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 ".

The eighth meeting of the Study Group on the Promotion of the Use of Well-Being Indicators

Overview

  • Date: March 17, 2025 (Mon) 16:00 to 18:00
  • Location: online
  • Agenda:
    1. Opening
    2. Business
      1. Promotion of Utilization of the Well-Being Index
      2. Towards the Next Phase of Well-Being Indicators
      3. Promotion of Utilization of the Well-Being Index
    3. Exchange of views

Material

References

Minutes

Moderator (KOBAYASHI): , we will hold the 8th Study Meeting on Promoting the Use of Regional Happiness Indicators.

The meeting was attended by the members of the adopting organizations today, but since the members of the adopting organizations will only be attending the meeting, please turn off the cameras and microphones so that there will be no sound.

I would like to ask Mr. Maeno, the chairman, to proceed with the proceedings from here. Thank you, Mr. Maeno.

Chair Maeno: Thank you, Yes. Thank you.

First of all, I would like to say a few words, but I hope you will have a lively discussion today as well. The agenda is full, so I look forward to it.

First, Mr. Digital Agency will make a presentation. Thank you.

Suzuki (Digital Agency): In , I will explain from Digital Agency.

(p. 3) I will explain from the page of the map of Japan.

This fiscal year has come to March, and the use of indicators is spreading beyond the organizations that have adopted the Digida issue Fund.

(p. 4) Next, I would like to explain the facilitator introduction and dispatch project and other support measures that we started from this fiscal year.

In order to expand the use of indicators to local governments and residents, we started a facilitator introduction and dispatch project in October.

We trained 102 facilitators, and in the four months from October to February, we were able to conduct seven times in six groups. We have also received applications from many groups in the future, so we will continue to utilize the indicators and hold workshops to expand the range of utilization.

On the right side of the handout, the local government questionnaire survey support system can now be connected via LGWAN, and it has been launched in the form of a standard questionnaire of 50 questions preset by the local government for both online and paper questionnaires.

This was also started in October, and currently about 50 organizations are using it. Many organizations are using it without any problems, and the data is being reflected. This is also free of charge, so we will continue to promote it so that many organizations can use it.

Regarding the second box on the right, we have released videos and operated a contact point for inquiries. We have attached materials in the Appendix, and with the cooperation of the members of this study group, we are distributing a video introducing the indicators on YouTube. I believe that many people are watching it now, but we would like to further utilize this video to provide information on what the indicators are and how they should be measured in various places.

Regarding the third box, there is a Well-Being Community within the digitalisation Horizontal Expansion Promotion Council. We are working as one of the seven communities, and the facilitators of the indicators are also participating in the council, so we held a workshop for the staff of the Digital Agency while cooperating with the community. The participation of 21 staff members of the Digital Agency deepened their understanding of the indicators, and as it was an initiative for the well-being of the Digital Agency, each staff member became attached to it and engaged in PR and other activities, which I believe led to a good result.

(p. 5) Next, I would like you to discuss how to disclose data to promote the use of indicators this time, and I understand that we have received opinions from teachers that the results of the survey should be disclosed at this review meeting. I believe that the use of indicators has advanced very much in local governments, such as the use of indicators has advanced in local governments' comprehensive plans and comprehensive strategies. On the lower left, I list some local governments' comprehensive plans that utilize regional happiness indicators. In this way, indicators are published in the comprehensive plans of each organization and are used continuously.

In addition, regarding requests for data provision, as shown in the graph on the right, the number of requests for data provision increased from 4 last fiscal year to 12 this fiscal year. Based on this, from the next fiscal year, we will develop activities to promote the secondary use of individual data for academic research at universities and public institutions and the use of indicators by private organizations. In order to promote the use by academia, we will consider depositing data in the data archive.

At that time, we are proceeding with the idea that this indicator will not be used in the ranking from the beginning of the review. Therefore, we will continue to make recommendations on this ranking, organize the data provided, clarify the rules, and proceed with the disclosure. Today, we would like you to discuss and suggest this point.

In the Appendix section (p. 7), there are photos of the members of the Study Group. Thank you for your cooperation. We are also sharing various information on Digital Agency News.

(p. 2) Lastly, going back to the first page, the point I would like you to discuss today is to develop human resources who can handle indicators. We have received your opinions on capacity building, including local government officials. How should we develop human resources and how should we support organizations that utilize indicators? The third point is about the way of data disclosure I just mentioned. The fourth point is, as I will explain later, I would like you to discuss support for creating logic tree using reference logic trees.

That's all from me. Thank you very much.

Chair Maeno: Thank you, .

You may have some questions, but I will summarize them at the end. After this, Mr. Nagumo, we will continue with the presentation by Digital Agency and the local government. Now, Mr. Nagumo, please give us your presentation.

Committee Member Nagumo: As Mr. Sasao Yes. Thank you.

I would like to divide the materials into two parts and talk about four main points.

First of all, regarding the first document, it has been six years since I started this activity with Dr. Maeno and Dr. Uchida, and three years since I teamed up with Mr. Digital Agency, so I would like to discuss it with you as it has evolved a little.
(Handout 3 p. 3) At the beginning, as an indicator of well-being, subjective happiness and the Cantrill ladder question are included at the top. This is taken as an average value for each local government, and the model is explained in terms of 24 factors, subjective and objective. However, it does not include the element of spatial city so much, it does not go beyond the average value of the results of the so-called individual questionnaire, so I have a problem awareness of how to include the concept of regional space here.

In the same way, I do not have much in the way of thinking about balancing the well-being of the global environment. There is a structure in which the well-being of individuals increases but the well-being of the global environment decreases, which is difficult to overcome. One of the issues I am considering is what to do about this.

(p. 4) It is easy to understand if I illustrate it a little, but I understand that this onion figure on the left is the original concept, but I am in the middle and the environment is outside. Professor Uchida sometimes says this is "ba," but when we use this as an index, as it is on the right, it is a comprehensive index of well-being. We measure the country ladder, life satisfaction and cooperative happiness from 0 to 10, and then look at why this is the case with 24 factors. This is the basic composition. It is very similar to the composition of the World Happiness Report. As a tool, we have added something that can be used to obtain a correlation coefficient when explaining the index this time, so it has come to a stage where it is being used more and more.

(p. 5) However, if you look at it from a wider perspective, it is like pulling the picture of an onion to the side. Individuals are happy, but in the context of regional revitalization, for example, how should we think about the situation where people are steadily leaving? Or how should we evaluate the fact that various activities in regional revitalization lead to the well-being of citizens? If you look at the green area on the outside, the happiness level of citizens is currently high, but climate warming is accelerating, so the well-being of a kind of ecosystem and the well-being of people are not very well connected.

The aim is to create a world view in which the well-being of an individual is well aligned with the policies represented by the revitalization of local communities and regions, or a situation in which decarbonization and the well-being of the global environment are well aligned with the well-being of an individual, and to think about whether it is possible to create an index that represents this situation well.

(p. 7) First of all, I would like to talk about what I thought about the local community. It is written that you can see this circled part, but I think it is difficult to understand, so on this page, I just want to say that I want to keep it as simple as possible. (p. 8) The image is that the finished logic tree will be like this.

If you look at the top, we are talking about the space efficiency of the total happiness in the area. It is easy to understand if you look at the formation. From the left, the subjective happiness that we are using now, the so called Cantrill ladder, and if you multiply it by healthy life expectancy, it is similar to the one multiplied by the average life expectancy called WELLBY in the UK. I think Mr. Ishikawa and others were sure of the term Kenko Quantum, but if you multiply it by the population of the area, the total happiness of the area comes out in the form of volume. In that case, the happiness is higher in big cities, so if you divide it by area and normalize it, you can see how much happiness a space has per area.

Even in that area, if the natural environment is very large and the urban area is small, it will be very costly, so I think it would be fair to divide it by the weighted land area.

Looking at this from the policy side, in addition to the option of increasing the scale from 0 to 10, which increases subjective happiness, so-called healthy town development policies are being implemented in every town, such as a policy to extend healthy life expectancy, or a driver to increase the population or stop it from decreasing. Furthermore, if you go to the far right, by increasing the degree of condensation of land like a compact city, the number of policy drivers who can adjust the total amount of happiness obtained by investing capital in this space will increase further, I think. So, in this way, if we work hard on the policy, we will be able to change the number of happiness, I think.

From the perspective of change, I have a concern that the subjective happiness scale of 0 to 10 may not change year after year even if policies are implemented. I often talk about the Easterlin Paradox, but I think that if there is a figure that does not change much, it will not have much effect from the perspective of those who are implementing policies, and it may be that they will not be motivated. I am considering a prototype as a model to break through it.

(p. 9) We actually take all the data and plot it like this. The vertical axis is the level of happiness of citizens. It is called modified WELLBY, which is the average value of happiness multiplied by healthy life expectancy. The horizontal axis is how much happiness is produced in the space of the region. The vertical is the individual and the horizontal is the region. This is also seen in this way. We know that we can see a slightly different arrangement from the world view that comes out with happiness simply measured on a scale of 0 to 10.

(p. 10) As for the level, I don't have much time today so I can't explain this, but when the vertical axis is the individual and the horizontal axis is the region, what kind of town it is can be classified.

(p. 12) In the same way, it is close to the horizontal development of the current model, but it is about how to look at coexistence with the environment.

We are considering a model that is as simple and uncomplicated as possible.

(p. 14) Going forward from this page, the denominator is not the residential area I mentioned earlier, but if we divide it by the carbon footprint and CO2 emissions, it means that we can show by one indicator how much of the environmental burden is sacrificed and how much happiness is created in return.

So if we reduce CO2 emissions, the denominator, we increase happiness, and if we don't, it's the same as before, we can make policies in the form of changing the level of happiness, extending healthy life expectancy, or increasing the population.

(p. 13) By the way, I would like to use ecological footprint for the carbon footprint and CO2 emissions, but I do not have it on a local government basis, and I do not have it on a basic local government basis, so the carbon footprint is about 70% of the ecological footprint, so I would like to start with this.

(p. 14) By the way, regarding the carbon footprint, we are consulting with private companies, but it is known that a certain amount of CO2 emissions can be calculated in a fairly timely manner using satellite data, so I hope you will understand that we are waiting for a worldview that shows this flexibly in a way that is not something that comes out once a year in so-called open data.

(p. 15) This means that it can be plotted in the same way.

(p. 16) They can be classified in the same way.

(p. 17) It will be a little complicated from here, so I hope you can ignore it.

(p. 18) Of course, it is possible to create a single scatter chart that integrates both the total happiness of the region and the coexistence of the environment. This means that it is possible to consider what kind of town produces happiness both spatially and environmentally efficiently.

(p. 20) This is a bit of an extra, but the amount of CO2 emissions is quite different between the so-called central part of the city and the residential areas in the suburbs. There is a bit of a peculiarity in that the central part of the city emits CO2 in the industrial sector, while the suburbs emit it in the consumer sector.

(p. 21) If you think about it carefully, it is easy to understand if you look at the lower left of this material, as shown in the urban employment area. However, I think it is really bad if we don't look at it together because both of them are creating one living area. So, when we look at it in a wide area, people go from the suburbs to the city, work, and then go back to the suburbs. How much happiness is created in the space by the entire ecosystem, and symbiosis with nature can be taken as data. (p. 22) When we analyze various things, we can see that there are about five patterns of towns, but I don't have time today, so I will stop here. All the data has been calculated, and more detailed data is included in the last Appendix. This is the first point.

I would like to do this on a trial basis and debut it when I can use it.

(p. 24) Second, there is a steady increase in the number of local governments that are using well-being indicators in policy design in the form of comprehensive plans and comprehensive strategies for the creation of communities, people, and jobs. This is a leading field, and now it is starting to move toward the evaluation point.

(p. 25) In terms of how to conduct monitoring and evaluation, I would like you to think that this is just a starting point, but when we talk about how to use this well-being indicator for policy evaluation, the country as a whole, as seen in the World Happiness Assessment, I think it will be a number or a score, but below that, the second level is the national policy unit, which is a semi-macro level, and the third level is a more detailed level, which is the happiness level of the local government as a whole, and then it breaks down to the policy and business level within the local government, there are about four levels. The fourth step at the bottom is usually evaluated in the form of a so-called logic model, and there is also a policy evaluation sheet, I think, and I think it will be done in that way. In the future, I think that it will be necessary to evaluate the relationship with the Policy Evaluation Sheet by using the data. However, at the beginning, how to use this data as an EBPM, if it becomes too complicated, it will not be useful as an evaluation if it is done so that it does not cause discomfort in places where the evaluation is low, and the upper bias will be applied. So, it's not like that, and it's easy to understand for everyone, so it's hard to quit. In short, I am thinking if I can somehow create a positive peer effect that I want to try.

(p. 26) I would like to introduce just one thing that we were able to do using our data this time. When we look at what are the highly correlated, causal and strong factors for the so-called high level of happiness from 0 to 10, we find that there are six factors: public space, diversity and tolerance, abundance of educational opportunities, trust in local administration, accidents and crime, and employment and income. So, as the World Happiness Report also explains with the factor of six, this is also about six.

These are divided into two groups. In this table, the horizontal axis and the X-axis are life foundation, and the floor where life cannot be achieved without this is regional administration, accidents and crime, and employment and income. On the other hand, the vertical axis is your own, and from the perspective of becoming a plus, it is known that compatibility with public space, diversity and tolerance, and abundance of learning.

If we divide them into these two groups and map the well-being scores of the cities, we can get something that shows a beautiful correlation like this.

I would like you to take a look at the graph on the right. The orange part is the group of the life foundation factor where the factor of your own is not so high. There are a lot of orange dots here. In fact, you can see that there are many cities that could disappear.

If you look at the opposite side, on the upper right, you will see a yellow dot. This is a place where the basis of life is strong and where you are strong, but this is a black hole type. It is concentrated in a place where people gather more and more.

There is a blue dot in the middle. This indicates the concentration of autonomous and sustainable local governments. Rather than making an evaluation based on this, I think this is a stage where we have been able to visualize the situation, but I think it suggests that our data can be used to look at policies.

(p. 27) Actually, about this axis, I think Mr. Uchida and Mr. Maeno are like "that". It is almost in sync with the vertical and horizontal axes on the so-called Inglehart's Cultural Map. The horizontal axis is the axis of survival, which is how much you have to work in order to survive, and the vertical axis is how you live in your own way, which is almost the same as how you are liberated from traditional culture. It is said that it is a development of Maslow, but the higher you go diagonally up and to the upper right, the higher happiness is concentrated. I think I arrived at it by doing almost the same thing again.

(p. 28) This is just for reference and is not an evaluation, but I included the SDGs Future Cities. If you look at the graph on the right, you can see that the places that have been doing it for a long time have policy effects, and they are concentrated in the upper right. The newly adopted places are concentrated in the lower left. So, if the SDGs Future Cities well cover the triple port line of cities and are reviewed once every three years, I think we can take a step closer to visualization and evaluation with this.

(p. 29) I don't think we can see it yet in the Regional Recycling and Symbiosis Sphere.

(p. 30) In addition, the Smart City Institute takes a questionnaire on the maturity of smart cities every year. If you look at the figure on the right, the demonstration stage and the social implementation stage are at the top. As expected, those who have been doing it for a long time and have done it quite a lot have a high correlation with happiness.

(p. 31) I also took DIGITA, but I do not intend to evaluate it because it is an entrance where this kind of thing can be done, but I do not see much correlation.

(p. 32) I think that it is not possible to achieve regional revitalization.

(p. 33) We are now at the beginning of the process of using our data in this way to conduct PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, and Act), and I would like to hear the opinions of experts.

(p. 34) As for the third point, I would like to make a few suggestions about the evolution of the indicators, both subjective and objective, once a year or so.

(p. 36) First, I think it would be good if you look at this. It's a little bit complicated, but the gray rectangle on the lower left is the nationwide survey that Mr. Digital Agency and I are doing now, up to the standard. On top of that figure, A Ward and A City are also fine, but they have their own questions. This is a pattern of 51 questions with individual questions that the city or ward wants to ask.

Other than that, there are more and more people like B and C who are collecting data in order to take samples. We are currently in this situation, but we are planning to create a pink layer on top of that, and we would like to conduct an independent survey as the Smart City Institute as a second layer. What kind of questions we would like to ask here is the OECD's Better Life Index, Gallup's questions about the percentage of thriving, and Mr. Cabinet Office's opinion polls. We would like to increase the number of contacts with questions that are very related and close to each other, so we are thinking of conducting an independent survey alongside the national survey next year.
By doing so, there will be a possibility of cross-analysis with international or domestic important surveys, so I will give it a try. If it goes well, incorporating this into the national survey may come out as one idea, I think.

(p. 37) What is it like? The red circle at the top is to increase attribute data so that it can be used for research. This means that we are adding items to a common questionnaire. From there, culture and art are still included, but the current question is about the desirability of leaving a good environment and culture for the future generations, so I would like to add a question about how it is now and whether you are satisfied.

The second point is about time allowance. This is also included in the public opinion survey on people's lives, and time poverty has become a very important issue, so I would like to ask about it. From there, the life variation, this is the life variation included in the OECD's subjective well-being guidelines.

(p. 38) I would like to go to the next page and ask about the so-called core questions of feelings, significance and purpose.

The third and the next question is about spiritual well-being. I believe that the question of whether we want to place importance on spiritual well-being and a comfortable life in our future lives, which is included in the public opinion poll on people's lives, or whether we want to place importance on enriching our material lives, is a question that is very often used, so I would like to add this question.

Also, I have not asked about the importance, so I am only analyzing which factors I think are potentially important in the correlation analysis, but I would like to ask again.
And lastly, I'm thinking about incorporating what you wrote in the form of free description this time.

(p. 39) This time, Gallup's question and OECD's question are included. Actually, I consulted with Professor Hiroshi Suzuki individually. We are thinking of matching the words in order to use our own Thriving indicator. With the current one, the words do not match with Gallup's, so the numbers are slightly different. What I am showing you now is that we can do something like this with the words in our question, which is different from Gallup's.

(p. 40) In fact, Gallup is doing this, or the Society of Well-being or the Global Wellbeing Initiative are doing this, so I think there is room for us to think of a world that we can associate with this as our data.

(p. 41) We also update the objective indicators every year, but we can't do it often because of the money problem when we change the dashboard, but I think it's a good chance to do it this time.

(p. 42) At the 5th meeting of the Study Group, you may remember that I reported to you an analysis of the correlation between subjective and objective. At that time, there were eight figures that were not very suitable for policy effects, that is, the policy did not move at all compared to the past even if measured. That is the light blue zone on the right side of this. This is something that I think can be removed because the correlation does not increase and the policy effect cannot be obtained even if it exists this time.

(p. 43) What else do you think we should add? In this case, the self-efficacy has an inverse correlation between subjective and objective. The subjective questionnaire on self-esteem and objective voter turnout are far from a worldview. Is there any way to solve this problem? I will talk about it later.

(p. 44) The other thing is that Professor Hiroi and Mr. Ishikawa pointed out this, and I had a lot of difficulties, but there was not much correlation between the natural environment and individual well-being, so I was wondering what to do. In fact, there were not many indicators to measure the natural environment in open data, and I looked for others, and I found some, so I am thinking of adding them.

(p. 45) If you look at this in the form of a guidebook, the type of this factor, for example, medical care and welfare, is at the top left. The purpose of measurement, what we measure for, is originally defined, but what we add or subtract from it is written on the right side. These are things to be deleted.

(p. 46) This red one is to be added this time, but how about including a children's cafeteria in child-rearing, and how about adding digital life as GIGA School Concept is included in the second phase and demand is increasing.

(p. 46) As for natural landscapes, we have received suggestions from various local governments that there are such things as the Top 100 Historical Sites, the Top 100 Rekishi-no-Michi Sites, Important Cultural Landscapes, UNESCO Geoparks, the Top 100 Japanese Mountains, and so on. As for environmental policies, it has become clear that what Mr. Ministry of the Environment has done can be used as indicators, so we are thinking of including them.

(p. 47) Also, regarding self-efficacy, it is not easy to say that it is in the middle, but rather than measuring self-affirmation vertically, what is the factor that lowers self-affirmation? What is the negative factor in the opposite direction? I think it is possible to create KPIs, including social decline, social decline of population, dropout rate, unemployment rate, and divorce rate.
In addition, there are various cultural indices, so we are thinking of adding them.

(p. 49) The last recommendation in this field is that the Smart City Institute will be the second global layer and the second global layer. If you look at this, there are various questions such as the World Happiness Report, UN-Habitat, OECD, European Commission, World Values Survey, and Gallup. Also in Japan, there are projects in Cabinet Office and Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, and I wonder if we can somehow overcome the world view that we are not connected to these projects.

(p. 50) In this way, regional happiness indicators will be used as a core data source. We will share and collaborate with other organizations. We will create the infrastructure that supports it in a common-like way. This will be the case with rule-making, a library of analytical and evaluation methods, and use cases for policies. As AI is emerging, algorithms, and education and training programs will be prepared as the next step. I believe that a more versatile world is waiting for us, where we can compare various organizations and cross-tabulate data. I would like to propose this as one vision.
This is one thing. There is one more thing I would like to report.

(Appendix 4) This is about the development of this indicator so far, which I reported last time. It was shown in this way last time.

(p. 3) The growth of OASIS training. The number of groups and participants has increased significantly. By the end of fiscal 2025, there were 40 groups and 673 people who completed the course, which is a little faster than expected. If you look at the green area at the bottom, there are red asterisks and asterisks, and the number of cases in which this is used for capacity building in local governments for the second and third time is increasing.

(p. 4) There has been a steady increase in the number of organizations doing this on a one day basis. There have been a number of unusual events, such as the Yokohama City Assembly, which was attended by all members of the Assembly at the request of the chairman, the Japanese Gas Association, and the Kurobe City Social Welfare Council, which will be announced later.

(p. 5) Among the universities, only the one where I play is included, but with the expectation that it will surely increase in the future, the number of students is now like this. Also, the number of people who took the card game and the collective impact game is increasing at a great pace.

(p. 6) It looks like this document. The local government think tank research exchange meeting is on the lower right. There is something like this. The one on the left is for high school students. The one on the left is for high school students. And the one on the bottom in the middle is for university students and city officials in Beppu City.

(p. 8) In terms of other high-end projects, COI-NEXT by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology is conducted by Keio University and Kamakura City. The second one is conducted by Yokohama City University and Yokohama City using this data. In Kamakura City, Professor Yasui of Hiroshima Eikei University and Professor Takao of Hosei University, who are also well-being researchers, wrote papers. In the upper right, SIP also has papers by AIST and the University of Tokyo.
If you go down, there are sessions at the World Bank, at the Hitachi University of Tokyo Lab, where Professor Uchida is also on stage, and at the Asia Smart Cities Conference, we invited Johns Hopkins University and Yonsei University in Korea to have sessions on cities and well-being.

(p. 9) Other than that, various things are also coming out in the media.
This is just for you to see. In the middle, the Japan Society for the Promotion of Well-Being has Professor Maeno on the platform, and activities are being promoted in a grass-roots manner, including exhibiting at CEATEC.

(p. 10) As for overseas relations, I have seen it in various magazines, and in places like Barcelona and Saudi Arabia, where I do it every year. Various activities, including those of the United Nations, have begun to spread around the world.

(p. 11) The digitalisation Horizontal Deployment Promotion Council also has seven teams, the largest group, working in this way, and the workshop in Digital Agency that Mr. Suzuki announced earlier was part of it.
Up to this point, I would like to ask Mr. Kurobe City and Mr. Ritsumeikan APU to spend three minutes on each of the two cases.
Best regards

Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University (Kuriyama): Thank you for . I'm Kuriyama from Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University.

I would like to introduce the implementation case of OASIS in Beppu City that Professor Nagumo introduced earlier.

(Reference 5) In Beppu City, we are formulating the next comprehensive strategy based on the Town, People, and Job Creation Act this fiscal year, and we are utilizing the Well-Being Index in the comprehensive strategy from fiscal 2025. In particular, there is a problem of how to reflect the voices of the young generation, who will lead the next generation, in the comprehensive strategy. As expected, Beppu City is also a city with a considerably declining population and an aging population, so we have a problem of formulating an attractive Beppu City for the future based on data. The activities were conducted for about six months from July to December last year. With the cooperation of Professor Nagumo of the Smart City Institute, we held a total of six workshops.

The participants were 12 students from Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University and Beppudaigaku, as well as 12 mid-level young officials from Beppu City. A total of 24 people formed a team and proceeded with the study.

Some of the students at APU are foreign students, and students from Vietnam, Bangladesh, and Pakistan think about the issues facing Beppu City.

Using this regional happiness index, we analyzed the strengths and weaknesses of Beppu City, and divided each into six teams to discuss what Beppu City should be like in the future. In the end, we proposed a vision for community development to the mayor and vice mayor of Beppu City along with measures.

As for the results, using this Well-Being Index, based on objective and subjective data, we were able to visualize what kind of strengths Beppu City has and where the challenges are.

Furthermore, in the end, we were able to consider from various angles what kind of policies should be taken to enhance the overall well-being, and we were able to create such a policy map. Also, young students such as university students and graduate students participated, and most of them were not necessarily from Beppu City, but had been working in Beppu City as they entered university. I believe that we were able to achieve results by forming an interest in what kind of regional issues Beppu City has and how they will be involved in the future, and by promoting self-absorption.

Although it was simple, it was an example of using the well-being indicator in this way.

Committee Member Nagumo: As Mr. Sasao . May I speak to Mr. Koshiba?

Kurobe City Council of Social Welfare (Koshiba): My name is Koshiba from the Kurobe City Council of Social Welfare in Toyama, . Nice to meet you.

(Reference 6) We are promoting research and practice on the utilization model of regional happiness with the aim of cooperation between local governments and social welfare councils.

(p. 1) This has not been completed yet, so we are currently conducting experiments and studies. The keywords are community planning using the local happiness index, this data utilization and citizen participation.

Of course, we are planning policies while looking at the regional happiness index. On the right, we are currently developing from this area, but we are focusing on promoting community-based town planning with the participation of citizens, and the Council of Social Welfare plays a central role in reflecting it in the regional welfare activity plan, and it uses the LWC index as an evaluation axis.

As for the LWCI survey, the Council of Social Welfare took the lead in surveying a wide range of citizens, and looking at the collected data together with the citizens to think about town planning while looking at the data. We also held a well-being workshop as part of the welfare education program for high school students that you mentioned earlier.

In this context, we would like to promote the utilization of LWCI, professional training, and well-being together in cooperation with the government.

(p. 2) In fact, the Council of Social Welfare is rooted in the local community, so it cooperates with various organizations and holds various events and projects. In such a situation, we gathered a wide range of voices, especially elderly people, to support them so that they can answer easily, and we also took a paper base and typed in data as a proxy. 613 We collected voices and collected questionnaires.

(p. 3) In fact, I am gathering time at these meetings.

(p. 4) In fact, in the form of a workshop, Mr. Nagumo visits us once a year to learn about the meaning of well-being, and while looking at the data collected in Kurobe, we hold a workshop in which we all think about our own community planning.

(p. 5) Among the participants, various people participated in the form of citizens, and we actually held a workshop.

(p. 6) This means that everyone is a citizen, and there are many citizens among them. People from companies and professionals, as well as people from government officials, Diet members, and the mayor, will definitely come if they have work or time. Here, we are all citizens, and each one of us will participate as a citizen, and we are thinking about town development while looking at the statistics together.

(p. 7) On the other hand, for the first time this year, we held a program in cooperation with a local high school called Sakurai High School.

It was held in the second grade class. (p. 8) High school students are also actually teaching programs to solve local issues, but it is very difficult to think from the perspective of local issues, such as how the vague town of Kurobe is. Looking at the data of the LWC index, looking at their own town, various awareness and awareness of issues are created. This kind of work will be connected to future classes for high school students, and even when they go out of the city in the future, they will think about their own town while looking at these indicators. Teachers have high expectations for this. With the cooperation of the Well-Being Facilitator in Kurobe, we will continue to cooperate with them and promote the use of data in the aspect of welfare education.

That's all.

Committee Member Nagumo: As Mr. Sasao . That's all.

Murakami Director-General: to discussions, so I hope you will listen to me a little more.

(Reference 2) Talking about vision in this context, I would like to ask you to discuss the relationship between well-being and a vision set in advance in urban management.

I think that the first half or half of Professor Nagumo's talk is actually the same issue. Apart from that, there is also a discussion on the replacement of indicators, so it will be mixed during the free discussion, but I would like to ask you to speak on both issues.

(p. 3) As for the logic tree, I started with the idea of doing it this way, and in the end, almost all of the local governments that received issue Gold TYPE2/3 this year made it. I was allowed to accompany about 10 of them, and in conclusion, a very good product was made more than I had expected.

(p. 7) I would like to briefly talk about what kind of work it actually became, including a review. Usually, the logic tree goes from left to right in this drawing, but this time I used it from right to left as well.

(p. 9) The first five levels are defined as policy areas, goals, outcomes, outputs and individual projects.

(p. 11) Leaving aside the skeleton work, we first confirm the purpose, decide which field and theme to do it in, make a draft, deliberate it, and finish it. In the local government where I was accompanied, we held three Brest courses of about two or three hours, and the same thing became a topic of conversation in all three municipalities, so I would like to review it as well as report on it.

(p. 12) Regarding the team formation, since it was difficult to gather all the relevant people across departments this time, we decided to have several core members and teachers from the Shirasaka Research Institute as accompanying members for the local governments that accompanied them.

(p. 13) These people carefully confirmed the purpose of the project and studied what the tree was in terms of what fields and what to do.

(p. 14) Then, if you select any of the fields, such as disaster prevention, mobility, and medical care / nursing care, and prepare a list of projects related to that theme, there are more than a hundred projects per field depending on the local government. However, it turns out that the projects in all of the local governments are different in terms of granularity. Some projects are classified as "well-being promotion projects," others are classified as "well-being human resource development projects," and there was a concrete "well-being workshop project," in which four workshops were held. At this point, I realized how different the list of projects organized by the government office was, and by the first meeting, I was going to organize them first. If there were too many projects, there were quite a few cases where Level 6 was created, but I think it would be good to put them at Level 5 in the category name once and organize them again.

(p. 15) At this point, we have only fitted the fifth level with the existing first to third levels drawn from the reference, so now we are going to look back and forth.
Actually, this is one point. I mentioned that the output is the 4th level and the outcome is the 3rd level. The 4th level is the personal impact, and the 3rd level is the impact of the group or community. It was discussed in the middle of the discussion. This is what Mr. Nomi City noticed at first.

To be more specific, from the perspective of individuals, the rate of development of medical institutions within walking distance, the increase in means of transportation, and so on are the output personal impact. As a result, I think the freedom of movement in our town has improved. What is the group impact? It is not a simple sigma of the number of rides shared by individuals, or something like that. There is something discontinuous in the group impact, but anyway, without knowing it well, if you think about it like this and work on it, you can somehow make a draft. That was what I was going to reach in the first Brest.

(p. 16) Next, the discussion stage is written. Then, somehow, I can draw a diagram that seems to be connected from the top to the bottom, but somehow it doesn't fit well. That is the part ② that comes out.

So, I made a comment that I would narrow it down. I tried to make it in health and medical care, but there were many measures and many lines drawn, and I don't know much about it. But originally, in our town, for example, XX Memorial Hospital worked on it and used the network of the former community center to improve the healthy living environment. If we were talking about rebuilding it based on this project, why don't we narrow it down to that? In this way, we decided that it would be okay to narrow it down to the whole. One drop like a catalyst was thrown in at the second Brest, and after that, the reorganization proceeded at once in all of the accompanying local governments.

As a result, I could see that it was like this.

(p. 17) Later, I would like to introduce some examples from two local governments, and I got to that point, and when I held the third meeting, I found something like this, and I was worried about what to do next, but for the time being, what kind of things our town was trying to do, and I got a clear idea of what to do separately from the comprehensive plan, and I am talking about adding KPIs to it.

(p. 18) This time, I asked some core persons to do this, so I can expand the circle to other departments and citizens, or I can give KPIs and dig down the tree to verify the policy effect. When this work is done, a considerable number of local governments have concluded that an organization theory is actually necessary, and after all, there are times when it is said that if it is horizontal, it is impossible to do without creating departments.

Also, Mr. Nagumo just introduced the upgraded version. In the OASIS training, although it is a different method from this tree, this method can be used for policy planning training, so I think it would be good to use it as a training topic.

However, there is a common weakness in this. I think there are people who are new to this kind of work and those who are not, but together with everyone at AIST

(p. 20) At present, WG4 has established Well-being in ISO/TC314, and is trying to establish an ISO standard for well-being management.

(p. 21) The fundamental problem is that, in fact, there is a macro designer called the mayor, who wants to raise the sewage improvement rate and improve public transportation. He talks to the micro-designers, the heads of each department. When the service is actually provided by the contractor in charge or the public corporation, it is said that the citizens have improved. The water supply improvement rate has increased, and what has increased? The PDCA cycle of the micro-PDCA cycle is running, but as a result, whether our town has become easier to live in, whether the ease of learning in our town has really improved, whether the dissatisfaction with freedom of movement has been resolved, etc. In fact, it has not come back to the macro observer.

In fact, even if the waiting time for a taxi is still 30 minutes, if you can communicate with a sense of satisfaction along with your vision, in my case, there are places that say that the transportation has become good enough, and if a taxi waits for 30 minutes in Tokyo, I wonder what you are thinking.

There are various people such as civic groups, critics, and city council members, but all of them are devoted to micro-level reviews of individual projects. As a result, I think we talked about the ease of living in our town. In fact, if we replace the fourth and third levels with the group impact, it will be clear, but this is actually missing.

(p. 22) You can think that the framework proposed by ISO is a little bit overturned at the end, but we are doing this kind of business as a service, and Member ABC is a persona.

If you put an indicator temporarily, for the personal impact on members, there is an index, there is an outcome, and below that, δ or Σ is written, but there is an outcome of how it is on a community basis or a group basis.

(p. 23) I have been asked to discuss whether this is the case in Melbourne.

(p. 24) Regarding the last slide, starting with the analysis of well-being indicators, I would like to ask you to create relevant logic tree on key areas.

Then, if we drop a drop of the catalyst mentioned earlier, we can see that this is an important business in our town, and we should focus on the related areas. The rest is that we implement the selected business, and as a result, we can get a personal impact, such as how many people got on the ride share, how many people came to the centenary exercise, and how many people used which business, but in fact, this is just a micro-business KPI measurement for budget allocation. If this is manufacturing, it goes to the profit margin on sales, and as a result, whether citizens are satisfied or happy, or if it is compared to manufacturing, whether people who used the products of manufacturing are happy or satisfied, it does not come back to that.

Earlier, I indicated that it is not enough to simply add up between the fourth and third, but what exactly is the difference? The group impact is good, but who the group is talking about and where it aims to be is, in fact, if I say a vision, I would like to say it, but in short, what kind of town development it aims to be.

By chance, in the Nikkei last week, the mayor of Nagareyama City said, "If you want to be a mother, go to Nagareyama," and it was a great success, but it was written that building a town without a vision is meaningless. It is probably necessary to create a consensus on what values to rally around, and a town without that in the first place would not be happy.

To some extent, there is a consensus on the vision of going this way in such a group. In other words, I think the workshop using well-being is meaningful. How to include those elements. Then, there will always be a selection, so someone has to decide, but this is probably something like a management decision. Then, who will do that? Is there a function to do that in the current community planning?

In terms of efforts to recognize and assist these areas, Mr. Nagumo explained at the beginning of the meeting that there was a discussion on the secondary index. What would happen if we abandoned the value of regional revitalization and what would happen if we added elements of the vision of decarbonization? Probably, even from an international perspective, such secondary indicators are emerging because it is necessary to organize secondary indicators to promote integration and fusion into new value systems. I think that is the reason.

From this point on, I think I will have to discuss with the members of the Shirasaka Research Group and the professor again, but as for the part of refining the method of this logic tree as a written work, the members of the Shirasaka Research Group have become quite proficient, and they have assisted me a lot, saying that it is better to write like this or change it. Today, I was surprised that Sakaimachi suddenly improved the quality at the end, and I later found out that Professor Yamasaki worked hard to write it.

However, in the middle of the process, I would like to ask you whether your town was originally trying to do this, or whether this is important. I am ashamed to say that I have been doing this kind of thing for 30 years in the midst of administrative decisions, so it is relatively easy for me to give advice on whether this is not the case. However, without considering who will do it, whether such a decision can be made internally from within the city hall, and how to fill in such pieces as a methodology, I have a feeling that the discussion on macro observation and satisfaction as a town planning will not be completed. I do not know if it is obvious if I just say the conclusion, but I would be happy if you could tell me how you think about it.

This is the first time for local governments to talk about this vision, so there is no need to pay particular attention to that part. However, after this, I think that two local governments will introduce the fact that such a logic tree was created through such a process, and I hope that they will discuss it from various perspectives, together with Professor Nagumo's talk.

That's all. Thank you very much.

Chair Maeno: Thank you, .

There are also 2 cases of municipalities here. I think they are in Mishima City and Taki-cho, but please start from Mishima City.

Mishima City (Kimoto): This is Kimoto speaking, my name is Sugiyama, and I am the manager of the Digital Strategy Division in Mishima City, . Nice to meet you.

Then I will share the materials.

(Reference 8) I would like to explain about Mishima City.

(p. 3) Mishima City has created a logic tree in the field of mobility.

In Mishima City, we don't have a culture of making logic tree in the first place, so we start from the position of what logic tree is. Since we started under such a situation, Mr. Digital Agency recommended mobility at the beginning, but when I talked to the related departments, the first thing I can say is that none of the departments were motivated easily.

However, the decisive factor was the results of the happiness index survey. One year ago, Mr. Nagumo, Representative Director of the Smart City Institute, became a lecturer, and the section managers of each section participated in the OASIS training to learn about the regional happiness index. Through that experience, the section managers understood this matrix, and although it objectively exceeded the average of 50 in the field of mobility and transportation, it did not reach 50 in the subjective part, so the measures were not sufficiently conveyed to the citizens, so I asked them to talk about it across departments. The section managers also learned about it a year ago, so they sympathized with it, and in the end, the section managers of each section agreed and settled on mobility.

The first meeting was held in four divisions, including the Policy Planning Division, which formulated the Comprehensive Plan, and the Public Transportation and Regional Transportation Planning Division, which formulated the Regional Transportation Plan. As I will explain in the following pages, we realized that the policies related to mobility were not limited to four divisions, and finally, with the inclusion of the welfare division, we worked on seven divisions.
Mr. Digital Agency, Mr. Director-General Murakami, and Mr. Inomata from Keio University will be following Mishima as advisors.

As for the progress of the initiatives, we worked on them for four months from November to February. In the first November, we did not know where to start, so we decided to extract a list of measures on mobility from the administrative evaluation conducted by the Policy Planning Division. This is the material used for the first meeting. At that time, when we looked at it again, we found that only the division in charge knew the name of the project, and only the division in charge knew what was being done from the name of the project, and other departments did not know the content, so we had to add a little more content in red.

Under these circumstances, we held the first meeting with the participation of advisors. As expected, most of the meetings were held in the hardware field, and there was no room for further expansion. In addition, there was a need to consider the needs of elderly people who need public transportation and child-rearing, so we decided to create a new one. In December, we decided to attend the second meeting with the participation of section chiefs and assistant section chiefs of the three divisions: the Longevity Policy Division, the Nursing Care & Insurance Section, and the Children's Future Division.

At the second meeting, we thought it would be easier to draw up a document based on the image of the target audience, so we decided to write down the measures we are taking and the measures we are planning to take in the future while imagining the target audience. This is the document from the second meeting. We created a unique area of 4.5 levels and came up with measures based on the image of such people.

At the second meeting, as a result, there were 28 items at Level 5. By the next meeting, I would like to reduce the number of items at Level 5 to about 15. I would like to reduce the number of priority items to about 15. Is there a department that can actually implement the plan? Also, Professor Inomata advised me that Level 4 should be written with an awareness of how it would change the citizen's experience, so I reflected it based on that advice.

The materials for the third meeting were prepared under these circumstances, and the division in charge was clarified, and the subject of this part was changed to "Shimin ga" or "Shimin wa" so that it could be written.

In the end, I once again used the terms "Level 1" and "Level 2" as they are used in Mishima and submitted them.

Mr. Sugiyama, the section chief, will talk to you about the findings, issues, and future prospects.
I would like to make it.

Mishima City (Sugiyama): In that case, I would like to report what I have found and what I have found and what I have to do.

Once again, I recognized the importance of listening and dialogue. Usually, I didn't have many opportunities to talk about what the staff in other divisions were thinking about while doing their duties, so in preparing this logic tree, I had a very good experience of being able to clearly verbalize what each staff member was thinking and listen to it.

In addition, other staff members said that this logic tree clearly showed that when the objectives of the measures they were taking were linked, they were related to the measures being taken by other departments.

As for the discovery of issues, what I think I should do first is to have an opportunity to discuss the vision of the future that I aim for and to have time to recognize how much there is a gap between the current situation and the vision of the future that I aim for.

Also, I would like to use this for policy planning, but in the current situation of local governments, planning alone will lead to more and more work, so if possible, I would like to use this tree as a way to quit. I am always thinking about whether this tree can be used as an indicator for quitting as well as a happiness index.
In addition, I thought that measures could be promoted more effectively and efficiently by cooperating with other divisions with the same purpose or by organizing projects.
In terms of future use and prospects, logic tree is a good tool for confirming the objectives and targets of policies and the content of actual initiatives, so I hope that it can be used in future policy planning.
I do not have a plan on how to use it yet, but I would like to think about it from now on.

Also, I think it is important to create an organizational culture in which we can listen carefully to what opinions each employee has and continue dialogue. I would like to do that if possible.

Also, I have my own thoughts on this, but I think it would be great if we could create a system in which the management at the level of the mayor, deputy mayor, superintendent of education, and department head can come up with the real issues that need to be solved, go beyond the department, find out what the really important initiatives are, and send them down to the section manager level and below.

That's all for Mishima City.

Chair Maeno: Thank you, . Then, I would like to make a Taki-cho.

Taki-cho (Mitsui): This is Mitsui from the Taki-cho Town Office. I will also share the materials with you.

(Reference 9) My name is Taki-cho from Mie prefecture. Thank you very much.

As mentioned by Director-General Murakami, Taki-cho has also prepared a logic tree with the assistance of Digital Agency.

In terms of the background or the purpose of the report, in Taki-cho, where there are quite a lot of verification test related to mobility, I would like to clarify the relationship with other measures and strengthen horizontal cooperation within the agency.

The implementation structure is led by the deputy mayor of Taki-cho. Other participating departments are the Planning and Coordination Division, which is in charge of public transportation and community development. The Children's Division, which is in charge of child care support and childcare. The Health and Welfare Division, which is in charge of elderly welfare support and health promotion. The Citizens' Environmental Division, which is in charge of decarbonization and environmental work. The Education Division, which is in charge of school buses. The last one is the Digital Strategy Office. I am in charge of the Digital Strategy Office, which is in charge of developing digital regional currencies and regional point apps using Digita issue Kin.

In creating this logic tree, the deputy mayor of the town decided who would be the main person in charge, and the chief of the Digital Strategy Office will be the deputy, and I, the section chief, will be the main person in charge.

As for the number of meetings, there were about five plenary meetings, four working group meetings, one workshop, and one individual hearing.

(p. 2) This is the time schedule, what we did, and the members who participated together.

We were originally assisted by Digital Agency, but we also had a consultant and Professor Yamasaki from Keio University as advisors, and we proceeded to create the tree.

First, we had a kick-off meeting in mid-November. After that, I will be in charge of selecting the person in charge of the tree. After individual interviews and a general workshop, we made a draft in early January. After that, we exchanged opinions and repeated work, and in late January, we shared the draft with Digi-cho, received feedback, and finally, based on the feedback, we exchanged opinions and worked with Taki-cho and the advisor, and reported the completion of the work to Digital Agency.

The content of the workshop was not to involve the people of the town, but to gather the relevant departments in the town hall, which was mentioned on the first page, and put each measure on a sticky note.

In addition, as for individual hearings, it was quite difficult to hold each department together for a long time, so we conducted individual hearings for each department and proceeded with the work.

(p. 3) This is the logic tree for the draft. In the workshop earlier, each department separated the colors on sticky notes and stuck the measures on them. As you can see in the lower left of this screen, the Planning and Coordination Division used pink, and the Health and Welfare Division used yellow. Each department separated the colors so that they are easy to mix. The measures presented in the workshop were applied to this logic tree, and the colors were clearly colored.

At this point, it was still a rough draft, so the first level had not been decided yet, and the third and fourth levels were still mixed, and it was difficult to understand.

However, when colors are added and visualized like this, of course, the colors are mixed up as you go up to the top, and the number of related departments increases. You can visualize at a glance, and you can see at a glance that various departments are mixed together to achieve various policy goals, so I think this coloring was very good.

Also, at the first level, we are discussing what we should do while keeping in mind the comprehensive strategies for the town, people, and life of Taki-cho. This is not really about the town's policies or its vision for the Director-General.

However, I made such a draft, and after that, I exchanged opinions and received feedback from Mr. Digital Agency, but I made various revisions again.

(p. 4) This was also mentioned by Director-General Murakami. Level 3 and Level 4. Level 4 was referred to as Personal Impact, which is a good effect for individuals, and Level 3 was referred to as Group Impact, which is a good effect for the whole town. We received advice that considering Level 3 and Level 4 in this way would make it easier to proceed with the work, and we revised the classification of Level 3 and Level 4 to make it easier to understand.

In addition, I made a new draft on the theme of mobility. The draft was based on mobility, but many things were mixed up, so I made a new draft on the theme of mobility.

Lastly, I would like to share my thoughts with you. In the Digita Project and other projects, we have created a system that allows us to collect data using digital regional currencies and regional point apps. We have changed the system in a way that we are aware of the effects of data collection and analysis, and we have incorporated the opinions of each related department. In the end, the system has become like this.

As for the issues, the related departments that I worked with on this project are of course aware of the completed logic tree, but of course I have not been able to share it with other departments that I did not participate in, so I think it is necessary to share it more widely, and I also think it is necessary to create such a logic tree not only in the field of mobility but in all other fields, and to take a fresh look at the challenges in each field.
Another point is that we have not been able to reduce the number of KPIs yet, so there are some well-being indicators for which we can measure KPIs. There are also many areas where we need to measure KPIs carefully. How to deal with such areas is also an issue.

Now that this logic tree has been completed, I can see key projects or areas where we will focus our efforts, and I hope that we can make progress in those areas and others in a balanced manner. That's all.

Chair Maeno: Thank you, . It may be difficult for the experts to decide what to comment on because the presentations were very diverse and contained a lot of information. Since there are only 40 minutes left, I may not be able to answer all the questions, but I would like to ask the experts for their comments and questions.

INOUE: , Thank you very much for your presentation. One of my interests is that I would like to hear your opinions. This time, when I created the logic tree and examined it, I told you that it seems to be possible to comply with the ISO management cycle process. What will be important at that time is how to define well-being for this town and how to clearly state it. If you have any ideas on how to clearly state well-being for our town, I would like to hear your opinions.

Murakami Director-General: Maeno, I have a limited time today, so why don't we listen to all of your opinions and then answer all of them together?

Chair Maeno: Thank you, Okay, I understand. If you have any questions or comments, please let me know.

Mr. Ota, please go ahead.

Mr. Ohta: , rather than at the national level. For example, "15-minute cities," which are spreading around the world, mainly in Europe, are highly recognized. In the field of nature, the concept of green infrastructure is said to be recognized by about 20% of Japanese people. I think it is necessary to properly look at how many people know about creating a vision or plan using well-being indicators.

Dr. Koga: I'm Koga from University of Tokyo. Mishima City and Taki-cho reported that there was a horizontal connection based on the creation of the logic tree, and I thought it was wonderful.

I would like to ask one question. In the initial announcement from Digital Agency, I believe you mentioned that the way in which the survey results are disclosed has been to avoid showing them in rankings. The first question is how many municipalities are using the indicators in comparison with other municipalities in their cities, towns and villages, out of the many municipalities that are using them.

The second proposal was that we would like to consider rules for secondary use in order to promote its use in research, etc., and I thought it would be a good idea to create a handbook or guideline and make it public. Specifically, in addition to basic survey information (target area, collection method, collection period, number of subjects, etc.), if there is a research that has already been conducted, for example, sharing the code for creating a secondary variable, establishing a study group of researchers using the same data, or creating a figure of the entire research, I thought there are various ways to do it.

Mr. Seki: About the children's cafeteria we talked about earlier, Musubie-san is working on a project to promote open data. I hope you will take this opportunity to consider it. There were so many things, and I learned a lot. First of all, I think it's very good to talk about connecting with ISO. It's a challenging goal, but I thought it would be easier for more people to participate if we did such a thing.

As for ranking, if many people can use it like this, there is no way to prevent it, and I think we have to admit it. I think what is more important than that is to spread better ways of using it more and more. Even if it is used for ranking, I think it is a good story if many people understand that it is just a part of the view. I think it is necessary to open the data freely at some point.

In the case of Kurobe City, I was really impressed by the progress in citizen participation. The Council has been actively engaged in data utilization and other activities for a long time, and I am aware that it is a very special organization among the Councils. I hope that the Council will be able to assume such a position, but I think that the reality is that other players will probably come in other regions. In that sense, it may be difficult to say simply what kind of abilities are required of such players, but I would like to ask you.

Mr. Sasao: Thank you for the very interesting presentation by . When there are multiple regions, for example, Tokyo has a high happiness level, Tohoku has a low happiness level, and Tokyo's electricity is supplied from Fukushima, how do you think about the relationship between them? If you think only about the happiness level of one city, there is a possibility that you overlook the relationship with such economically related regions. I would be happy if you could think about designing a new program to think about how to improve the happiness level by bringing together multiple economically related regions.
In addition, I personally think that there is a possibility that we can use individual questionnaires more in the future. By using individual questionnaires, for example, we can focus on people with low happiness and implement individual measures for those people, and we can also confirm the effects of those measures a year later. I think that the hurdles for using individual questionnaires are quite high, but I hope you will consider it.

Mr. Uchida: It was a wide-ranging presentation, and there was a lot of content, so I don't know if I can put my opinions together very well. Overall, I thought, especially when I think about what I said in the first half and the initiatives of each , I think that we have come to a point where we need to show the direction and the differences in each area, such as looking at well-being from a bird' s-eye view when looking at it as a whole map, and looking at well-being from an ant' s-eye view when thinking about well-being in a specific area. When we discuss looking at the whole, I think we will abstract it to some extent and say that about three elements are important. However, even if it is said that three elements are necessary as a whole, I think it is natural that such things are not relevant in light of our own regions. However, it is hard to say that those in charge of policy are launching policies while ignoring the three elements that came up in the overall discussion. How should we understand them and consider them separately? What are the differences and commonalities between what can be seen when viewed as a whole and what can be seen when viewed individually? I think that misleads will occur if we do not clearly communicate them at this meeting or through manuals.

As one way, I think there was an analysis of various axes that Mr. Nagumo made, but if you put all the data into the statistics, I think the data from urban areas is very strong. Especially when population is included, it becomes so. I thought it is necessary to show separately what the data looks like when Tokyo and big cities, which are so-called outliers, are excluded.
When I think about the current situation in Japan, it is not a clear normal distribution, and large cities such as Tokyo exist as outliers. If we include them together, there is a possibility that we will not be able to analyze and evaluate them well. For example, apart from the overall map, I thought that it could be a way to show one data that connects the overall story and individual stories I mentioned earlier, such as showing cities with a population of tens of thousands or more and cities with a population of less than that separately on the map.

KOIZUMI: , I had almost the same impression as the three people you just mentioned. Today's presentation by Mr. Nagumo was very interesting. I learned a lot from it. For example, in terms of space efficiencies, in the end, multiplying happiness, healthy life expectancy, and population to calculate total happiness, and then dividing that by population density means multiplying happiness × healthy life expectancy by residential area. In other words, the higher the population density, the greater the total happiness.

Among the indicators published by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, there is one that shows the distribution of figures obtained by dividing fiscal expenditure by population density. If you do this, the higher the population density, the lower it will be. Basically, in a sense, it is natural, and I think it means that the efficiency will be that much better, but on the contrary, in areas with extremely high population density, it is rather reversed, and in fact, it is a U-shaped curve. In Europe and North America, there is no land with as high a population density as Japan, so there is a premise that the perception of population density differs greatly depending on the region and ethnicity. But even so, if the population density is too high, various effects may gradually diminish. In a study we conducted in Yokohama City, wellbeing also decreased in areas with too high a population density.

For example, I thought it would be easier to understand if we divided by something like per capita fiscal expenditure rather than population density. If we look at how much money is spent and figure out how it leads to well-being, I think we can see that it doesn't lead to well-being unexpectedly because the way money is spent is bad. Of course, I don't know what the cause is. In any case, it doesn't mean that the higher the population density, the better, so I thought it would be better to pay attention to that point.

Also, as Mr. Sasao mentioned, depending on the indicator, there is a problem of which unit should be used, and in the first place, there is a problem of scale, so I heard it because it is a little difficult. I was wondering if the carbon footprint has the same problem.

I had the impression that the presentations by the local governments were very positive initiatives, and I would like to ask them to consider how they will lead to practical initiatives in the future and share new information.
Also, regarding open data, one of our students used this data in his graduation thesis this year. I think he will publish a thesis somewhere, but I would like to share it with the people concerned with the consent of himself and his academic advisor in private. In any case, I thought once again that open data would be very meaningful for us researchers.

Mr. Ishikawa: I wrote about four points I mentioned in the Message.

  1. Revision of the OECD guidelines for the measurement of subjective well-being
    → The revised version will be announced at the World Expo on October 6th this year. I thought it would be wonderful if you could match it with this.

  2. Enhancement of natural capital
    -> At the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Professor Managi of Kyushu University took the lead in creating the new National Capital Index. In that connection, I think Professor Managi compiled data on natural capital by municipality, so it may have been considered, but for reference.

  3. Relations with other regions
    -> In the Netherlands, we are looking at not only well-being within a region, but also how one region affects the well-being of other regions, and how it affects the well-being of future generations by extending not only the spatial axis but also the time axis. It seems that the United Nations is considering adopting well-being from three perspectives of region, other regions, and future generations as a framework for Beyond GDP, so please refer to it.

  4. On the limits of the Cantrill ladder
    → The current Cantrill ladder looks at subjective well-being at a certain point in time, but it is not very suitable for looking at trends.

I would like to talk about the fourth of these.

The Cantrill Ladder measures well-being at one point in time. For example, it is said that it is not suitable for comparing two points in time, 2024 and 2025, and looking at trends. It is related to the Easterlin paradox that Mr. Nagumo mentioned. For example, if you get 7 points out of 10 in 2024 and 7 points in 2025, both of them are 7 points, so there seems to be no change. But if you evaluate again, last year you said 7 points, but by this year's standard, it was 5 points. So by this year's standard, last year was 5 points and this year was 7 points, which means that it has increased. There is a problem if the evaluation axis changes in this way, so when looking at trends, it is said that using this Cantrill Ladder requires a little correction. In the Gallup survey, we started adding one question to be corrected last year. When looking at trends with the Cantrill Ladder, there is a method of correcting for changes in the evaluation axis. If you are going to match it with global indicators from now on, I hope you will incorporate it. I will explain it in detail to Mr. Nagumo separately.

Mr. Ohta: , Mr. Uchida mentioned the gap between the overall priority and the individual, and Mr. Koizumi mentioned the problem of spatial efficiency. Considering these issues, I would like to make a proposal. Adaptive governance is being implemented in nature conservation and infectious disease countermeasures. I think it would be good to get advice from experts on adaptive governance.

Committee member Hiroshi Suzuki: I really learned a lot today. I don't have much time, so I would like to ask Mr. Nagumo, or I would like to make a suggestion, but I thought it was very good that a children's cafeteria was included in the revised indicators. In addition, I thought it would be good if we could get something like a "shared meal" to eat together. There are two reasons for that. One is that it can be a solution for measures against isolation and loneliness of the elderly, or it is deeply related to it. Another reason is that there are few people who are eligible for the cafeteria, so it may be difficult to get figures from the children.

According to the OECD's PISA2022, the biggest problem in Japan is that the percentage of children aged 15 who think they are supported by their families is extremely low. I have been thinking about various reasons for this, but I have a hypothesis that one reason is that the time and opportunities to spend time with their families are overwhelmingly low compared to other countries. Recently, I have been talking to various business owners' associations and the like, and in any case, for employees with children aged 15 or older, I have been asking them to go home and eat meals once or twice a week on weekdays, or to intentionally increase the amount of time they spend with their children. I think this is a very important point in terms of connections. Although eating together is an example of how to increase connections, I think it would be good if we could create an indicator to measure how much time we spend with our families and communities.

There are some policies that don't require a lot of money. For example, in Shibuya Ward, teachers are not allowed to have classes on Wednesday afternoons. If you do that, you will be able to spend the whole afternoon on training, and you will be able to use your time for various things. I think it would be a good idea to approach the Chamber of Commerce and Industry and community schools for such things.

I've been asking people in many places if they eat dinner together. It's almost impossible in Tokyo, but there are cases where people eat relatively often in rural areas. Earlier, you mentioned Nagareyama, but when you put forward a vision like "If you want to raise a child, I will do it at home," I thought this kind of initiative might be related, so I would like to propose it.

Chair Maeno: Thank you, . I have a suggestion. Could we create a group using Slack, Facebook, or something like that so that discussions can be held between meetings? Or could we make it possible for discussions to be held among individual committee members? That way, I think it would be better not to keep talking and not have enough time to answer and end the meeting.

Mr. Seki: About the children's cafeteria we talked about earlier, Musubie-san is working on a project to promote open data. I hope you will take this opportunity to consider it.

Committee Member Nagumo: As Mr. Sasao mentioned, the question of how much space to use as a unit is really a thorny issue. This time, in the form of an urban employment area, we measured the well-being of the entire ecosystem, which combines central and suburban cities, and tried to see how it differs between central and suburban areas. I think this is one way.

Also, Dr. Uchida is right that Tokyo is an outlier, so I think this should be treated differently.

What to do with the denominator of space efficiency and environmental efficiency is also really troublesome, so I showed it in the form of a prototype this time, but as Professor Koizumi said, the point is that it is not linear but like a quadratic function, and I recognize that there is a lot of room for consideration in terms of both what to do with something that incorporates it and what to do with the denominator. Thank you very much for your advice.

Chair Maeno: Thank you, In closing, Mr. Murakami, what are your comments?

Murakami Director-General: First, I'd like to ask you about the replacement of indicators today, but I didn't have time to discuss it. If you have any concerns after looking at the materials, please contact the secretariat. If there is nothing in particular, I'd like to consult with Mr. Nagumo at the secretariat and finalize it.

Second point. There are cases of comparison within the area in some municipalities, but there are not so many. I will report to Mr. Koga after I check it.

Third point. Regarding the secondary use of data, we will consider it separately for research and other business purposes. For other business purposes (for the general public), we will not issue individual forms. For other data, we are coordinating to provide it after receiving a written pledge, and we will report it again. Regarding the secondary use for researchers, we are talking about depositing it in the research database of the University of Tokyo, but as Mr. Nagumo introduced, it is said that it would be better to consider the system a little more carefully and proceed with it, including the research on secondary indicators, so we hope to discuss it at the next review meeting, etc.

I thought the points you pointed out could be broadly divided into three levels. As I often say, we need to study how and who sets the vision and new values. This is the first level.

As for the second layer, Mr. Nagumo talked a lot about how to support it, but I think there will be a lot of discussion on how to create application indicators for this indicator and how to think about the range of areas when talking about it.

Finally, if we are able to achieve this goal, how will we develop human resources to facilitate the process? Roughly speaking, I think we have received many comments on these three levels.
We will discuss these matters in depth and consult with you again next year. In preparation for that, I would like to consult with the chair of the Advisory Council carefully, including whether or not we can increase the number of professors to be included in the Advisory Council.

Chair Maeno: Thank you, . Do you have any comments from the local government? If not, I will make a comment as a summary.

Originally, Digital Agency was about connecting everything digitally, so I think we have been able to connect policies from the micro to the macro. Thanks to the results of Mr. Nagumo's visits around the country, as well as the collection of data from all over the country, there has been a lot of micro and macro discussions. In a very good sense, I think we can see what we need to do. From now on, from a macro perspective, we will use the power of digital technology and the wisdom of everyone on difficult and complex issues such as what to do in the first place and what to integrate, and from the leadership of the head of the local government to the leadership of each person in charge, I think it was a meeting like a miniature of the present day where everyone has to work together, rather than the top doing it and the bottom following their instructions.
As for my suggestion, I don't think this discussion will be possible within the two hour time frame. There are so many wonderful teachers here, so I would like you to consider creating a system to accumulate your opinions so that the discussion will not be interrupted each time. Thank you very much for your enthusiastic discussion today.

Moderator (KOBAYASHI): , thank you very much for your valuable opinions today. The secretariat will consider the setting of a forum for continued discussions, which was proposed by Chairman Maeno. With this, we will conclude the review meeting. Thank you all.

Or more