and there is a need for improvement. As we move toward a data-driven society, government organizations are the largest data owners in Japan, so I think it is important that we work hard. Since the world is running on an open-by-default basis, we would like to promote open data in order to catch up with the world.

On page 26, I would like to talk about measures for that purpose. We had discussions at the Open Data Evangelist Group and others in a way that emphasizes the existing measures. In addition to the existing measures, as you can see at the top, we will change recommended datasets to the local government Standard Dataset. To that end, we are talking about creating a new dataset. In addition, as you can see at the far right, we will add metadata that is easy to search and update the catalog site. In addition, we will strongly promote the existing measures.

Page 27. The data catalog site was opened in October 2014, and it has been about 10 years. At the end of March 2023, it will be integrated with e-Gov and renewed as a data portal service. The changes are that the domain will change with the integration into e-Gov, and we will revise the metadata in accordance with international labeling in the form of the base registry and DCAT-compliant metadata model to enhance searchability. We will also improve functions such as enabling full-text search and collecting local government data by the harvester function, so that we can create an even more user-friendly environment for open data.

Page 28. As a priority initiative, we have the Basic Guidelines for Open Data, which I created when I was in the IT Office of the Cabinet Secretariat, and we need to revise various parts such as background information. In addition, we need to revise the Basic Guidelines for Open Data in accordance with the latest technology trends, and to enrich the data that can be used, as I explained earlier about the catalog site, we need to change the metadata, increase the amount of machine-readable data, strengthen the data request, and consider responses to new technologies such as LinkedData, which has been strengthened overseas. At the same time, we will develop the data and develop common rules. In addition to the Government Uniform Terms of Use, there is also a template for the API Terms of Use in the API Introduction Practice Guidebook, and we would like to advance the unification of rules for these things.

It is page 29. In other administrative data, there are other things to do to expand the supply of data.

On page 30, for example, there is a data standard on the website shown in the entire administrative data at the beginning. It has been in use for about 20 years since 2001. In design system, we have been creating a system that allows easy creation of websites for the Cabinet Office and Ministries. In that sense, we will develop a data model and API so that information can be provided in a form that can be easily used by everyone. I wonder if we can create a system that is easy for users to use.

Page 31. High-value datasets. As I mentioned at the beginning, high-value datasets are widely used in society, such as statistics and geospatial data, and are used to upgrade services for people and businesses. Both in Europe and G8 have created high-value datasets, and in the United States they call them priority datasets. The main examples are the local government Standard Open Dataset, which we have asked local government to create. In addition, statistics, geospatial information, and major databases, although they are not designated as high-value datasets, I think it is important to actively promote the use of such datasets. In addition, I think it is necessary to consider data dictionaries.

Page 32. In terms of digital data management methods, technologies around the world are changing rapidly, and in addition to LinkedData, which I mentioned earlier, there is also how to manage IDs, so I believe that we will consider the use of such technologies while monitoring global trends.

Page 33. In addition, regarding the utilization of administrative data, our data strategies so far have been basically centered on developing a foundation and strategies to catch up, but from now on, we will promote AI and EBPM, and by promoting the utilization aspect, we will not only collect and distribute data, but also create value by further utilizing data. We would like to proceed with discussions that include these points.

Page 35. Regarding the promotion system, as you can see on the left side, necessary functions for a data-driven society include domestic and overseas information collection, policy decision, international coordination, and institutional review. Rules will be developed, including in Trust, data utilization and AI utilization, cooperation infrastructure and data maintenance. Engineering is a mechanism for data design and a mechanism for data management. Operation management and human resource development. In order to do these things, there are many organizations promoting data in private sector, as well as resources in Digital Agency. I would like to strengthen such private sector organizations, operation organization and engineering organization, which were in the base registry earlier, and build an integrated system in which everyone works together.

On page 36, first of all, while saying that, before we become one, we will promote what we can promote in Digital Agency. We have defined a data model and rules in the form of the Government Interoperability Framework (GIF), which will be used by ministries and agencies and local government, and we will promote one time only, which will make it easier for local government to have wide-area cooperation.

Page 37. In terms of strengthening data management, we are actually working with IPA to create the Data Guidelines and GIF. However, we are also cooperating in areas other than data management, so we would like to strengthen cooperation with such external specialized organization.

On page 38, I would like to reiterate that we would like to firmly establish an operation system.

With regard to today's issue, before that, on page 40, in addition to the efforts we have made so far, it has been important to create a system, etc., but there are still parts that are lacking, such as the enhancement of GIF and the enhancement of the system, and the rules have not yet been developed. Therefore, rules are being developed, and one time only has not yet been realized. The base registry is still under development, so we are advancing it, and we will continue to promote open data as before. In addition, the collection of results such as smart cities has produced results in various cases such as smart cities and Digital Garden City, so I would like to organize these results well and lead to their dissemination. Since the system in local government will be standardized in the twenty twenty-five of the year, a base registry must be created by then, so I would like to strongly promote that.

It is page 41. As today's issue, I would like to ask for your opinions. The first point is to revise the perspective of the base registry. First of all, it is the concept of content designation. If there are any conditions to be added to the base registry, I would like to ask for your suggestions and opinions on candidates and operations. In addition, regarding open data, I would like to ask for your opinions on the promotion policy, which will be strengthened up to now, and I would like to ask for your opinions on the promotion system, which should be considered more.

That's all for Material 1. Next, I would like to go to Material 4. Material 4-1 shows the concept of the subworking of the Data Strategy Working Group.

Page 2. In terms of sub-working, there have been four working groups under the digital society Concept Conference, namely the Trust Platform Working Group, the EBPM Working Group, and the semi-public sector Working Group. All of the working groups have worked on various matters, and some are reaching a certain point. Once the results are gathered, we will close the working group, and when a new Issue emerges, we will consider the system again.

On page 3, in the form of organizing sub-working groups, etc., working groups that have secured Trust have been organized. As each of them is written, we believe that each of them has achieved a certain level of results. We will continue to work on Issue, but I would like to close here.

Regarding the next document, Material 4-2, I would like to arrange it in the form of a document like this, and I would like to ask the chief examiner to make a decision.
That's all for the explanation of the material.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
At this timing, Special Advisor Mori will leave the room.

Assistant to Prime Minister Mori: Officer I'm sorry that I have to leave after this due to my official duties.

Regarding the base registry, we would like you to discuss whether the content to be specified is OK, whether the standards related to operation are OK, or whether it is optimal to operate here in light of the requirements required for the data operation system. In particular, regarding the operation system, we would appreciate if the Secretariat would respond to the results of the study next time.

As I introduced earlier, the four sub-working groups will be abolished because they have fulfilled their roles to a certain extent. However, the EBPM Promotion Committee will hold a successor council under another organization, so please continue to support it.

Then, I will leave the room in the middle of the meeting, but I would like you to actively proceed with the discussion. Thank you very much.

(Leave Special Advisor to the Prime Minister Mori)

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Now, I would like to exchange views on agenda (1) and agenda (4). If you have any comments, please let me know by the show of hands function or chat. I will appoint you.

As your time is limited, I would like to ask you to speak in four to five minutes.

Mr. Murai, please go ahead.

Mr. Murai: There were various discussions about this story, and the base registry was also established, and I think it was a process of baton tapping after the start of Digital Agency. To tell the conclusion, since this sub-working group played its part, everything will be closed, and I would like to hear the opinions of other members, but basically it sounded like it was decided not to do it in the future. I am thinking on my own that it is a quite serious condition. I hope not.

We have been discussing the basic idea of this problem all the time during the Open Data, and I think that we have achieved great results. First of all, it is because you, the members of today, are working very hard. You are very knowledgeable people, and you have expressed various opinions, and we were able to proceed with it. Therefore, I think that when we were at the headquarters of the Cabinet Office, open data was a field in which we achieved results that would be perfect if we started from scratch. I think that it was a process that was really not easy, and that we could do it if we just did it. I think that was one of the lessons we learned.

If that is the case, as I said earlier, we will add the base registry to the open data system, determine the data system for this country, and Digital Agency will take the baton. In other words, I feel that we have gone back to leaving everything to each ministry.
So, as a basic idea, each department in ministries and agencies does not want to publish data. I think this is the way to think. Therefore, what we need to do is how to promote a situation where we have no choice but to publish or develop data. I think this is especially true for the base registry. I think it was the same for open data.

Then, this is a rule base in a sense, such as digital consultation, and rules are created that require certain implementation of what must be done in such a case. This is the first point.

The second point is that I think Digital Agency was created so that this kind of thing can be done. Digital Agency is the control tower of the data society, so in other words, Digital Agency has no choice but to do this. It may be a rule base of its own, but I think it will not be easy if it is not.

Each industry has digital data in private sector, and each government agency is different. Then, how to connect these silos itself is very important as a data strategy in this country. Can I see page 22? As the slide "Roles of Foreign Countries" says about the roles of digital promotion authorities, I don't think this can be done unless someone clings to it and picks it up. I think that's why they made Digital Agency.
Therefore, in conclusion, there are various situations, and Digital Agency may be busy and in trouble, but if we do not create a system with a strong feeling, it will be a pie in the sky and we will come here without doing it. There is no KPI listed either.

We have been discussing the base registry for two years, but I have not yet been able to grasp the specific measures for how to improve it. If only I do not grasp it, it is fine, but if these people say it is fine instead, it is the other members who are attending today who I am relieved. As I said earlier, these people really have great power and passion as experts, so I think I was wrong if these people say they are relieved.
If all the sub-working groups are dissolved, who will provide wisdom to the government as experts? Who will provide wisdom where central silos can be de-siloed? I thought that this system must be properly established.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
After hearing your opinions, I would like to respond to them collectively. Next, Mr. Koshizuka, please.

KOSHIZUKA Member: DFFT It was the same as Mr. Murai that I actually wanted to make a comment, but I think that the development of a system is very important. I think that is probably not only about the base registry, but also about the comprehensive data strategy in general.

This is about the Base Registry. Speaking only about it, for example, in local government, I visit various places and have various relationships with companies. The Base Registry has become a big topic of conversation. People are talking about what to do, and they don't know what to do or how to do it. What I hear is that the people in Digital Agency are doing their best, and I hear that the people in charge of data are doing their best, but I don't know what the people other than them are doing at all. Therefore, it seems that the people in charge of data in Digital Agency are doing their best, and they are trying to move only by their leadership. I think it will be difficult from here on if there is no system for how the organization and the government will do this.

In addition to the Base Registry, there are many other important data sources within the government. There are other ministries and agencies, and they do not have any systems at all. They do not know what to do with the data, and they have to do it properly in each ministries and agencies. They have to abandon the plan, saying that it should be done in Digital Agency. I think Digital Agency is also having a hard time. One thing is enough, but I feel something like that.
The other day, for example, I talked a little with a German person who is on good terms with IDSA. When I asked him how Japanese data looked from the German perspective, he said that there were many people who visited IDSA and GAIA-X, and there were many companies, but the whole country was headless. So, what should we do with the system as a whole? I think that a very good concept has been launched, and the system to realize this concept has been various, and Digital Agency has been launched, and I think that it has been a difficult period for more than one year. However, I feel that it will be difficult to implement it unless we improve this system.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Tomioka, please.

Tomioka Member: Base Registry, as I stated at the 4th Working Group, it is a theme that the New Economy Federation attaches great importance to. At that time, I talked about real estate ID, and just last March, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism issued guidelines, and after that, I stated that it was a voluntary effort by the people concerned. Looking at the materials this time, I was relieved that real estate ID is properly positioned among the things to be considered for future development.

On the other hand, what kind of system will be used to advance this? Mr. Murai and others have been making comments, but I believe this is extremely important.

I think it is very wonderful that we have been organized into information sources, data that can be provided, aggregation functions, and collaboration functions. public authorities, which is in charge of the information source system, is supposed to play a very important part, but I think there is also the extent to which it can be done, including cleansing. Regarding the system on page 22, it is desirable for public authorities, which is in charge of the information source, to play a leading part. On the contrary, I think there are places where it will not go well unless we work hard here.

On the other hand, in a sense, this may be a common Issue for Japanese DX, but we have been completely outsourcing the discussion of digital and IT, and I think that the experience and skills, or more specifically, the human resources, to manage with the awareness as a party concerned are still insufficient.

Therefore, as the final goal, it is desirable that things proceed without the digital promotion authority like (2) playing such a role, but I think that if (2) is done suddenly, things will not proceed well.

In that sense, first of all, I think it is important for the Digital Promotion Authority to exercise leadership in the area of data that can be provided, but instead of doing everything, including cleansing, etc., it is important for the Digital Promotion Authority to create a system while playing the roles of controlling or cooperating with the public authorities of information sources. If you have a specific image of what kind of system Digital Agency is considering, please let me know.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Sakane, please.

Gold Bullion Member: 's presentation.

With regard to concerns about the system, Mr. Murai and others have made statements, but this is 2023, and we are talking about the digital theme, but it is a matter of concern that people are not saying that cleansing should be checked by human eyes to ensure its integrity.

Since ChatGPT, there has been a rough argument that all problems can be solved by creating a large-scale model. At least, it is necessary to create a mechanism that combines a rule-based model and a small number of machine-learning-based models to check whether the data defined in the base registry is correct. If Digital Agency provides such a mechanism and throws it in here, the completeness of the data can be guaranteed by the library or mechanism provided by Digital Agency. If can fulfill such roles properly, it will be possible to solve the problem more smartly, rather than assigning a large number of people. If Digital Agency leaves the problem to be solved here, it will be left to you from the responsibility demarcation point. Considering this, I think it is probably almost impossible to create a mechanism to automate something other than human efforts to a certain extent, and to deal with a larger range of problems properly as Tokyo.

I understand that people in Digital Agency are working hard on data-related matters, but I don't want to use the term "AI" in a broad sense. I hope that you are considering a mechanism to automate it, but if you don't have one, I would like you to discuss it.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Ota, may I have your attention?

Member: 's, but I think the concept is quite wonderful and there is also rule-making, but in reality, rule-breaking or regulatory reform is necessary, and as I said before, for example, data from cadastral surveys conducted by municipalities are managed by Legal Affairs Bureaus and local Legal Affairs Bureaus, but they cannot be used at all, and the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries does not have the latitude and longitude of agricultural land data, so there was a serious problem. At that time, three years ago, the Ministry of Justice said that public authorities should go to Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications because there is a law concerning the protection of personal data held by Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. When we went to regulatory reform, it was said that we should go to the Ministry of Justice, so we were handed over to the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, and we managed to break through by saying that we would bring it to the Hokkaido Promotion Conference. However, there is a place where we can break through, and there is also a digital dialogue, so I agree that it will be difficult to proceed realistically unless we continue it well.

In terms of open data, I think there are very advanced parts in terms of maintenance. As Mr. Hiramoto said, in the future, distribution and utilization will be exactly the same, but I think one of the lessons is that training is necessary between maintenance and utilization.

The Data Academy in San Francisco and the Data Drill in New York City are famous, but there are various participants in such places, and of course, if the government does not participate in constant training on how to use data, it is impossible to predict which data can be used. Also, if you do not have training, you may not be able to use data in an emergency, so I think it is very important to allocate resources to training as the next step.

In addition, as a side note, I would like to ask you to give us figures on how much data is distributed. For example, the number of people who visit the data catalog site is a simple indicator, but I am helping the Tokyo Metropolitan Government. Compared to San Francisco and New York, the number of users of the open data catalog site in Tokyo was one twentieth. Now, the number of users has reached one tenth, or five times, but I think it would be better to quantitatively look at such points and proceed while tasting the results of the efforts.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Goto, please.

Mr. Goto: Mr. Murai and Mr. Koshizuka commented that the development of a registry and a system are important in the first place, and I believe that is correct.

In the future, there is a point that I would like you to consider about the operation system shown on page 23. After the problem of whether the registry will be established in the first place is solved, it is seen that the use of the base registry will spread more and more, and social dependence will increase. In that case, how will its availability be maintained? I think this is a very important point. It is possible that social chaos will occur or industries will suffer losses due to the inability to use the base registry. Measures for such things will be thoroughly formulated from now. Regarding the "BCP," the first point is that I would like you to create a system to achieve the BCP from now.

The other is maintaining consistency. If the content of the registry has been contaminated, wrong data has been mixed in, or it has been attacked, this is also a problem. Therefore, as part of security measure, I would like you to consider a function to continuously monitor the content of the base registry and include it in the operation system.

In that sense, I think that both the mechanism for actually building the base registry and the mechanism for operating it are extremely important, and I think that it will be mentioned in the important points in the second half of this paper, so I think that it is necessary to prepare a solid system for that from now.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Shimoyama, please.

Shimoyama Member: I would like to make three points.
My first question is about the operation system of the base registry. I would like to say this from the perspective of a person who is engaged in the data type business as a venture and is involved in civic technology. The reason why data quality is required for the base registry is that when providing services using data, particularly around page 12, the business operator needs to be responsible if the original data is wrong or if there are problems caused by the data. It is not possible to be exempt from liability by saying that this is the fault of the original data. Therefore, the business operator has to spend a large amount of money on data cleansing to make it correct, or if it is not possible to do so, it has to give up using it. This may have led to a large economic loss. Therefore, I believe that the base registry is to develop data as infrastructure as the foundation of a large society and to make it available at the necessary timing.

In this data cleansing, as I heard from the Sa-jin members earlier, if this is done through human wave tactics, it may lead to further data contamination. If people actually correct it, everything will be judged by the rules of each person, so there is a possibility that it will be even more wrong. Therefore, I believe that it is necessary for organization to form a system, and for quality control to operate it as a system. From that perspective, I think it would be good if you could consider the operating system and operating organization.

The second point is about the perspective of the base registry. On page 12, it says that the new definition will be designated by Digital Agency. On page 18, I believe that the new definition will include the base registry of local government, which is established by other organizations and fields in private sector. Whether Digital Agency will designate the base registry is probably different. Whether local government or private sector will be designated is probably determined by each area, and I believe that there is a definition, so it would be good if the base registry designated by Digital Agency is released and named in a way that can be distinguished.

In fact, there have been consultations from prefectural governments about this, and they have commented that they are not sure whether the area version can be called the base registry. Therefore, I think it would be good if you could sort out the fact that there are Digital Agency designated ones and others.

My third question is about open data initiatives. As for page 25, it says that about 70% of local government now has catalogs, but to be correct, I believe that about 70% of local government now have at least one catalog. Only a part of local government has developed catalogs. For example, in one prefecture, 35% of Digital Agency have exchanged only one open data, according to a survey. Therefore, I believe that local government, which is working on open data, has been disclosed on dashboard before the introduction of the system, but it is not disclosed now.

However, recently, a system of indicators to qualitatively evaluate the quality evaluation indicators of open data efforts has been published from the Digital Agency Open Data page. At present, local government is positioned to use them for self-evaluation, but I think a mechanism to conduct a survey and visualization a little more once a year will be necessary. With this, when comparing local government a little, I think it will be clear how much progress has been made and where we need to strengthen it a little more.

In addition, I believe that ministries and agencies should also make such efforts, not only in local government, but also in each ministries and agencies, each ministry and agency, and by what division and how much efforts are being made. By qualitatively evaluating them, I think it is necessary to make them into a form that can be seen by comparing them a little.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Shoji, please.

Shoji, Member: I have a few questions, if anything, many questions, but I would like to talk about them.

First of all, in the review of the definition that Mr. Shimoyama mentioned earlier on page 12, it will be designated by Digital Agency. Later, there will be a discussion about a base registry of another organization. I had the same impression as Mr. Shimoyama that they will probably be distinguished. In that case, the definition is vaguely written, but who and how can it be designated? I think it should be discussed not only by Digital Agency as a whole, but also by each government and agency, for example, whether or not there is a possibility that it should be designated as a base registry, whether or not there is a possibility that it should be designated as a base registry, and who, where, and by what process Digital Agency will make such a decision. If there is any place that is considering it, I would like to ask you.

In addition, on page 23, the requirements for the operation system are written. It is still vague, but what is an appropriate governance system and what is disclosure? I think that we are still really working on the items. Even if we discuss it from now on, we are not in a situation where we can take it so slowly. So, I think that it is necessary to clarify it clearly and define it clearly because it is related to the base registry. I would like to discuss how to proceed with it.

As for DATA. GO. JP on page 27, it has been a topic of discussion here for some time, but I feel a little sad that the integration with e-Gov will finally come. Since it is about 10 years, there are parts that can't be helped, but I think the transition of domain names is quite a big deal. Of course, some people have seen DATA. GO. JP, and I think it is not good unless some transition measures are taken. As far as I know, I remember that the Government of Canada changed the name once in the G7, but when I look at other countries, such a thing is rarely done, so I think it is necessary to be cautious.

In addition, it is because of this situation, so how was DATA. GO. JP? As you mentioned earlier about quantitative understanding, I think DATA. GO. JP had good and bad points, but I would like to share and discuss with you how it was at a place like this.

Finally, at the very end of Mr. Hiramoto's explanation, I believe that he was referring to the relationship between the base registry and standardization, and the relationship between the local government system standardization. I believe that this is a part that contributes to the talk about creating and checking data automatically, not by humans, which has been mentioned several times. I would like you to advance specific discussions on this. This is my opinion.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
I believe that you have provided us with all of your opinions, so please let us have a response from the Secretariat.

Mr. Hiramoto, Senior Expert (Data Strategy): Mr. Koshizuka : It did not seem that my explanation was bad, and I did not decide not to do the system. I will do it, but I will organize the sub-working group, but I will do it properly, and it did not mean that the level was lowered because I was handed over to Digital Agency.

It has been said that there are no KPIs, but it is true that there are places where it is difficult to set KPIs. There are some data strategies, such as how many open data have been released, but what the world is paying attention to is the economic effect of this, and the satisfaction level of the people. There are places where KPIs are set, but it is not yet possible to do so, or it is necessary to prepare the infrastructure properly, and as can be seen in the GIF, there are places where efforts have been made to develop the infrastructure, so it is not yet possible to do so.

Until last year, we were working hard to create basic rules on how to connect silos with the Cabinet Office and each Ministry. As you mentioned on page 36, it will be more efficient to use data standards as much as possible for the Cabinet Office and each Ministry, and cooperation between the Cabinet Office and each Ministry will be possible, and it will also lead to one time only. In this way, there are people in local government who are consulting with the Cabinet Office and each Ministry on the Digital Agency system, and I would like to work together on that.

You have pointed out that someone should take care of the system. However, we will firmly implement the policy part. In addition, we have heard that the operation of the system is important. In that sense, it is difficult to create the operation system in a single step while creating the policy on one side and moving forward while solidifying the back. So, I would like to build a team.

You mentioned the deployment of the system to each ministry. With regard to the system that I mentioned earlier, Mr. Tomioka asked what he thought about the specific system. When other members consider quality control and security, I think the Printing Bureau is relatively close to the three that I mentioned earlier, but it is not that we do not consider other matters separately. As I mentioned earlier, there were places where the definition and operating conditions were ambiguous, so I would like to examine them more carefully and advance toward a decision at an early stage, although we do not have time.

It is exactly true that it should be done on a rule-based basis rather than on a visual inspection basis, and we are considering providing a data conversion tool and other such tools collectively. I believe there are various options, ranging from simple tools such as a conversion tool from single-byte katakana to double-byte katakana, and how to write dates, to automatic classification, and the use of AI. I would like to consider such options.

Mr. Ota, I would like to ask you to continue your support for the process of breaking through. In fact, the cadastral survey, or real estate information, was opened recently, and we have been working together to coordinate it. As a result of this, over the past two to three weeks, we have started to convert the data into an easy-to-use form and overlay it on a map of Japan. At first, it was difficult to obtain real estate data, but we are gradually working on this issue behind the scenes, although there are few negotiations.

In addition, as you said, training is necessary. Now, there is talk of creating a training course that is more general in terms of not only open data but also data-related training, particularly in terms of education of users' literacies, in coordination with the digital skill standards created by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. In terms of open data, trends in open data are changing, and we have just redesigned the teaching materials for the training course the other day, so we hope to expand the training course to area in cooperation with evangelists and others.

You are correct about the content of the registry, security, and the monitoring system. As I said earlier, security will create a proper system, and we will also provide monitoring data on whether it is being properly implemented, as we are providing it as a condition for being transparent.
In addition, Mr. Shimoyama said that dashboard should also be done. Now, dashboard, or DATA. GO. JP, will be re-created as a catalog site and will be released soon. Even after it is released, it will not be the end of it. We would like to gradually change it to agile. Therefore, data quality, or a quality evaluation index, is attracting attention around the world because of whether it can be used safely when conducting transactions. We would like to consider quality and modification, including data from the Cabinet Office and Ministries, and a mechanism that can be used easily.

Mr. Shoji pointed out the process. In terms of what kind of process there is to designate, we are actually still running around and thinking about it. Rather, we are consulting with each ministry and agency on whether this data will be used as the base registry, and we are discussing whether it will match the definition of the base registry that we are considering, starting with the confirmed data. Although it has not yet been made public by the Accreditation Committee, I am thinking about whether we need to do such a thing when it becomes a little more stable.

In addition, DATA. GO. JP is scheduled to conduct domain transition this time, and it is also scheduled to conduct redirection. We would like to do that properly, and open data has been around for more than 10 years, and I believe that the whole world was evaluating it about two years ago, but I think we also have to do it, so I would like to consider it.

So, I think I answered the whole question.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, .
I believe I have given you all the answers, but if you have any additional comments on this agenda, please let me know.

If there is nothing in particular, I would like to move on to the next agenda. The Secretariat will explain about Agenda (2) "Efforts to Realize DFFT" and Agenda (3) "Consolidation of the Comprehensive Data Strategy".

First of all, please explain about Agenda (2) "Efforts toward the Realization of DFFT" based on Material 2.

Mr. Hiramoto, Senior Expert (Data Strategy): Mr. Koshizuka Document 2, on page 3, first of all, if I were to briefly explain the flow up to now, Prime Minister Abe proposed DFFT at the Davos Conference in 2019, and the DFFT Roadmap was discussed at the G7 in 2021, and the DFFT Action Plan will be formulated in 2022. This time, it will be hosted by Japan, so it has become important to realize the outline and specifics of the efforts to date.

On page 4, as an agenda for discussion, as a reference, DFFT is of course an important theme at the Digital and Technology Ministers' Meeting, so we will discuss it here.

On page 5, I believe that we must consider trade, Trust, security, privacy, data utilization, and infrastructure, which are examples of fields related to DFFT, as important elements when considering Trust and DFFT.

To be more specific, on page 6, we are considering launching a partnership as a framework for promoting DFFT. As stated in the "Purpose" section here, it is necessary to remove barriers to data distribution when promoting data distribution. To this end, it is necessary for private sector and the government, as well as the government and private sector, to cooperate to create an ecosystem. Below is a proposal. There is a government panel, which has been engaged in institutional coordination within the government, to coordinate between governments. On the right side, there is a stakeholder panel, which is a data exchange between companies by the private sector. There are many topics that need to be considered, such as the existence of Issue.
We are considering whether we can create an international framework in which we discuss these two issues and realize them in the form of promoting projects based on the agreement of the two panels, which is green in the middle. As you can see below, [Project Example], we will ensure transparency for Trust and the quality of data that has just been released. Privacy is also important, and there are discussions about which countries IDs can be used with, and we must ensure interoperability in terms of data. I would like to advance specific initiatives to promote these based on the agreement between the Government Panel and stakeholders.

On page 8, I am talking about data exchange in the form of cross-border data trading. In addition to that, I think there is also smart cities that you feel in Trust and in commercial transactions. It says "December 2022," but there have been several draft versions of it since a while ago. GAIA-X is a data space, for example, a data space for tourism and a data space for the automobile industry. As I mentioned last time, it is easy to secure Trust in the data space, but it is difficult to secure Trust in the form of what the company is the moment it becomes another industry. Therefore, we are discussing how to create a Trust framework across industries.

On the other hand, in the discussions in smart cities, Trust is defined by the Minimum Interoperability Mechanism called MIMs, which I provided information on last time. However, this is also limited to personal data, and in that sense, I believe that countries around the world are still considering a specific implementation in Trust.

It is page 9. We have to talk about this internationally, but we are originally thinking about architecture, so for each architecture, in the data space, first of all, what kind of rules are there in the partner country? If the rules of the partner country are different, can't we do business with them, or is it okay because they are managed there? In addition, the rules are not fixed, and they change after a certain amount of time has passed. It is difficult to check how the rules have changed at that time, so can the rules be trusted in this data space? As a place, there is talk about whether there is any misinformation, disinformation, or false rumors, and whether the technical elements of the data connections infrastructure and data are okay.

In addition, there are guarantee of originality, non-improvement at the time of transfer, Trust technology, and certification of equipment and networks. In addition, there is a question of whether human resources are safe, and in the future, a framework for data Trust will be paid attention to worldwide. Therefore, I think it is necessary to consider it while promoting international cooperation.

On page 10, in the positioning of each project so far, it is said that each project is examined by ID or data model. However, since data affects Trust, I think it is important to systematically organize such things and advance them while exchanging information with each other. For discussion, I think it is good to start from the point that I am doing this by mapping.

On page 12, I wrote about the issues, but I did not write much here. I would like to have suggestions such as what to keep in mind about the recent international framework in DFFT, and whether it is better to consider various technologies in the Trust system shown in the second half for implementation.

Pages 13 and after are reference materials, so please take a look at them.

Next, Handout 3 is on page 2. As I said at the beginning, I reviewed the whole in Part 4, Data Space in Part 5, and Data and Trust this time. In compiling the Data Strategy, I would like you to discuss the outline this time, and next time, I would like you to review the content of the strategy and include it in the action plan. First of all, in goal of the Data Strategy, I don't think we can overlook AI as a big move. We should develop a foundation that can compete with the world, including the use of data. To this end, AI requires a variety of data and a sufficient amount of data, so it is important to create a mechanism to supply this in a consistent flow.

On page 3, in the review and promotion steps, it has actually been two years, and the first Data Strategy was created in June 2021. There are some parts that need to be reviewed, and Priority plan will also be organized as a whole, so there is Priority plan as a digital strategy. Although the Comprehensive Data Strategy is written twice, I would like to integrate it into Priority plan and organize it in a way that creates synergies in other fields, such as AI and growth strategies.

So, what we have done so far is to sort out the current situation and promote GIF and the Base Registry as a foundation, which is what I will say on the right. I believe that we will consider what we should do, such as focusing on rules, technologies, and areas of competitiveness in order to find out which countries Japan can win internationally and which countries Japan must expand into the business space or service space.

On page 4, although it is not a rough outline, the table of contents of the Data Strategy up to now is on the left. On the other hand, what is lacking in the current strategy is that we have not yet talked about the overall picture of administrative data, so we have to think about it. We have to think about the fact that AI and data utilization were weak, and operation and data management. At that time, we mainly talked about the functions we had to do, but we have to add this content. In addition, there are environmental changes that need to be added, such as data space and industrial policy. There is talk about Minister in charge of Administrative Reform Okada, so we have to consider this. In addition, countries, particularly the EU, are developing laws and systems related to data, so what should we do to counter this? Interoperability is drawing a lot of attention around the world, so we will strengthen it a little, and there is DATA-EX. How should we position the building blocks? I think this is the case with the data conversion tools I mentioned earlier, but what should we do with this group of tools? Digital twins were our final goal, but the world is also starting to work on it faster than expected. In this sense, we will accelerate the utilization of geospatial information, and the needs of users, who are said to be the maturity of data, and data quality, which is the need to create data, are expanding. We will narrow down the points and promote it in a way that is consistent with other fields in DFFT. I would like to promote it in a way that reflects this. I would like to focus on the promotion of Priority plan.

In general, that's all for how to proceed, and based on this, we, the Secretariat, would like to organize it based on your opinions.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, .
Now, I would like to exchange views on Agenda (2) and Agenda (3). First of all, we have received opinions from Mr. Endo, who is absent today, and as I sent it to you just before the meeting, we are receiving opinions on the promotion of DFFT and from the perspective of data connections and digital human resources development.
Then, members who want to speak can let us know by the show of hands function or chat.

Mr. Koshizuka, please.

KOSHIZUKA Member: DFFT , I believe there were two talks, one on the G7 and the other on the consolidation of comprehensive data strategies. On page 6 of Handout 2, DFFT stated that he would like to launch such a organization. In addition, DFFT is a Japanese leadership, and although the issue of the system was mentioned in the base registry earlier, we will create an international organization. I believe this is the form of the IAP. Various discussions are underway at the World Economy Forum task force, but one thing I would like you to do is to firmly advance this and take leadership.

Another is that there are several comprehensive data strategies, and one of them is that the system development that I mentioned earlier will be made more specific in the strategies. However, what I will say from here is not that Digital Agency should do everything, but that the government and the private sector should cooperate appropriately and properly, and the private sector should do what the private sector does, and within that, I will say in terms of strategies, there is no place for the government and the private sector to cooperate, for example, because data connections is conducted by the government and the private sector, and there is no place for communication, coordination, and cooperation in the midst of data infrastructure efforts across various fields such as mobility, medical care, and manufacturing. I don't mean that public office should do all of this, but I think it is important that we have such a place in the form of public-private cooperation.

However, in order for such a thing to be established, I think it is necessary to create a more solid data community on the basis of it, and to make efforts to improve the quality of the people involved in such data. As for data, it is said that the people I meet are the same no matter what meeting I have, and the community is small. So, when it comes to learning from Europe, GAIA-X and others attract a large number of people. I think it is amazing that there is such a community, and in that sense, I think that creating a base community is important in our strategy.

Finally, if I were to put it bluntly, I would say that international cooperation is a little more relaxed. At the level of international cooperation, there are many places in DFFT that are a little further down the road, and battles have already begun. There are probably many places like Catena-X, which is a supply chain, that are under specific pressure in the industrial world. There are also many places where the fight is raging, such as what will happen in Asia and ASEAN. With regard to such places, although there is a long-term view, I think it is necessary to take a little bit of overseas response to what will be done in the crisis at hand.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Watanabe, may I have your attention?

Watanabe: The DFFT was proposed by the Japanese side, and it is very popular. In that sense, I think it is important. Originally, it was proposed in G20 and other fairly wide countries, and this time, it has become a G7, and it can be said that it has become easier to do so. The problem is that it is a free flow of data up to DFFT, so it is the definition of Trust. The degree of difficulty varies slightly depending on the members in terms of how much this Trust can be organized, but I think the point is how to explain Trust within this framework.

In your explanation earlier, it sounded as if you were going to consider Trust separately from Trust. However, if you really want to consider implementation the project here, I think it would be difficult to do so without first having a clear view of Trust. How do you think about the context?

Another point is that even if the G7 has examined the framework, it may be different where the framework will be implemented. It may be that the framework has not been decided or announced yet, but depending on the framework, the approach may differ. In that sense, in any case, how do you explain Trust as a Japanese city? In the previous explanation, there are some explanations on the architecture side, for example, there are other things written in the TrustedWeb section, and in fact, at the end of the discussion earlier, there was a discussion about the cleansing operation, but the limited intervention operation is also related to the Trust of the entire system. Therefore, I would like to confirm to what extent the framework will be organized before the project starts, or whether it will be examined in parallel.

In addition, in the second half of the review of data strategies, on page 4 of Handout 3, "Examples of Environmental Changes and Technological Changes That Need to be Improved" is written on the right side, and when I rewrite the lower right part with the background on the right side, I will talk about AI, and Minister in charge of Administrative Reform Okada is also written, and what kind of output should be reduced may be in the future, but this is quite important, and Minister in charge of Administrative Reform Okada is in the hardest part of the conference, but data will be discussed. Therefore, it has been unclear for a long time where it is being conducted, but I thought that the government as a whole must share the responsibility for where it will be conducted.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Ota, may I have your attention?

Member: This is not a very wise statement, but when I look at what is being projected from the outside, including inside, to be frank, I think that the budget for the data strategy is insufficient in terms of people and money. Compared to overseas countries, I feel very worried and concerned about what will really happen if something is added to the data strategy.

I think it is very good that Digital Agency is committed to the development of digital society infrastructure over the long term. I have a question. It may be unavoidable to ask this, but for example, the budget for the spread of My Number Card is incredibly in the trillion yen range. For example, the budget for the digital society implementation of Digita was 40 billion yen, but it will be 100 billion yen in the next fiscal year's supplementary budget. In contrast, the budget for the Data Strategy is quite different and small. Mr. Hiramoto mentioned earlier that the final economic effect will be achieved. For example, Denmark and the EU have produced quite a few figures. If such figures are produced, will it be possible to develop proper people and systems? Well, it is fine to add and refine items in the Data Strategy, but I feel that there is a lack of funds. If there is more discussion on the importance of such an important issue or the need for such a system to properly implement such an important issue, I would like to contribute something. I am sorry for my comment that I cannot say anything about questions or opinions, but I am thinking this time.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Tomioka, please.

Tomioka Member: : I have two questions rather than opinions. The first is about the framework for promoting DFFT at the G7. I understand that Minister Kono has already made some kind of announcement at the Davos Conference in January, and that a consensus will be reached toward the Ministerial Conference in April. Are there any countries or groups that are showing negative reactions to the launch of such a framework? If so, what are the reasons? This is a pure question.

I would like to ask another question. In the area of AI in data strategy, the government also formulated AI strategies several years ago, and in a sense, I feel that the rise of AI from the perspective of policy was once at its peak. It does not mean that AI has ceased to be important, but in a sense, it has been understood as a matter of course. Under such circumstances, Image generative AI has been around since last summer, and Chat GPT has been around since winter, so the impact of generative AI has become quite large among AI. I would like to ask whether the government is considering new measures and initiatives from the perspective of specializing in generative AI in the future due to the emergence of generative AI, which policy makers may not have been very interested in until a year ago.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Murai, please.

Mr. Murai: You are right about the matter you just mentioned. As Mr. Ohta mentioned earlier, the budget scale is completely different, so the system is not established, or the importance is difficult to recognize, I think. However, on the other hand, as Mr. Tomioka said, for example, the size of the market for AI, I think we can use economic effects as indicators. However, one of the reasons why we have not established a budget system for data strategy is that we do not have a system to evaluate it as economic effects.

In addition, regarding DFFT, I think it is very good to set up a project called implementation. However, I think there is another way of thinking about how common it is or whether it is a specific area. Because the Japanese data strategy is based on architecture, for example, if you set the architectural items of Trust and ID as horizontal, I think you can create a demonstration with a horizontal idea. On the other hand, I think you can also implementation and demonstrate in vertical, that is, specific areas, such as disasters, medical care, and health.

In that case, I think it would be good if there were Japanese best practices when making proposals in DFFT, whether it be G7, the OECD, ASEAN, or G20. It would be rather difficult if implementation and demonstration in a specific area based on this architecture were successful, and there are things that can be proposed from there. For example, I think that the security Framework is a big concept that always becomes a topic of discussion in the distribution and sharing of IDs and data. In other words, data classification, access control, and whether the IDs of those who access are properly defined. The successes and failures are quite clear, and it is not possible to put everything in a wide range. It is possible in a specific area. Therefore, I think that such area limitation is very important at the center of this model in DFFT.

If I were to think about the future structure of data strategies after that, I would like to apologize for repeating what I said earlier, but I would like to ask you because you are experts, but I think that basically you don't want to publish and maintain data. If you are wrong, please say that you are wrong. Therefore, it is necessary to generate energy for publishing, sharing, and using data somewhere. In other words, as I said earlier, I think that a digital ad hoc approach is necessary in Japan. Is this wrong? If it is not wrong, I would like to conclude by saying that I would like Digital Agency to make steady efforts.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Shimoyama, please.

Shimoyama Member: Thank you very much. I would like to make one comment on Document 3.
I believe that data management methods, which are becoming a global trend, should be included in the contents to be added. Going back to Material 1, the technology you listed on page 32. This tends to be treated as a new technology, but for example, DoI has had this technology for 20 years, and at a time when it has not yet been able to respond to this, I think Digital Agency in particular is in a bad position.

For example, it is not that people give this to each meeting, but for example, it can be given automatically when a document is published in the mechanism of a website. By doing this, for example, when searching for meeting materials on the private sector side, there are many people who are searching a lot because they do not know which meeting they are linked to. This will lead to the improvement of usability and DX for society as a whole, so I think it is necessary to create a system that includes responding to such technology in the strategy.

In particular, if we do not give a direction to respond to this, organization will not be able to accept such human resources. In response to this, we will create a mechanism, and those who are actually in charge of business will create something that can be automatically generated without being particularly aware of this technology. I would like to see this included in the strategy.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Shoji, please.

Shoji, Member: I would like to make two remarks on the comprehensive data strategy.

First of all, I would like you to look at this page and write down what you have done so far. If you try to make strategies like this with enthusiasm, you will inevitably look too much at the buzzwords in the near future, and what you have done so far will be greatly toned down. I think that what you have done so far will not be utilized or will be forgotten. So, I would like you to show clearly what you will do based on the talk about open data by Mr. Murai, what data connections has done here, especially across fields, and what has been done so far, in concrete terms or in data, and based on that, or if Issue has come out, based on that. I believe that steadily building up such a base over a five - or ten year period will be a major strength when doing things on the side of the country.

In addition, on page 4 of Handout 3, I would like to comment on the current situation. I think it would be somewhat sad if the general remarks were only about the background and basic ideas. The details are important, but as you have mentioned so far, I would like to write a more specific vision on what the Minister in charge of Administrative Reform Okada should do in the midst of global trends and how data should be positioned in the midst of industrial change. I would also like to state that this is where we should aim. In this situation, I would like to express Sotobori's comments and important basic policies, but I would also like to present a future image.

Finally, there was a talk that the budget for data is insufficient, and talk about open data has been going on for more than 10 years, so in that sense, I think we are in the stage where we should reboot. Talk about the budget is the same, and the Basic Act on the Advancement of Public and Private Sector Data Utilization has been going on for more than seven years. In that case, there are things that have been done, and since then, there are things that have changed in the environment, so I think it is necessary to discuss a review or an amendment. I am not sure if I should say it here because it is a legislative act, but I think it is also a matter of determining the framework of the existing data strategy, so I think that a talk on such a large scale will be an opportunity to reorganize the data strategy in a bold manner.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Next, Mr. Sakane, please.

Gold Bullion Member: When I comment on this comprehensive data strategy, on page 3, it says, "I will go to win." I am worried about what the conditions are for victory, and I guess that I will take considerable leadership. However, since I am not a private sector company, if I am thinking about winning and losing, I think it is better to share at least the picture of what kind of situation is the correct situation with the people concerned in an easy-to-understand manner.

If I were to say that I am going to take considerable leadership, I would say that the examples that Mr. Murai mentioned earlier are important, and although they may have already been done, I think that it is necessary to go to global meetings and disseminate information on Japan's efforts. Therefore, even if only architecture has been established, I believe that other activities are also extremely important. However, I think that it is better to set a goal a little more clearly, whether it is the value to take considerable leadership or to take the standards for each industry.
However, on page 2, it is expressed in terms of competition and cooperation, so I believe that in many fields we will be able to cooperate on the basis of global standards, rather than winning on the whole. However, if you have any plans at this point to focus on this field with the conviction that you will never be able to retreat, I would like you to make a declaration or disclose it as an initial plan.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
It seems that Mr. Sakamoto, Deputy Director-General of the Secretariat for the Promotion of Science, Technology and Innovation of the Cabinet Office, would like to make a statement.

Mr. Sakamoto: I would like to make a statement on the Comprehensive Data Strategy and developments related to the G7 Science and Technology Ministers' Meeting.

The current Comprehensive Data Strategy positions the development of research data infrastructure by universities and research institutions and the promotion of research data management and utilization. This will develop a research data platform that will utilize research results such as research data and papers in an integrated manner across fields and connect them to large-scale computational resources and analysis infrastructure, which will lead to the development of data human resources. We, the Cabinet Office, believe that this is extremely important from a policy perspective.

Furthermore, in Japan, this research data platform has an extremely important function as a channel for the distribution of new academic results. As you may know, regarding intellectual assets such as Japanese papers, in particular peer-reviewed papers, there is an oligopoly of global academic publishers, and the current situation is that universities and research institutes are hindered in their research activities by soaring subscription fees or publication fees. It is currently being discussed internationally that it will function as a distribution channel as a new alternative for that purpose. Therefore, with the G7 Science and Technology Ministers' Meeting to be held in May this year in mind, the Cabinet Office is currently conducting deliberations to present national policies with a view to the formulation of an integrated innovation strategy in 2023 at the Council for Science, Technology and Innovation.

We believe that this is closely related to the review of the Comprehensive Data Strategy, and we would like to respond in full cooperation with Digital Agency.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
Then, it seems that you have given us your opinion, so the office will respond.

Mr. Hiramoto, Senior Expert (Data Strategy): Mr. Koshizuka said that he would like you to do your best. Mr. Koshizuka, I would like to work with you. I understand that communities are important, and as you pointed out, I would say that the members here are familiar with community building, but in order to expand the scope of community building, I would like to increase external communication and make it easier for everyone to enter. It is certainly true that you are calling for international cooperation earlier, but there are still places where the system is not sufficient, so I would like to do my best.

As Mr. Watanabe pointed out, you said that the materials for Trust are divided into the first half and the second half. I believe that Trust must be realized seamlessly, but we have not organized it on a concept basis yet, but I hope that we can do it seamlessly in the future.

In addition, I would like to touch on AI and Minister in charge of Administrative Reform Okada. We will pay attention to that. I think I will write about AI clearly, but I will also pay attention to Minister in charge of Administrative Reform Okada. The specialized area will be handled by the specialized team, and we will proceed with it from a lateral perspective.

It has been said that there is a complete lack of money and human resources, but it is true that there are such aspects, so I would like to work hard on how we can show the effects of the system that has just been announced.
With regard to AI, you mentioned whether there is a policy for generative AI in the future. We are currently engaged in various discussions with AI Strategy, and I would like to discuss with CSTI how to advance AI, not just generative AI.

Mr. Tomioka asked if there are any negative aspects to the framework of G7. Basically, I believe there are many matters that need to be internationally coordinated, so I have not heard much negative news.

In addition, Mr. Murai asked if there is a more digital-oriented approach or a compulsory approach to data development. As you mentioned earlier, we are monitoring the GNN system to a certain extent, so please use it. With regard to that approach, there are places where we have to use it, but I don't think there are places where we want to use it, so I would like to consult with the Department of Digital-Oriented Policy to determine how far we should go, and we have set a target date of 2030 or twenty twenty-five, so I would like to consider when and how to proceed to achieve that.

I would like to organize the results of the accumulation so far, and the timing of the reboot is exactly the same. Just like the digital catalog was revised, I would like to review other parts that should be reviewed.

Gold bullion You mentioned what you meant by "going out to win," but I believe that we will take leadership. It is impossible to do it in all areas, but I believe that it is important to have mutual leadership in some areas, so I believe that we will aim to achieve that, but we will continue to scrutinize the matter going forward.

Finally, Deputy Director-General Sakamoto talked about the research data, and I would like to discuss it with the Council for Science, Technology and Innovation, including other AI, and create a consistent strategy.

That's all.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, .
It is almost the scheduled time. Thank you very much for your valuable opinions.

Finally, I would like to ask a few words from Chief Officer for Digital Policy Akaishi.

Chief Officer for Digital Policy Akaishi: Thank you, everyone .

You said a lot of things that really hurt my ears. The other day, in the multi-brand display area of the Liberal Democratic Party, you said very strict things about Digital Agency. In the Global Digital Competitiveness Ranking 2022, Japan fell to 29th, and in terms of data analysis and utilization, it is 63rd out of 63 countries. You said what on earth is going on. Aside from the way the ranking itself is done, I think it is the party's sense of crisis itself that the utilization of data is really lagging behind. We really evaluate it that way.

It's a pity that there is not much thinking about how to use data in Japan.
On the other hand, in December last year, the State Council of China released an opinion paper on building a data infrastructure system and making the role of data elements better, indicating how data will be handled in all fields. In January this year, the Office of Science and Technology Policy of the Office of the President of the United States issued a report on AI, in which it was stated that data resources should be thoroughly prepared throughout the United States, with a very strong awareness of the problem.

In addition, with regard to DFFT, G20 is holding the Indian Presidency this year, and their proposal is called Digital Public Infrastructure. What they are saying is that they will create a platform for cooperation in eID, cooperation in payment platforms, and data cooperation, and we are conducting advanced discussions.

In any case, it is true that we do not have a system or funds, we are strong in our thoughts, and we are fighting against the world with grand ideals. As Mr. Koshizuka said, there are only a limited number of people in Japan who will truly do this, and there are only a limited number of people who have feelings, so we would like to realize this data strategy by working together with industry, politics, government, and the world. Thank you very much for your continued support.

Thank you very much.

Councilor Mishima: Thank you, Thank you very much.
The next working group meeting is scheduled for April, and will include a revision of the Data Strategy Part in Priority plan.

In addition, today's minutes will be announced after everyone has confirmed the content.

With that said, I would like to conclude the 6th Working Group on Data Strategy Promotion. Thank you very much for your time today.