The 3rd Study Meeting on the Promotion of the Use of Vision for a Digital Garden City Nation Well-Being Indicators for the Realization of area

Overview

Date and Time: Monday, July 10, 2023 from 17:00 to 18:30
Location: Online
Agenda:
1. Opening
2. Proceedings
  1. Area Well Being Indicators Results of the 2023 National Survey
  2. Status of efforts in each local governments
    - Hamamatsu City, Shizuoka Prefecture
    - Mitoyo City, Kagawa
  3. Methodology for Designing Workshops
3. Exchange of opinions

Materials

Minutes

Moderator (Suzuki): Now that it is on time, we will begin the 3rd Review Meeting on the Promotion of the Utilization of the Vision for a Digital Garden City Nation Well-Being Indicator for the Realization of the area National Concept. I am For the public Group Digital Agency, and I am in charge of Digita.

Today, the members of the adopting organization are also attending. In addition, we apologize that some of the materials were delivered at the last minute.

First of all, Mr. Murakami, Director-General of the Digital Agency For the public Group, would like to say a few words.

Director-General: Mr. Matsuda . I have two agenda items today.

First of all, Mr. Nagumo will introduce the results of the survey on a nationwide sample base of about 80000. If you listen to this, you will be able to get an image of how to use it, including what results will be obtained if it is done in each city and town.

If you access the site later, you can see the results for each city and town. Regarding this national survey, there may be a local government where data is insufficient, but first of all, I would like you to listen to the results of the national survey and get an overall picture.

This is the second one. At the training sessions for local government held on July 4 and 5, I think many people learned how to use the Well-Being Indicator and what the indicator is.

However, it is important to discuss the results of this activity with citizens and various departments in the government, rather than measuring it and ending it.

I wonder if the meaning of measuring Well-Being will come out only when there is a process of creating a community well for efforts to improve Well-Being and listening to the opinions of various people. One of the methodologies is the utilization of workshops.

The actual workshops will be held after the results of the survey in each local government are available. I believe it will be a while in the future, but I believe that it is about this time that everyone is thinking about what kind of roadmap to use for this fiscal year's activities, including the execution of the Digita Issue Gold Project. In order to grasp the image of the workshops, I would like to ask Mr. Shirasaka to give a lecture on the methodology of the workshops, and the people of the two local government will introduce the examples of implementation.

In addition, we would like to ask questions and comments on the results of the national survey and give advice and messages to the people of local government for the implementation of the workshop during the time of exchange of opinions in the second half. Thank you.

Moderator (Suzuki): .

Then, I would like to ask Mr. Maeno of Keio University Graduate School, who is the chairman, to proceed with the proceedings from here. Mr. Maeno, thank you.

Chairman: Yes, thank you very much. I would like to say a few words at the beginning.

My name is Maeno from Keio University. I am the chairman of the Study Group. In line with what Director General Murakami said, I am very much looking forward to measuring Well-Being in each local government.

Today, we will talk about some cases and the methodology of the workshop. I think this is really educational and exciting content, so please look forward to it.

Depending on the local government, there may be people who feel burdened by the need to measure Well-Being and conduct workshops, but based on my experience so far, I think it is a really happy activity.

Everyone has a health checkup. To be healthy, we have a health checkup, and based on the results, I think I'll do sports or I'll do abdominal exercises. I think I'll cut down on rice a little, and so on. Each person thinks about it and aims to be healthy. It's like having a health checkup in local government, and I think it's like having a happiness diagnosis, and based on the results, I think about what kind of things I should do to be happier.

For those who are not used to it, it may be troublesome to take a medical examination, but it is definitely better to take it. Mr. Digital Agency is doing the same thing as this. We are also doing it very hard.

I think today's talk will be very educational, so please look forward to it. In addition, I would like to hear frank opinions from experts.

So, first of all, I would like to introduce the results of the area Happiness National Survey from Commissioner Nagumo.

Commissioner Nagumo: , I would like to explain.

From this year's survey, we have switched to a slightly simple 50-question questionnaire.

The website has already been launched, and the dashboard has been released so that everyone can see it. I think some people have already accessed it.

Starting from the dashboard screen, if you go inside, you will see page 5. This figure is like a collection of pages. On the "comprehensive" screen, you can see the results of questions such as how happy are you now and how satisfied are you with your life?

On the "By Factor" page on the right side of the figure, you can list the "Subjective" and "Objective" results in the form of a radar chart. The lower part of the figure shows the details of the subjective and the screen on the page where you can see the details of the objective.

On the "Comprehensive" screen, the results of the following questions are displayed: "Happiness" and "Satisfaction," "Happiness in five years," which I added after receiving a comment from Mr. Inoue at the previous review meeting, and "Happiness in the town" and "Is it fun around you?" as questions related to cooperative happiness.

In addition, a guidebook is also available, so please take a look at it.

Now, I would like to introduce the results of the survey of 85000 people.

What you are looking at is happiness on the left side and life satisfaction on the right side. It is a distribution by age group and gender. Compared to last year's results on page 10, the waveform is not much different, and the number is slightly higher overall.

In terms of "happiness," men in their 40s are at the bottom, and then it rises with age to form a gradual U-shape. In terms of "life satisfaction," men in their 30s are at the bottom, and it also rises gradually to form a U-shape.

It was almost the same last year, but as for "life satisfaction," it was almost flat, partly because there were 5 methods. Well, there were no big surprises.

I divided this by age group and looked at where they are distributed from 0 to 10. That's page 11.

There are various features, but the biggest feature is the double-humped type, that is, there are mountains concentrated at 5 and mountains concentrated at 7 and 8.

Relatively young people tend to be 5, and people over 60 tend to be 7 or 8. I think this reconfirms what is generally said to be a characteristic of the Japanese.

As for "life satisfaction," the results are almost the same, although they are a little flatter.

As for the "happiness level five years from now", it is relatively flat, and the happiness level does not increase so much even in the 60s and 70s. Actually, it is better to be a young person and have a higher score in the future, but we have not been able to confirm that this time.

The distribution of "happiness five years from now" is also almost the same double-humped type as the current "happiness".

Next, the question corresponding to cooperative happiness ("Neighborhood Happiness") has a slightly flatter form. The question "Fun Around" has a relatively high score (3 points or more in the 5-question method) and is flat.

The age classification of "Happiness in the town" is still double-humped. On the other hand, "Fun around" is almost flat.

This is the overall picture of the current level of happiness of the Japanese people. Next, we will start with an analysis from the perspective of how to use the results.

On page 18, in the middle of this figure, there is Well-Being (happiness and life satisfaction), which is divided into factors as if they were logic tree. At that time, the focus is on the logic of which items in the questionnaire were highly scored, and the logic of which question items were highly correlated with happiness. If you organize them on these two axes, the first quadrant (circled with red points) is the question items that were both highly scored.

This part is an important item for Japanese people. First of all, if we look at it in terms of happiness, "health condition," mainly mental health, and then "self-efficacy" and "housing environment" come in. These are in the form of items common to all of Japan, and the others are slightly out of place.

If we look at this in relation to "life satisfaction," there are a few more satisfaction levels related to "urban functions."

When the two correlations are combined, "medical care and welfare," "area administration," and "connection with area" have high characteristics.

Next, from the perspective of the correlations between "happiness" and "life satisfaction", where are the bumps in the radar chart for "subjective" and "objective" data, what characteristics are there, and the results of several local government are entered in the form of samples on the page.

In the graph on the right, a line is drawn where the correlation coefficient is 0.4, but if there is a correlation of 0.4 or more, there is a correlation to some extent.

If you take a quick look, you will understand that first of all, I would like you to recognize that the shape differs considerably from city to city. In other words, you can see that the strengths, weaknesses, and personalities differ greatly from city to city.

There is a term "strength finder," but I believe that the first step is to think about what the strength of your local government is, to find it, and then to use it to consider how to reflect it in policy.

Next, since we are conducting various correlational analyses, I would like to share it with you briefly. On the left side is the basic local government (city, ward, town, and village), and on the right side is the prefecture. I am looking at how much "happiness" and "life satisfaction" are correlated, and it is 0.64 in the basic local government and 0.76 in the prefecture, so it is quite correlated. I am plotting the names of several local government. If you include all the names, it will be like a ranking, so I am not going to do it, but I will include the names of several local government, so I will have some image in mind.

Next, if we take the correlation between the average of the 24 categories of subjectivity and "happiness", it is like this. It is 0.48 for municipalities and 0.6 for prefectures, so it can be seen that there is a correlation between the average score of each category and "happiness".

Looking at the correlation with "life satisfaction", both have a correlation of close to 0.9, so it can be seen that there is a considerable correlation.

On the other hand, when we look at the relationship between "objective indicators" and "happiness," there is almost no correlation. As expected, while looking at "subjective indicators," we look at what works for happiness, and then we consider the relationship between "objective" and that. This sense of step is very important, as I see from this result. If we do the opposite, there is a possibility that we will see a disconnect in which Well-Being cannot be realized even though the points of "objective indicators" have increased.

The same is true for "life satisfaction." There is little correlation with "objective indicators."

Next, when we look at the correlation between the 24 categories of "subjective indicators" and "objective indicators", we can see a correlation of 0.3 to 0.4. In fact, if you divide by city group, you can see a stronger correlation, but if you look at the whole country, there is a cancellation out, and the correlation coefficient decreases a little.

Looking at the correlation with "happiness" in each of the 24 categories, most of the categories show a moderate correlation (from 0.3 to 0.4) with the factor related to "urban environment."

On the other hand, there is not much correlation in the factor of "natural environments." I think this is because there is a variation between local government, where the correlation is strong, and local government, where the correlation is weak, partly because the local government where "natural environments" are sold is limited.

As for "human relations in area," there is a certain degree of correlation. After all, I think you can see here that "connection" and "diversity and tolerance" are important.

For "How to live in your own way," a stronger correlation of about 0.6 can be found. Correlations are high for "Self-efficacy," "Culture and Art," and "Richness of education Environments."

If we look at "life satisfaction," we can see a stronger correlation. If we look at each factor of "urban environment," we can see a strong correlation of about 0.7. "Digital" is also strong at 0.78. "Digital" is also quite effective for "life satisfaction."

Each factor of "natural environment" does not have a strong correlation. "Natural disasters" and "environmental coexistence" are strong in their own way, but "blessings of nature" have an inverse correlation. It seems that there is a tendency that where there is a lot of nature, "life satisfaction" is low.

The factor of "human relations in area" is strongly correlated with 0.50.0.68.

"My own way of life" is also very strongly correlated.

Again, I think that the process of decomposing "happiness" and "life satisfaction" into individual factors and then taking policies that fit well for highly correlated items. Then, setting objective KPIs will be the most suitable.

As for prefectures, we will show the slides a little earlier due to the time, but we can see a stronger correlation compared to municipalities.

I would like to make the results of this correlation analysis in a form that can be seen by everyone in the dashboard. However, I have attached a table this time, so if you want to see it, please see it later. I will end my explanation here. Thank you very much for your attention.

Chairman: Yes. Thank you for your explanation. You may have questions, but we will proceed with the presentation.

Next, I would like to ask about the status of efforts in each local government. First of all, I would like to ask Mr. Hamamatsu.

Hamamatsu-shi: This is Takimoto from Hamamatsu-shi, . Nice to meet you. I would like to give my input on the public-private co-creation approach using the Well-Being Index.

This is a diagram of the six steps of the utilization of the Well-Being Indicator, which you are all aware of. Hamamatsu City has advanced the steps up to No. 3 (visualization in the scenario) using last year's Issue fund. This fiscal year, we are discussing it through the workshop I will introduce later.

As for the utilization of the Well-Being Indicator, we are promoting its utilization in these four fields. Today, I would like to introduce the utilization in the transportation and mobility fields.

In the mobility field, last year, the public office of the city created an impact map and scenario for each of the five citizen images (personas). For example, for the citizen image of the eldest child-rearing generation (overall), securing one's own time was set as a core value.

On top of that, we set up three factors and layers of initiatives and projects for each persona as shown in this figure, and created a scenario of how the inputs of the project at the bottom will lead to the sense of happiness at the top.

In the mobility field, a consortium has been established since fiscal 2020 as a joint public-private partnership, and we held two workshops using the Well-Being Indicator. In the past, the consortium has held workshops on service creation in cooperation with the public and private sectors, and the feature of this time is that we took on the challenge of creating services in a Well-Being Driven manner.

In conducting the workshop, Mr. Nagumo was invited as a lecturer to give a lecture on the whole of Well-Being and the utilization of indicators, and the workshop was operated in cooperation with Mr. Tokio Marine.

In the first workshop held in April, we considered the elements and main themes that would lead to the improvement of the well-being of the personas set by each group. Although we are a consortium in the mobility field, we did not limit ourselves to mobility. We listed the elements necessary for the improvement of the well-being of the personas set by each group. After that, we organized them into the three factors at the lower left, and asked each group to decide on one core theme.

In the second round (July 3), based on the scenarios up to the three factors made in the first round, we worked to consider services on a Well-Being-driven basis. First, based on the persona, core value, and three layer factors set last time, we asked them to consider services that could lead to them, not only in mobility. They chose one service from among them, created a storyboard, fleshed out the service, and finally made a presentation. The presentation materials of two of the six groups are shown in the lower right corner.

This is the scene of the workshop. In the past workshops, I felt that the weight of the idea was to start from Issue and extend the current one. On the other hand, this time, I think that I was able to consider the service in backcasting from a positive point that I wanted to be like this in the future by considering Well-Being as a starting point.

Looking at the services that were actually announced, it was very impressive that there were many services that were conscious of cooperative happiness and mutual assistance.

In addition, in the past, the main activity report of the consortium was to share the input that the member companies did this or that, but in the future, by using such scenarios, I think that the impact of the activity report can be shared in the form of how much impact each scenario has.

I would like to introduce two points. Although it is not a workshop, I would like to introduce our efforts to utilize the Well-Being Indicator. The Well-Being Human Resources Development Program, commonly known as OASIS, which has been launched in various parts of Japan, started in this city on May 22. As you can see on the lower left, managers from various fields, including the Planning Division and the Financial Affairs Division, participate in six lectures.

What I would like to share today is that OASIS in local government is becoming a place to learn with colleagues from all over Japan. At the second OASIS held the other day, 20 people from 10 organizations from all over Japan participated and listened to the lecture side by side with the staff of Hamamatsu City. It is planned that it will be held sequentially in the future, and at the final sixth session, it will be announced to the mayor. In addition, after the third session, only Hamamatsu, which is considering the introduction of OASIS, will be able to participate in the training of this city.

As for the second initiative, smart cities City has designated October every year as Digital HAMAMATSU MONTH and is conducting various awareness-raising initiatives. This fiscal year, we established the Hamamatsu Well-Being Awards to promote efforts by honoring the well-being efforts of companies and organizations. Applications began on July 7, and are currently being sought. In October, MONTH, the winners will be announced and an awards ceremony will be held.

We have Design Awards and Impact Awards, and you can see the details from the QR codes at the bottom right, so please take a look. Through these awards, we hope that the efforts of companies and organizations in area will be revitalized, and at the same time, the Well-Being of area as a whole will be enhanced. In addition, when applying, we will ask you to make a simple impact map, so we would like to raise the Well-Being of area together as such knowledge is gathered.

Please take a look at the efforts of Hamamatsu City, which are shared and published on the city's Decidim and official notes. That's all my input.

Chairman: Yes, thank you very much. Next, Mr. Mitoyo City, please.

Mitoyo City: Yes. Thank you very much. My name is Kuramoto from public office, Mitoyo City, Kagawa. Nice to meet you.

I would like to make a presentation on the Workshop on Utilization of Well-Being Indicators and Scenarios for Well-Being in area.

First of all, Mitoyo City has a population of slightly less than 60000. It is a town rich in nature located in the western part of Kagawa Prefecture, with the sea, mountains, and countryside. Oyakogahama, where you can take pictures like the scenery on the screen, has seen a 100-fold increase in the number of tourists in about six years. In recent years, it has been attracting attention as a tourist town.

Regarding the process of enhancing Well-Being and our efforts in fiscal 2022, we are conducting questionnaires and workshops in accordance with the workflow for utilizing the Well-Being Index in cooperation with Maeno Laboratory of Keio University Graduate School.

As for the schedule, it was very short for the duration of the project, so we spent six months from October to March to implement this schedule. I hope you can use it as a reference.

Next, we will analyze environmental factors related to the "livability" of Mitoyo City. We will take a bird' s-eye view of the characteristics of local government by utilizing environmental indicator data on "livability" and data held by area.

In this process, we are delving into specific objective indicators, comparing them with other neighboring cities, and linking indices and ratings with implementation measures. It is not essential to take such detailed measures, but I personally feel that by implementing this, our understanding of Well-Being has significantly deepened.

Next, we are conducting a questionnaire for city employees. After this questionnaire, we are also conducting a workshop for city employees and citizens. The flow of the workshop is attached to the materials, so please refer to this as well.

With regard to the content of the workshop, as a citizen, we are asking what we should do to make life in Mitoyo City better, and we are conducting a focused breakfast on that.

We grouped the sticky notes described by Brest by the factors of area's Well-Being Indicator, and analyzed them by extracting characteristic words from 12 pages by text analysis based on the grouped contents. We have held the workshop in this flow, and could you please give your comments to Mr. Inoue, who cooperated with the workshop?

Inoue (Observer): Keio University.

We supported the workshop. First, we shared the results of a subjective questionnaire on Mitoyo City. In sharing the results, as Mitoyo citizens, we reconfirmed the characteristics of area where we live. Then, we asked what we should do to improve our lives. We had a breakfast at the workshop, and I think we had a common recognition that our lives would improve further by enhancing dynamism, pride, and convenience of life.

Mitoyo City: Thank you, Mr. Inoue.

Based on the results of these questionnaires and workshops for city officials, we extracted questions on factors important to area from more than 80 items of the Well-Being Indicator. In addition, we set up original questions to ensure the results of the projects to be implemented, and conducted a questionnaire survey of about 300 citizens.

Among them, as you mentioned at the beginning, Mr. Inoue has included a question on expectations about the current life and the future life five years from now as an original item. Mr. Inoue, could you give us some comments on this point?

Inoue (Observer): : Commissioner Nagumo mentioned earlier that people's expectations for their lives five years from now tend to decline as they get older. This is also the case with Mitoyo City.

However, as you can see, the younger generation in their 20s, 30s, and 40s had more expectations for the future than the younger generation. It may be represented by the factor of "dynamism and pride," but I thought it was a local government where the younger generation wanted vitality and felt strength.

Mitoyo City: Thank you for your comments.

Based on the results of this questionnaire, and by comparing the results of the questionnaire with environmental factors, we are working to realize the Issue of the city and sort out the need to work on the basic infrastructure development project. It was a short period of time, so I have not been able to connect this workshop with the logic tree I am going to talk about, but I will explain the logic tree now.

From here on, it will be an initiative unique to Mitoyo City, but we are preparing an logic tree in order to make it a continuous initiative by firmly utilizing the Well-Being Indicator. This logic tree is a decomposition and visualization of the initiatives and effects necessary for improving the well-being of citizens.

Specifically, we have organized A. what kind of measures and services will change B. how the lives of residents will change, C. how the conditions of residents will change, and D. what kind of social impact will eventually appear.

As for the initiatives of A., we are investing demonstration measures for basic infrastructure development projects and initiatives for existing mutual aid projects.

This logic tree was created not only by the government but also by the government and companies in private sector, area, and other cities. We will update it as the project progresses.

I have heard that Mr. Inoue is engaged in research on corporate logic tree, so it would be helpful if you could tell us about Issue's efforts on corporate logic tree and logic tree in government.

Inoue (Observer): Yes. In recent years, mainly major companies have been publishing integrated reports every year. In it, it is recommended to visualization and tell a narrative about the value creation story, that is, what kind of social impact their business activities have. I talked about how I hope we can draw such a value creation story for each local government.

In this figure, at the stage before the efforts of A come out, we will grasp the current situation using the indicators mentioned earlier, identify the factors to be noticed in our town, set up efforts to raise them, determine how it will affect the change of residents and what output it will lead to, and finally determine what KPI will be set as the impact and outcome of the administration, and I think it is good to be able to validation the measures based on the KPI. Companies are leading such efforts, but I think it is good to be able to provide them in a simple form in local government.

Mitoyo City: Thank you.

There are still few places in local government that are making such efforts, and I thought that it would be difficult for the citizens to understand if I showed only this logic tree, so I created an image of the effects of the efforts so that the citizens can understand it as easily as possible.

In addition, we are creating a "Future Map" in which citizens and companies can confirm the future image that Mitoyo City aims to be and the efforts to realize it by slightly changing the form of the logic tree.

To be specific, we are visualization the efforts we will make to realize goal and the points to be improved, and we are planning to build a mechanism that can manage, measure, and disclose the social impact of our efforts. For example, in this figure, we are visualization what will be improved by our efforts related to childcare and children's education, and how it will lead to area's goal.

By conducting such consolidation and visualization, we aim to build a system that makes it easier for companies to invest and participate in businesses in area. For companies, we aim to make demonstration experiments a place for new services and technologies, and for Mitoyo citizens, to improve their rich lives by receiving them.

In Mitoyo City, we are planning to further advance projects in the area of mutual assistance. Needless to say, funds will be necessary for this, but at the moment, mainly private sector companies in area are considering the formation of a fund.

As I said at the beginning, the number of tourists to Oyaga-hama has increased 100-fold. Up until now, we have been promoting an increase in the "related population," who are either single tourists or continuously involved in the area. However, we are aiming beyond that, and we would like to aim to acquire the "shareholders population."

By developing the funds mentioned earlier, we would like to create a mechanism in which people who visit Mitoyo City can be more deeply involved in their efforts, including investment. To that end, we believe that it is necessary to show social impact while using these Well-Being Indicators, and we are working on this. That's all for the presentation. Thank you for your attention.

Chairman: Yes, thank you very much. Next, I would like to ask Member Shirasaka to talk about the methodology for designing workshops.

Member Shirasaka: , Yes. This is Shirasaka from Keio University. Today, I am participating from Ishigaki, where I am on a business trip, and it is Kariyushi Wear. Using the methodology of the workshop I will talk about today, I plan to hold a class on entrepreneurship development for junior high schools tomorrow.

The methodology for designing this workshop is a bit old, but it was created in cooperation with 23 research institutes and universities in the form of the "Innovation Dialogue Guidebook" in the form of how to design a workshop as a dialogue tool for creating new value and innovation from universities in Mr. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)'s commissioned project.

I can only talk about a part of it today, but if you are interested, you can look it up on the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) website. In this material, there are many makura words such as innovation and innovation creation, but as a methodology for designing workshops, it is actually made as a versatile one.

So, today's material is also based on this, and the word innovation is used a lot, but I hope it can be read as something that can be used in workshops in general.

The reason why workshops are frequently used and considered effective in smart cities and community development is, I think, the diversity of people living in the community. Many people, including citizens, government, and companies, are involved in community development. However, everyone has cognitive bias and expert bias, and if only a limited number of people proceed with things, they can only see things from a limited perspective.

We need to take this from multiple perspectives, so I think workshops in which various stakeholders participate are becoming important. In that sense, I think it is necessary to pay attention to what kind of people will participate or what will be done at the workshop, because if we do not make a proper design of the design, it will be just a workshop.

Regarding the design of the workshop, we separate the workshop designer who designs the workshop from the facilitator who facilitates the workshop. Of course, it is easiest for the designer to facilitate the workshop, but we make it so that the two can be separated.

For example, we are supporting Tokio Marine, and they are facilitating, and we are in charge of design.

In this "Innovation Dialogue Guidebook," one of the main purposes is assumed to be the training of workshop designers and facilitators, and the target is to improve their abilities by themselves by "looking back."

"Workshop design" is to facilitate from the top down, from the purpose side, what to do, how to do it, and how to do it. On the other hand, "design" is to reach the final purpose by accumulating from the bottom up what should be done in each step and what we want people to think about. Therefore, awareness of facilitation is to be done from the bottom up. "Reflection" is also better to be done from the bottom up, so reflection is also to be done from the bottom up. This guidebook is also organized in that way, and when we actually design and conduct workshops, we follow this flow.

Next, I would like to explain about "workshop design" in order from the top. As I said, first, there is the setting of the purpose, and then there is the design of the methodology and method. Whether or not this is done properly will make a considerable difference in the results.

Of course, it is true that there are people who can do the facilitation well without doing this. Therefore, it is not necessary for everyone to do this, but it is beneficial for people who want to design workshops and improve their abilities by doing so.

As I said, from the top, there are the "Purpose Layer," the "Methodology Layer," and the "Method Layer." There are three layers: the "Purpose Layer," which is what the workshop will be done for; the "Methodology Layer," which is what steps the workshop flow will be considered in; and the "Method Layer," which is what procedures will be followed in each step. We grasp the overall structure at these three stages and make design in this flow.

A common pattern is to think only about this combination of "method layers," and it is difficult to reach the purpose. After all, it is easier to do design from the top.

As for design in the "purpose layer," as in the case of Hamamatsu earlier and I think Mitoyo City as well, it is important to consider where the workshop will be positioned as a whole, not to achieve some purpose by itself.

For example, OASIS has several workshops, and Hamamatsu city has two workshops. First, we have a purpose of what we aim for as a whole, and then we think about where we aim at each step and which step we will do in the workshop. Then, in this workshop, the purpose is to produce the output so far, and in the next workshop, it will be clear what we will do by utilizing it. If we do not make design of this entire flow at the beginning, it will be difficult to make a workshop that matches the purpose.

Another thing to be aware of is why it is a workshop and why it should be done in a workshop. There are cases where you do things in a workshop that you don't need to do in a workshop, and then it was fun, but the output itself doesn't show what is unique to a workshop.

If we are going to have many people participate and hear the opinions of many people, it is necessary to make it a workshop that lives. In the first place, if the positioning and purpose do not match, it will be difficult to obtain the effect as a workshop. By sharing the experience and knowledge of various people, something new will be created, or it will lead to some results. It will be meaningful to hold a workshop at such a time, so it is necessary to consider whether it matches such purpose.

Then, the facilitator is the one who brings the dialogue together. Because the facilitator understands the purpose of the workshop, he or she can practice how and at what steps to facilitate. However, if the facilitator is too vocal about the output itself, the workshop participants will not be able to speak freely. In addition, if the facilitator summarizes the output, the output, which should be produced from the opinions of various people, will be biased.

In order to prevent this from happening as much as possible, it is necessary to conduct "design of the workshop" and "facilitation."

There are various types of workshops. There are workshops to obtain the opinions of various people, and to generate ideas from their interaction. There are also workshops to deepen mutual understanding. In addition, who is called as a participant depends on the purpose. In addition, in the class we are conducting, we also teach how to write a recruitment statement and application guidelines. This can be said to be part of the design of the workshop.

This is an example of a workshop in Maebashi City that was held together with SCI-Japan. At that time, it took a short time for people involved in smart cities to deepen their understanding of the Well-Being Indicator and to consider how to utilize it. With that as a premise, the design was design.

Next, how to think about the "methodology layer" in order to achieve the set purpose. At this time, basically, we perform a design by calculating back from the final output we want to obtain. To give a simple example, if we have a purpose of creating a service to make the weak points of our city better, let's do a design to create the service. But in order to think about the service, of course, we need to know the weak points, so let's find out the weak points. What should we do as input for that? We calculate back and think about the steps to consider. As a result, if we can't finish the workshop on the 1st, let's divide it into 2 days, or we can only do this part because we can only do it for 1 hour this time. It becomes a part of the whole.

At the Maebashi City workshop, in Step 1, we did the work of understanding and reading the Well-Being Indicator, and in Step 2, we did what kind of direction we would think about based on the expectations of citizens. Then, before the step of thinking about services, in Step 3, we thought about what kind of experience and value we would provide to what kind of people, and finally, in Step 4, we made a design of the flow of thinking about services. This work is actually a design of back calculation from Step 4.

Next, regarding the "method layer," we will consider what kind of work will be done in each of Steps 1 to 4.

In Step 1 of the Maebashi City workshop, we are thinking about what kind of data will be used and what kind of table will be used to work on it in order to understand and analyze the Well-Being Index in order to know the current situation.

Next, in Step 2, we will show the results of the questionnaire on the left and use the format on the right to determine the direction of citizens' expectations by the process shown there.

Step 3 presents the appropriate format to determine which experiences and people to focus on.

Finally, in Step 4, we will consider the services to be provided to such people. Here, we also created the format necessary for the examination, embedded the results of the examination earlier in this format, and brainstormed ideas while looking at it. In this way, we will consider what steps should be taken to perform the work at the "method layer" stage.

As shown in this figure, the workshop design is performed from the top down in the form of "purpose layer", "methodology layer", and "method layer".

On the other hand, "facilitation" and "reflection" are done from the bottom up, but when doing so, it is overwhelmingly easier to facilitate if you are aware of the intention of this design. Therefore, it is better for the same person to be the workshop designer and the facilitator, but even if it is someone else's workshop design, if you correctly understand the intention, it is possible to facilitate. Anyway, it is important to understand the intention of each step and the goal you are aiming for and to facilitate.

Regarding "reflection," the guidebook includes formats for reflecting from four main perspectives. The reason why it is divided like this is that even if the design is not very good, if the facilitator has great ability and good results are obtained, or if someone who is good at discussion participates, even if the design and facilitation are not very good, good results will be obtained.

Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate what went well and what went wrong from each perspective. Otherwise, the ability of workshop design will not improve easily.

It is important to conduct reflection using the perspective of each of the four stakeholders shown here, i.e., "designers," "facilitators," "supporters," and "people who do the work," and a matrix of three layers: "purpose layer," "methodology layer," and "method layer."

As I mentioned above, it is important to conduct "workshop design" from the top down from the purpose, and "facilitation" and "reflection" from the bottom up from the method toward the purpose.

In the purpose design of the workshop, we decide what to aim for as the output of the workshop while considering its position in the overall activities. On top of that, in the "methodology layer", we make a design of back calculation to achieve the purpose based on the flow of thought (logic). After that, in the "method layer", we think about what format should be prepared for each step and what procedure should be followed.

When you design your workshops in this way, the facilitation is easier and you will be able to self-assess correctly during the reflection.

As I said at the beginning, the "Innovation Dialogue Guidebook" has various materials that can be used as a reference, so please take a look. In addition, we have made a presentation on the same content at the Service Society, so if you are interested, please take a look. That's all from me.

Chairman: Yes, thank you very much.

This will be a Q & A session. Committee members, please feel free to say anything.

Member I am also doing the same thing as other organizations and companies, and the results are almost the same. In short, the results show that there is no clear correlation between the specific outputs of the policies put in by local government, or the urban environments themselves as the results thereof, and the sense of happiness and subjective evaluation. On the other hand, there is a fairly clear correlation between how citizens evaluate their own lives and the sense of happiness.

What I found out by looking at the results this time is how to bridge the gap between the physical environment and the quality of service in urban areas and the subjective evaluation of citizens.

Conversely, the Well-Being Indicator becomes completely linked to policies when the mechanism of what local government's policies are used to increase citizens' satisfaction with their living conditions and the results are more effective is understood. I was able to confirm that it is necessary to explore this point in the future. That was a very interesting point.

I have one question. I would like to ask Mr. Takimoto of Hamamatsu City. After conducting the workshop, I had the impression that very good results were obtained. After conducting the workshop, I think the logic model itself may change. Could you tell me if there were any routes or viewpoints that were different from the assumed logic model?

Hamamatsu-shi: This is Takimoto from Hamamatsu-shi, .
The purpose of this workshop was mainly to experience how the approach will change when the perspective is changed from the activities of the consortium at the Issue origin to the Well-Being origin, so we did not compare and validation with the logic model created by the city last year.

Since we are a consortium in the field of mobility, the efforts of member companies and organizations were inevitably biased toward the field of mobility. However, through this workshop, I think it was a major achievement that we were able to gain a common recognition that in order to improve Well-Being, it is necessary to work together with fields other than mobility and other players. We would like to utilize this recognition in the future activities of the consortium.

Member : Thank you very much. I understand.

Chairman: : Mr. Maeno, thank you very much. Next, I would like to ask Mr. Ohta.

Member: It is very rich in content, and there are many things I would like to comment on, but I would like to focus on two and give my opinions and proposals.

Committee member Shirasaka's talk on the design of the workshop is very disappointing based on my experience in the project I am involved in. In particular, I think it is very good to consider the Well-Being Indicator, the direction of policy, and the service and user experience as a set in the materials on page 12.

The first point is that it leads to an example of Well-Being-driven services by Hamamatsu City, but I think it is good to do it while balancing indicators and policies because services and experiences are easy for citizens to understand.

To be more specific, this is a story about when I made a logic model for mobility measures in Toyama city, a validation of the logic model can be made in about 2 months. Then, you can see from the experience and the service that there are parts of the tree where the correlations are strong, weak, or not at all, and there are correlations that you didn't expect. And even if you don't take a questionnaire for the service, you can make a validation fairly quickly because the footprints of behavioral factors and mental factors are left by using the service.

This is a good service, and it is very good that users can experience the effect of this in terms of Well-Being. So, this is a proposal, but I think it would be better to work on Well-Being driven service design not only in Type II and III local government of Digita Issue Kin, but in all local government.

The second point is close to the opinion of Mr. Koizumi, but as Mr. Inoue said, I have a hypothesis that narratives are quite important, and once the direction of policy is decided, rather than analyzing the factors in detail, I think it is important to confirm how much the story will spread by, for example, text analysis on Twitter and Facebook.

There is a talk of narrative economics, but for example, in Maebashi City, you publish a newspaper called Mebuku Shimbun. There are various stories in this Mebuku Shimbun, and they are spreading considerably. I have a sense that the spread of the story of what kind of town this town will become by using technology is quite correlated with the sense of well-being and satisfaction of the citizens, so I think it is better to look at such an approach together. If you only analyze the factors, there is a gap, and it tends to be difficult to understand, but I think you can grasp it as a story and your wisdom will come out.

Anyway, I think it is very good to hold a workshop. During RESAS, we held 50 workshops a year from 2015 to around 2018. If you look at the RESAS website, where and when the workshops were held are archived. I would like the Secretariat to consider continuing to hold such workshops this time.

Chairman: Yes, thank you very much. Next, Mr. Seki, please.

Seki: Thank you very much, Thank you very much for today. I really learned a lot, especially how to assemble the workshop, and I was grateful for your easy-to-understand explanation.

I was looking at the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) page called development of the Innovation Dialogue Tool, but it was a large document, so I was very glad that Committee member Shirasaka told me about it briefly.

I think the workshop is really important, but on the other hand, the workshop seems to be very successful, but when I transfer it, there is a tendency that there is nothing left. When I myself made a design for the workshop, I thought that I had to make a design for the upstream process (purpose) and the post-process (how to utilize the results).

In addition, I would like to ask Mr. Shirasaka and Mr. Mitoyo City what is the difference from other workshops that are often held when planning services from the perspective of Well-Being, and what differences are important. In particular, when citizens participate in a workshop, there are various variables, including what we should do and what we want the government to do. If we do not firmly decide our stance, ideas may become fluffy or simply become empty.

If there is any advice that we should be careful about this, I would like to ask you.

Member Shirasaka: Yes. Thank you for your question.
Actually, Commissioner Seki said what we are thinking, but I think we need to position ourselves quite firmly. Well-Being is something that appears as a comprehensive result, so I don't think it will work well if we suddenly use the indicator of Well-Being to conduct a workshop.

For each workshop, it is important for the organizers to analyze in advance what the citizens will come for, how to analyze the Well-Being Index, and what they will think about, and to design the workshop with hypotheses. Otherwise, we will use data and think about it, and output will be produced without knowing who will do it. Or, it will be a workshop in which we all had a good time.

In particular, I think that the workshop on Well-Being needs more detailed design than other workshops.

Seki: Thank you very much, . I was just listening to it because I thought it was very difficult.

Mitoyo City: , we are building a logic tree, but that has not yet been done as a workshop starting point, and I think we will discuss this idea in future workshops.

I think it is difficult for citizens to understand even if I list them all, so right now, in the part of the basic infrastructure development project, we are specifically developing cooperation services such as comprehensive education, health, and transportation.

By having people experience and discuss such specific services, I think we can discuss them in a more easy-to-understand manner, so I think it is necessary to show them clearly.

Seki: Thank you very much, . It will be like deciding on a focus area and then involving the citizens.

Mitoyo City: That's right. There are also services in the area of mutual assistance that have already started in private sector, so I think we are introducing such services.

Chairman: Next, Mr. Uchida, please.

Dr. Uchida: Thank you very much, . Thank you very much.

There were many questions I wanted to ask. In particular, I was interested in the difference between the Well-Being Workshop you just mentioned and other workshops. I have just received your answer, so I would like to ask another question.

I would like to ask Mr. Nagumo. This analysis is very interesting, and I was watching it thinking, I see. One question I would like to ask is how to handle objective and subjective indicators. I thought that if I were a staff member of local government, I would be troubled.

It is easy to set numerical targets and policies, but the problem is that objective numerical values do not directly lead to a sense of happiness. For example, if we can analyze a model in which objective indicators mediate subjective satisfaction and eventually lead to a sense of happiness, I think we can see the significance of raising objective numerical values step by step. I think there were many direct correlation analyses this time, but I would like to ask if there is a possibility of conducting an analysis in which the numerical values of objective indicators may be an underlying cause of a sense of happiness.

Commissioner Nagumo: Yes, thank you.

This is exactly what I'm trying to do, but when I try to correlate subjective and objective KPIs with round-robin, there is actually about half of the correlation. Originally, subjective KPIs were created by analyzing the factors of happiness, so a chain of correlations was incorporated in advance. On the other hand, objective KPIs are originally based on a completely different idea from happiness, so it has been found that there is no correlation with happiness, or on the contrary, there is a high correlation between the congestion rate and stress. With this combination, I think the next step is to expand the set with high correlations as a use cases.

Dr. Uchida: Thank you very much, . If we can see some stories, I think we will also be able to see how we will accept the results and make use of them in the future. The analysis of the current situation is sufficiently interesting, but it is interesting to look at it from a macro perspective. Rather, individual local government will look at their own numerical values individually and in detail, so I asked you how to come to terms with that. Thank you very much.

Chairman: Yes, thank you very much. Then, Mr. Hiroi, please.

Member Hiroi: Yes. Thank you very much. I was very impressed with all of your talks.

I would like to make two or three comments. Commissioner Nagumo said that in the analysis of strong and weak correlations, the way of life, education, income, and health are strongly correlated with a sense of happiness, and are mildly correlated in urban environments and are not so strongly correlated in natural environments. I believe that this does not mean that urban environments and natural environments are low in priority.

In other words, there are two levels of happiness, one is individual happiness and the other is public happiness, so I thought one theme would be how to incorporate these levels when considering happiness.

I also thought that the story of the level of happiness five years from now would be interesting. I thought that there would be interesting developments when such stories as how to create the future of area and what kind of area society to become are connected with the story of Well-Being.

Finally, I also have some points of contact with existing surveys on the level of happiness in local government, such as the Arakawa Ward and the Happiness League. I believe that this survey has become much more sophisticated, but I believe that there are parts that are relatively common in the discussions, so I think it is okay to be a little aware of the connection with local government, which is conducting the existing survey.

Chairman: Yes. Thank you very much.

Important Implications Thank you very much. Then, Mr. Sasao, thank you very much.

Member Sasao: Yes. I'm Sasao from the University of Tokyo. Thank you very much for today. It was a very interesting analysis and workshop result.

First of all, there was a slide around page 18 that was interesting in Mr. Nagumo's analysis. He said that the important factor is the quadrant that has a high correlation with happiness and a high score in the questionnaire by mapping the correlation with happiness and the score in the questionnaire into four quadrants. I thought it was very interesting that he successfully created a mechanism that makes it easy to determine in what fields my area has strengths.

On the other hand, although it may overlap with what Commissioner Koizumi said earlier, I believe that more research is needed on whether or not the factors that have low correlation with happiness and low scores in the questionnaire are really not important to citizens.

With regard to such factors, I believe that by improving the quality of the corresponding services in the future, there is a possibility that the correlation coefficient with happiness will increase, and in that sense, I thought that long-term surveys and approaches would never be useless.

Regarding workshops, I am also involved in activities such as a citizen-participatory living lab, and there were many points that came to my mind in Commissioner Shirasaka's talk. In that context, I thought that the final goal of the workshops using such Well-Being Indicators this time is to use them in many cases to examine what new measures and services should be launched in the city. In that case, I think that the extent to which we discuss with the residents will be a quite important point.

If we try to make it with the participation of the residents until the end, it will take a lot of time and effort. So, I think it is important to decide which process the residents will participate in and how to design the workshop by taking advantage of the strength of the participation of the residents. Considering that the ability to listen to the voices of the people, even if it is a small number, is a major strength of the workshop, I think that the voices of the residents should be heard in the process of investigating the cause of why this town and which factor has a high or low correlation with happiness.

On the other hand, regarding the process of formulating future measures, it is necessary for the government, who are experts, to thoroughly examine them, including environmental and economic evaluations. I thought that it is necessary to design the design of the workshop on the premise that such matters will be shared well.

Chairman: Yes, thank you very much. Finally, Mr. Ishikawa, do you have any comments?

Member : I am very excited to realize that such a wonderful initiative is underway. I have three requests to Member NAGUMO and the Secretariat.

My first question is, as you stated, the current administration has set a goal of a virtuous cycle of growth and distribution, and this year's Basic Policies include monitoring whether a virtuous cycle of growth and distribution is occurring. It is inscribed that growth is monitored by per capita GDP and Well-Being, so I think it would be wonderful if we could derive factors common to GDP growth and improvement in Well-Being through analysis using data from a national survey of more than 85000 people. Although it is a rather difficult Issue, if we could do so, I think we could insert it into the monitoring mechanism of the virtuous cycle of growth and distribution to be created in the future.

My second question is that the theme of Beyond GDP is finally being recognized as a global Issue at the UN, and at the UN General Assembly next year, it is likely that Well-Being will be positioned as Beyond GDP. In addition, I would like to ask you to consider not only averages but also disparities when looking at Well-Being. If we look at this survey in each local government, there should be disparities in Well-Being. For example, the Well-Being Gender Gap is fine, but from the perspective of disparities, I think we should sort out the situation in each local government. If we do so, I think it will be a major weapon when Japan takes leadership internationally in the field of Well-Being.

Third, I think that there was data in the materials presented by Dr. Nagumo that there was an inverse correlation between subjective well-being and the blessings of nature. I think that we need to be careful about how to obtain that result. It is the current trend in society to achieve both human well-being and planet well-being, and I think that we need to be aware of the need to achieve both human well-being and planet well-being in order to make the efforts of well-being understood and to work together with people who emphasize sustainability.

Chairman: Yes, thank you very much.

Let me make a few comments at the end. It was a really good meeting today. I have a lot of input and I still want to discuss it, but I have time so I will finish today. However, I would like to say one thing. I don't think all of it will be clear only from the macro data you introduced this time. There is a research result that says, "People who touch nature are happy." In the macro, there was a result that goes against this, but I think there is a lot of room for different results to be seen by dividing them into clusters or looking at the variation. I thought that today's result is not all of it, and that I should take it that a very wonderful research has finally started.

I believe that the people of local government who will be attending today will have various points that we learned today, points that were difficult, and points that we would like to refer to. I would like you to feel free to ask Digital Agency and the experts. We ourselves are working on new knowledge with excitement, but at the same time, I believe that if the people of local government learn this hot method and apply it more and more, we will make great progress in a double loop.

I would like to work with you so that Japan can lead the world of Well-Being.

Finally, Mr. Murakami, Director-General of the Foreign Ministry of Japan, would like to summarize.

Director-General: Mr. Matsuda Yes. Thank you very much for today. I think it was a very good meeting.

In particular, I think that I was greatly inspired by Mr. Shirasaka's story, but on the contrary, I imagine that some people in local government have not yet caught up to that extent.

I received comments from Chairman Maeno and Dr. Shirasaka, but before the fever subsides, please send us your impressions and questions about what you heard today to the Secretariat. In addition, I think we will rely on you for any questions that Digital Agency cannot answer.

I think the workshop has probably started with this process. There is no exact answer somewhere, so I would like to use today's meeting as an opportunity to expand this activity together with everyone. Thank you very much.

Chairman: Yes, thank you very much. Please let me know the administrative contact.

Moderator (Suzuki): , Chairman, thank you for your progress today.

This is an administrative communication from my side, but as Mr. Imamura said, Mr. local government, before the fever subsides, you can e-mail us your questions, impressions, and opinions. Thank you very much.

We would like to hold the next conference around September. We look forward to your continued participation. That's all for the office communication.

Mr. Matsuda: I was transferred from Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications to Digital Agency on July 7, . I also worked in the IT Office in 2015, and was in charge of public-private data utilization and the sharing economy. For the past two years, I have been serving as the Planning Director of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Post Office Administration Department, and although I have been out of the digital world, I would like to firmly catch up with you. Thank you very much.

Director-General: Mr. Matsuda will replace his predecessor, Mr. Yoshida, and will be in charge of coordinating and managing Digita in Digital Agency. I and Mr. Suzuki are no different, so please continue to support us.

Moderator (Suzuki): Yes. I am very sorry that it has exceeded the scheduled time.

Thank you very much for taking time out of your busy schedule. With that, we would like to conclude this meeting. Thank you very much.

End