The 6th 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, June 24, 2024 from 3:30 pm to 5:30 pm
Location: Online
Agenda:
1. Opening
2. Proceedings
  1. Area Well-Being Indicators Results of the 2024 National Survey
  2. Promotion of utilization of local governments Well-Being Indicators in area
  3. Matters concerning the reference logic tree (draft)
3. Exchange of opinions

Materials

References

Holding a Study Group on Promoting the Use of Vision for a Digital Garden City Nation Well-Being Indicators for the Realization of area (PDF / 141 kb)

Minutes

Moderator (Nagura): From now on, we will hold the 6th Review Meeting on the Promotion of the Utilization of Well-Being Indicators for the Realization of Vision for a Digital Garden City Nation.

Today, most of the members of the selected organizations are attending the meeting. However, since the members of the selected organizations are only allowed to attend the meeting, we would like to ask you to be careful not to hear any sound.

First of all, Mr. Murakami, Director-General of the For the public Group Regional Bureau, was scheduled to make a speech, but he is not at his desk right now, so I would like to make another speech later. Thank you very much.

From here on, I would like to ask Mr. Maeno, the chairman, to proceed.

Mr. Maeno, nice to meet you.

Chairman Maeno: There have been really good discussions since the first half of Yes. Thank you very much for coming today.
I received a lot of very interesting presentations today, and I have about two hours in total for discussion, so please look forward to it.

Have you all seen the website of Digital Agency? It has become possible to see the statistics of each local government, and it actually looks quite naked. You can see which local government is high and which is low. If you use this seriously, people throughout the country will know what kind of town it is. I think we are at the stage where we are ready to improve Well-Being in digitalization, which we have no choice but to make a good town by visualization, which Mr. Nagumo and Mr. Murakami were aiming for.

With the cooperation of Mr. Inoue and others, the logic tree has been considerably improved. Of course, there will be many discussions and amendments, but I think today will be a very important start for the conference. I hope you will look forward to your presentations.

Shall we get down to business?

Murakami-san, I think it would be better for you to speak when you can, but haven't you? Is that OK?

Managing Director Murakami: Mr. Nagumo I will speak during the Q & A session, so why don't you go into the content as it is?

Chairman Maeno: There have been really good discussions since the first half of Yes, I understand.

First of all, the results of the 2024 area Happiness Indicator National Survey, is this from Mr. Nagumo? Thank you.

Member Nagumo: Yes, I will submit the materials now.

The survey for this fiscal year has been completed within the past month, so I would like to report on it.

(p. 1) First, the Executive Summary in the form of an overview. This year, we collected more than 100,000 people. It is a little more than 100,000 people, and last year it was a little less than 85000 people, so it has increased significantly. The number of local government with a sample of more than 100 is 668, and last year it was 391, so it has steadily increased its coverage.

The reason for coming to the top of the take-away this time is that we have received very stable answers compared to last year, so I think we have finally reached a point where the reliability has increased considerably, and I think we have reached a point where the transition is from 0 to 1. I think we will be able to reach a stage of 1 to 100.

On the other hand, as Dr. Hiroi and Mr. Ohta pointed out in various ways last time and the time before last, the problem of cognitive bias, in which nature-related parts are low, remains as usual, and I believe that this issue will continue to be considered in Issue.

As a new attempt this time, Dr. Kan Suzu may not be here today, but I once calculated something almost similar to the calculation of Gross Domestic Well-being and GDW using our data, so I would like you to take a look at it for your reference.

In addition, up until now, we have stopped at correlation analysis, but we have tried multiple regression analysis, so I wonder how the results match the feelings of Dr. Maeno, Dr. Uchida, and all the experts.

I don't think there is such a big difference, but I would like to confirm that.

(p. 4) First, the results of this fiscal year's survey are in the form of a histogram, as you can see, consisting of three lines. If you look at the happiness segments on the left side, we have data for three times, 2022, 23, and 24, so the three times are shown in a bar graph. The yellow dots are the three year averages.

As you have already mentioned, the World Happiness Report uses a three year moving average, so we use yellow dots to show the three year average, including the meaning of reducing volatility.

You may notice that the height of the stick is slightly lower in 2022. This is because the data collection company is different, and the samples are different. The height is different, but the overall waveform is not so different.

When I compare last year and this year, it is almost the same. It sounds good to say that there is stability, and I also have the impression that Japan is a country that has not changed much.

It has a shape like this, a so-called U-shape. Life satisfaction is also a similar U-shape, but it takes a slightly more gradual shape.

(p. 5) Also, I would like you to look at only the right side. The left side is the happiness level you saw earlier, but I also take the happiness level five years later.

The reason why there is only 2 years of this is that it was not done before, but as you can see, even if it is 2 years, it has not changed much.

(p. 6) Also, as Mr. Uchida's cooperative happiness, the distribution of happiness in the town, and whether the people around you are also feeling happy, or whether it is a town with many smiles, there is no big difference, so I think the reliability as data is increasing here.

(p. 7) This time, I made a little something like this, but since I came to 668 Basic local government, I mapped it on a map of Japan.

I try not to rank because the degree of coverage does not fit well with the ranking, but I added some color to the deviation value of happiness and the height of the point of happiness. This is happiness.

(p. 8) And life satisfaction does the same.

The interval of the data is different, but if it is like this.
I think it is as you can see that life satisfaction is strong in central Tokyo, Osaka, and Nagoya.

(p. 9) I also did it by prefecture. Then, the degree of happiness is like this.

I think it is possible to see that the color is lighter in Tohoku, but recently NHK showed a program about possible disappearance cities, and I feel that there are some areas that overlap with the data.

(p. 10) Similarly, life satisfaction is like this.

Therefore, in the future, I believe that the correct answer will be that the colors will be the same as a whole, that is, there will be fewer disparities and the colors will be darker, that is, the overall situation will improve, but I believe that there is a possibility that it will be used as a starting point.

(p. 11) For this fiscal year, we are creating spider chart on the distribution of responses when 24 factors were measured by the five case method from 1 to 5. This is the entire Japanese population. If you look at it, the area circled in blue is the average of 3, and the middle area is higher than 3. There is also an area like 3.1, but it is significantly higher. The red area is the area that has fallen down. I think this also well captures the characteristics of Japanese society shown in Maslow and various happiness indicators.

For example, medical care and welfare, shopping, eating and drinking, and housing are said to be strong even in the OECD, but primary education and compulsory education are also the strongest, as shown in PISA. Public space, nature's blessings, and health are familiar areas.

On the other hand, if you look at the fact that I am depressed, I think it goes without saying that there are problems such as play and entertainment, time poverty, and in particular, women's lack of time, but it goes without saying that there is a mode in which there is no time for oneself, including work-life balance, and that I am occupied with work, and that there is diversity and tolerance.

And income, employment and income. This is like a desire for fame, and I think it is relatively difficult to be satisfied no matter how much money you receive, but this and business creation are down.

It is a spider chart, but it is drawn in two colors, dark orange and light orange.

The dark color is this fiscal year, and the color like a light highlighter is last fiscal year, but I think you can see that there is almost no change.

(p. 12) So, this is the current edition of the last one. In terms of the correlation between happiness and the 24 factors, there is a slight change in the order of high to low from right to left, but there is no significant difference, and the transition is the same.

As I said earlier, Issue comes to the right end. So-called nature is natural because of cognitive bias. This nature still remains.

(p. 13) Also, life satisfaction has an aspect related to the functional evaluation of cities, so there are many things that are relatively correlated, and there is no significant difference from last year.

(p. 14) And this time, I am doing the same for Mr. Uchida's cooperative happiness.

It seems that the balance is slightly different, but I don't think there is a big difference.

(p. 15) Also, between subjectivity and objectivity, which was the main theme last time, is also the same. In terms of self-efficacy, the subjectivity is the question that you think you can do something, and the objectivity is the voter turnout, so you have a technical Issue in the combination of subjectivity and objectivity, so the results are not very good, but other than that, the situation is the same as last time.

(p. 16) For the factors with correlation coefficients of 0.4 or more this time, multiple regression is also performed. It looks like this, and I think we have taken the root of what is said to greatly affect the sense of well-being of the Japanese people. Health, self-efficacy, and connections with area. And public space, in the sense that it includes our city, is a little different from ordinary factors of well-being, but it has this composition.

(p. 17) Then, when it comes to life satisfaction, it is a little bit more material, or the area of daily life comes out, so employment, area administration, and medical care welfare come in.

(p. 18) Also, I am comparing Mr. Uchida's cooperative happiness, but I think the composition is similar to the so-called happiness. I don't think there will be a big surprise.

(p. 19) I would like to place the current ones in order by language. For happiness, life satisfaction, and happiness in the town, the top 10 with the highest correlation coefficients are placed in order. And what is underlined is what is common to these three. Public space, richness of education opportunities, accidents and crime, administration, and area administration are common. The one with the * mark is the one that was dominant when the multiple regression analysis was performed.

(p. 21) Regarding the GDW, it is a bit of a trial, so I would like you to see it as a reference this time.

This is the percentage of people who answered that their level of happiness this fiscal year was 7 or more and that their level of happiness five years later was 8 or more. This is a smooth U curve.

(p. 22) On the opposite side, if the happiness level for this fiscal year is 4 or less and the happiness level for five years from now is also 4 or less, it will be a reverse U curve, on the opposite side, so it will be like this, although it is natural.

(p. 23) This is different from the pure GDW, but you always put out a similar table, so I made it with the data we have, but the happiness level is 7 or more, and in addition to this, the GDW will be 8 or more five years later.

However, our data collection method has a measure of happiness and happiness five years later, but does not have the pair of life satisfaction and life satisfaction five years later that is used in the so-called GDW. Therefore, five years later is slightly subtracted. The percentage of people with a score of 7 or more in happiness and life satisfaction is drawn by the orange bar at the top, and the blue line at the bottom shows the percentage of people with a score of 4 or less in happiness and life satisfaction.

Then, it is similar to what teachers Kan Suzuki wrote, but in Tokyo, Nara, Nagasaki, and Okinawa, we can see the tendency that orange is higher in the upper part and blue is lower in the lower part. We can see the tendency that Tokyo is a monster, but it is very high. On the other hand, on the left side of this table, Tohoku is a little lower.

(p. 24) What is the correlation between the region's GDP and the level of happiness? On the left are municipalities, and on the right are prefectures. The original idea is that the words "growth and distribution" and "virtuous cycle" are used in the current administration, and as an attempt to determine how well they are balanced, we are looking at the correlation. There is no such strong correlation between the level of happiness and the economic indicator GDP.

(p. 25) However, on the other hand, it is known that there is a fairly strong correlation when it comes to life satisfaction. I have received a request from Mr. Ishikawa to try making this once, and I have done it several times before. This time, I have obtained a little more beautiful data, so it is the second time, and I am now at a point where I can share it with you, including two years.

(p. 27 onwards) The rest is in the attached materials, in the form of the current year's version of what I showed last time. This is a breakdown by age group, or a visualization of various correlations with each of the 24 factors. It is not very meaningful to explain this one by one, so I explained it a year ago, so I will omit the explanation. The data is also attached in this way, so I would like to limit it to the city in the form of public disclosure.

That's all for my explanation. Thank you very much.

Chairman Maeno: There have been really good discussions since the first half of Yes, thank you very much.

Did you have a question-and-answer session here? Did you make an announcement first?

Suzuki (Digital Agency): Thank you, , I will continue to explain Document 3.

Please take a look at Handout 3.

(p. 2) First of all, it is page 2.

As for the points of today's discussion, I believe that the main part of today's discussion will be support for the creation of logic tree. As the use of indicators expands, I would like to see discussions on support tailored to the degree of maturity of use and improvement of data provision.

(p. 3) Although we are in the third year of utilizing indicators, we will continue to provide data through this initiative and support the evolution of utilization.

Today, I would like to briefly explain the key points of this fiscal year's efforts.

First of all, on March 29th, as Mr. Maeno said at the beginning, we have released the index site, so I would like to explain it with a simple demonstration.

Can you see it on the screen? This is the Well-Being Indicator site released in Digital Agency on March 29. First, the Well-Being Indicator of Hiratsuka City, which is under the Minister Kono of Digital Agency, is displayed on the screen. The number of cases is as few as 116 in fiscal 2023, but the shape of the radar chart is like this. In the radar chart, the subjective indicator is displayed by an orange line and the objective indicator is displayed by a green line. In Hiratsuka City, the objective indicator of health status is 50.7, which is above average, while the subjective indicator is 35.3, which is below average. I think it can be read that the fulfillment of the measures is not accompanied by the actual feeling of the residents. For example, the objective indicator of health status is the healthy life expectancy obtained from open data. The subjective is the result of a questionnaire on whether you think you are physically and mentally healthy.

For each result, please open the tab, and the objective indicators of healthy life expectancy that I mentioned earlier are around here. And for the subjective indicators, please open this tab, and I think you can see that people who think they are mentally and physically healthy are a little lower. Like this, we have made the site by posting each question and each item of KPI broken down in the lower part of the radar chart. This back data can also be downloaded in CSV format, so you can see the data at hand.

Next, I would like to show you Mishima City. This is Mishima City, Shizuoka. You can see that the radar chart of Mishima City is different in shape from the radar chart of Hiratsuka City that I mentioned earlier. On the whole, it is characterized by the fact that the subjective indicators are much higher than the objective indicators. In particular, the natural landscape is high in both the subjective and objective indicators. Mishima City is a city with a wonderful natural landscape where the underground water of Mt. Fuji flows through the town. You can see from this radar chart that all the residents are proud of it. On the other hand, medical care and welfare are high in the objective but low in the subjective. The cost of medical care for the elderly per capita is low, and the population coverage ratio of welfare facilities within walking distance is high. On the other hand, when I look at the results of the questionnaire on the questions that medical institutions is satisfactory and that it is easy to receive the services of welfare nursing care facilities, I can say that each of them does not lead to the actual feeling of the residents. Overall, the satisfaction with life seems high, but the evaluation of employment, income, and business creation is quite low, and the evaluation of shopping and eating and drinking is also low. I think that this radar chart seems to be worrisome.

Next, regarding the radar chart of Mr. Taki-cho, Mie prefecture, although the number of responses is a little small, I think you can see that the shape of the radar chart is significantly different from the two cities so far. The objectivity of self-efficacy in Taki-cho is very high, and as Mr. Nagumo mentioned earlier, there are no objective indicators that fit well in terms of voter turnout at present, and I think voter turnout is used in some area. Overall, subjective evaluation is severe, and I think there are a few prefectures nationwide where such evaluation can be made.

As for this site, we have released data for fiscal 2022 and 2023 in the past, and for fiscal 2024 today, so we would like you to visit it again.

On this indicator site, we also post how to use indicators, including videos, and examples of using indicators from many organizations as a reference use cases. We hope you will visit the site and use it effectively for indicator utilization.

Please go back to Handout 3 on page 6.

(p. 6) Pages 6, 7, and 8 introduce the functions to be added to this site in the future.

(p. 7) By adding tools to support the use of local government, such as questionnaire functions, to this site, we plan to support the reduction of burden on people in local government and the upgrading of analyses.

(p. 9) Regarding utilization groups, Digital Agency has confirmed that 85 groups have utilized the indicator as of June 6. Actually, I feel that it is a little more than that.

(p. 10) This fiscal year, we would like to continue our efforts to further expand the use.

It is written as New in red, but we would like to newly work on two things: holding workshops for NPOs and residents, and building a system to train and dispatch facilitators. Through this, we will expand the use of indicators to residents. That's all for the explanation of agenda 2. I would like to explain the remaining pages after I ask questions. Thank you.

Chairman Maeno: There have been really good discussions since the first half of Yes. Thank you very much. Please feel free to ask questions or give your opinions on the two points I have just mentioned. Anyone is welcome.

Hiroi: . I was deeply impressed because I thought that a very wonderful result is being achieved.

The first question is, in Mr. Nagumo's explanation, roughly speaking, there is a tendency that happiness and life satisfaction are higher in metropolitan areas and lower in the Tohoku region. I think that is true, but if you make a mistake in interpretation, there is a risk that it will be perceived as accelerating concentration in large cities. In order not to simply accelerate concentration, what points in interpretation or what measures are you thinking about?

As for the second question, as a technical issue, how many samples should be secured in each local government for statistical significance to be closer to the actual situation?

Member Nagumo: Hiroi.

As you said, when I put it on the map, it seems that the efforts for regional revitalization that have been made since 2014 have not been fully effective. In reality, it seems that there is a well-being gap beyond the economic gap and the fertility gap. Even so, I personally think that the result is a reaffirmation of the need to create a debate on the importance of policies that enhance the well-being of area. I think that it is necessary to make efforts to show that there are so many things that are so different and so interesting by using this indicator instead of people who tend to be modest about the goodness of area and do not want to say it in words. One concern is that even if the score is high for nature's blessings and natural scenery, the correlation with happiness tends to be low. Therefore, we are now trying to find a measure to mitigate such cognitive bias.

Hiroi: I see. By the way, in this map, there are regions other than metropolitan areas where the degree of attachment to area is high, such as Hokkaido and Okinawa, which have been said to have a high degree of attachment to area for a long time. I think that is one clue. What do you think?

Member Nagumo: That's right. In addition, I think that if there is data on the characteristics of the people of the prefecture, the relationship between the characteristics of the people of the prefecture and the degree of happiness can be analyzed, but the current situation is that I wonder if there is no such data in Japan. Regarding the second question, I would rather ask a member who is an expert in this field to share his knowledge, but in terms of the number of samples, 400 is one standard.

With a 95% confidence interval and a standard error of ± 5% as the target, there is a statistical idea that a city with a population of one million would require 384 samples.

However, considering that we need to cover the approximately 1700 local government throughout Japan as much as possible with a limited budget, we have no choice but to prioritize them. This time, we conducted the survey under the condition that local government, which received Issue Gold Type II and Type III for Digita, and ordinance-designated cities with a concentrated population, were relatively thick, and that at least 100 samples were secured for other cities. As a result, the number of local government with more than 100 samples increased to 668. Of course, there is an argument that it is 384 for the population, so if we divide this by age and sex, we need 400 each. However, I recognize that this number of samples is the standard in Japan even if we look at various other surveys.

Hiroi: .

Chairman Maeno: There have been really good discussions since the first half of Then, how about other people?

Member Ohta: I'm Ohta . I would like to make two points regarding the utilization of data.
A rule of thumb is a principle for utilizing data. Although it is called open data, there are many cases in which it is disclosed in the form of so-called machine-readable data, so I thought it was very good that this indicator can be downloaded in CSV. In order to ensure that data will be used more and more in the future, it is better to clarify the principle of data disclosure, regardless of whether or not it will be disclosed.

One point that I am a little concerned about is that the data is processed. When we look at cases in which data is used, including overseas, it is a common feature that the data is not processed much and is disclosed in a form close to raw data. When I listen to requests from users, they tend to ask for processed data, but as a rule of thumb, I think it is better to submit data without processing as much as possible. As a domestic example, we created a website for Tokyo's COVID-19 measures, but at that time, we received many requests to process the data, but we rejected all of them and submitted only raw data. As a result, many people were able to use the data. And it spread to other municipalities. I think it is better to determine the conditions and principles for using such data to some extent from the beginning.

Member: I thought it was wonderful that you disclosed wonderful data.

It overlaps with what you have pointed out so far, but I think it is better to show on the dashboard what percentage of the population of each local government the sample is. It is still developing data, and I recognize that it is necessary to increase the number of samples and increase the statistical significance.

Second, I was very concerned about the geographical difference, and I thought that the gap between happiness and life satisfaction is quite important. I thought that it would be better to think that Tokyo is high in life satisfaction but not high in happiness. I thought that I need to be a little careful about how to interpret this.

Third, I agree with what Mr. Ohta said, and COVID19-related data is analyzed in various ways using open data, and a lot of new knowledge is produced. Since a huge number of papers are produced, if we can handle raw data as much as possible even if we only consider academic use, validation and analysis from various angles will progress further, and proper journal papers will be published, so I think that will lead to the process in which the survey results are recognized as so-called academic knowledge. I also think that it will be a material for companies to think about various services. In that sense, I would like to ask for open data disclosure in a form as close to raw data as possible.

Managing Director Murakami: Mr. Nagumo samples is not yet sufficient.

Of course, we will make efforts to raise it, but for the time being, we would like to focus on having various people discuss what we have seen and felt, even if it is a provisional figure. Of course, in parallel, I would like to continue research on whether it can withstand statistical validation with you.

I think that disclosure of the results and English-language publication should be promoted, but what we are most afraid of is that there will be a move to download the results together and rank them by local government. I don't want various people to use the raw data without permission to create rankings, or to argue about which prefecture is the most unfortunate in Japan. Rather than suddenly disclosing the results in English, I think it would be better to start from a slightly lower level, for example, by supporting professors who submit English papers on the subject of this index.

However, since it has been viewed by many people and has been evaluated as very easy to understand, I would like to receive guidance on how to further improve the level while maintaining a good balance between the spread of its use and the prevention of abuse.

Member: has not yet been made public?

Member Nagumo: can be downloaded. We have not yet downloaded the raw data in bulk. This is close to the comments made by Mr. Hiroi earlier, but I am afraid that there will be people who will make a ranking of happiness and discuss the opposite of policy. In addition, among the inquiries, there are requests for the use of this for the formation of real estate prices, which is a reversal of master and servant. Therefore, it is better to have a premise that it is consistent with the direction of the policy we are aiming for to some extent, and the current situation is that we are carefully considering the full disclosure of the raw data.

You are absolutely right about academic papers. In the past, Professor Uchida said that it is time to write a paper. If possible, I would like to have a paper published by an expert member, and if you could present something that can be understood in this way, I personally think it would be beautiful to spread it in the form of citations.

However, in principle, as Mr. Ota and Mr. Koizumi say, I understand well that the ideal is that raw data will be widely publicized and used for innovation and new knowledge will be obtained.

Chairman Maeno: There have been really good discussions since the first half of . You can download raw data by local government, so you can get all the data by doing it one by one.

Suzuki (Digital Agency): Thank you, Yes, that's right.

Chairman Maeno: There have been really good discussions since the first half of 's goodwill.

Member: I think it would be good if the purpose of the data disclosure and the limitations of the data as stated by Mr. Murakami and Mr. Nagumo are properly written on the website.

Managing Director Murakami: Mr. Nagumo Yes. I often think about how to make a note.

Member Sasao: When I visited the website of the area Happiness Indicator, I thought it was well done, but in order for each local government to make effective use of this data, I think it is important to make it a platform that can analyze this data from a people-centered perspective. On the current site, the function of narrowing down the attributes is a function that can narrow down only by age and sex and display the results, but I thought that it would be possible to analyze from more diverse perspectives if we could break this down a bit more and confirm from multiple perspectives, for example, whether you are single or have a family, analysis by amount of income, or how the situation of each factor is different between people with high and low happiness.

The other point is that it depends on the survey method, but I think it is impossible to obtain data on children in their 20s or younger. I think that a separate project to collect such data in order to make plans for young children to live in the town and become happy will be very important in considering the future.

I thought it would be great to be able to do something like a well-being survey for children.

Member Nagumo: , you are absolutely right.

I think it is good to say that we are about to reach the stage where we want to have a wide and deep range. I think that there are still few people in local government who can truly conduct analysis with such awareness, but I think that the need will grow in time. At present, we are still in the stage of enlightenment, and the development has not advanced to that extent, but as a future image, I have an understanding that what Mr. Sasao said is true.

Managing Director Murakami: Mr. Nagumo : By the way, it is known that if you do not have a proper taxonomy of the variations in household composition, the system development will be very inefficient. For each type of subsidy, there are various conditions for payment, such as how many children there are, how many children among them are registered in the region, and whether there are people with disabilities. Currently, we are taking the trouble to create a classification for each support system and create an application.

When I conducted a full-scale analysis of how many such household classifications there are, I found that there were nearly 700 patterns. In fact, I think that we should discuss and fix such household compositions, income levels, and other classifications necessary for the execution of support systems with experts, so that they can be used not only for surveys of well-being indicators but also for various services and systems.

Member: My name is Koga from the University of Tokyo. I will be working with you from this fiscal year.

I would like to make three comments. The first two are about the materials you presented, and I believe you are currently showing the combined results of the analysis of each factor. For example, in the case of public spaces, I believe you are using two questions, "comfort" and "walking space," and I would like to ask if there is a possibility of analyzing these separately in the future. That is because it is good to say that there was a relationship between public spaces and well-being, but I thought that if we could understand more specifically what was working, it would be easier to utilize the results in local government for policy formulation.

As mentioned earlier, I am also concerned about basic attributes. I believe that age and other information is disclosed, but I am not sure if this information is taken, but I did not know from the documents how long you have lived in the area and whether you have taken into account the number of years you have lived there, so I would like to ask you about this.

The third point is also a matter of the number of samples, so it will be a future story, but I thought it would be better if we could make comparisons for each small area in local government. When local government takes measures for well-being, I think there may be disparities even among area. For example, it would be easier to use if we could analyze such things by elementary school district, by comprehensive ward, or even by town. That is all.

Member Nagumo: Yes. I would like to give you an answer.

I think you've just mentioned a really good point. First of all, with regard to your third question, we are trying to break down the postal codes from the beginning, so it is a system design. On the Digital Agency website, the addresses of the people who answered the questionnaire are plotted in dots on the map. However, if you break down to that point, you will be asked if you have a sufficient number of samples. That's exactly what you said.

In terms of attribution data, in the first year of the survey of 34000 people, we actually used a different company, but at that time we had quite a lot of attribution data. However, even if we spent money on it, it would be difficult for people in local government to make full use of it. So, first of all, we wanted to increase the number of samples and give priority to having a wide range of people in local government see it, so we made a change.

Regarding the first point, more detailed analysis, actually, it is done by local government who uses this to create policies. Whether Digital Agency, the smart cities Institute, or the Advisory Council can play the role of a think tank, it does not have that much spare capacity.

Depending on the policy goals of each local government, the extent to which the analysis will be conducted and what will be analyzed will be left to the judgment of the people of the local government. Our stance is to provide the necessary support, training, and dispatch of facilitators to the extent possible.

Suzuki (Digital Agency): Thank you, .

Regarding the analysis by district and postal code that Dr. Nagumo introduced earlier, the site displays the addresses of the respondents on a map in a plot, and when you specify a range on the map and narrow it down, the data of the area is displayed.

Hiroi: , I may not have understood exactly because it was a separate story, but in the GDW, you said that Nagasaki Prefecture was the top, but I did not have a strong image of Nagasaki. Please tell me if there is anything you imagine about the background.

In addition, I think it is an important message that the correlation between GDP in the region and happiness is not so high. Is there anything you are thinking about here?

Also, there was an explanation that the subjective result was low in Taki-cho, Mie prefecture. Is this interpretation that there are objectively good aspects but the residents are not aware of them? Do you have any opinions on this?

Member Nagumo: GDW, I could not create the exact same GDW as Dr. Kan Suzuki is doing due to data constraints, but I tried to create a GDW that is close to the GDW using the current level of happiness and the level of happiness five years later. If the Government of Japan has a direction to use the GDW in earnest, I myself am aware of the problem of whether we should be equipped with an analysis like this as a standard. At present, I have not heard the question of life satisfaction five years later, but in the case that the decision that the GDW for each area should be surveyed will be made at this Expert Council, I think that officially adding the question of life satisfaction five years later will be an option.

We do not have such deep knowledge about why it is high in Nagasaki Prefecture. I think we have confirmed that it is almost similar to the GDW data when compared with the mechanical calculation.

In your second question, if your subjective view is very low compared to the objective view, I think there are two patterns. One is that, as you just said, you do not recognize the goodness of the town very much. For example, there are times when the city is implementing various policies, but it is not well known to the citizens. The other is that there is a cognitive bias in the situation where it has become too common for the people who live there, like a natural landscape, and they no longer feel grateful. I think there are two patterns. Depending on this, the policy approach will change, and in terms of not being known, communication strategies will be extremely important.

On the other hand, if you believe that only your subjective view is very good when it is not so good objectively, safety and security will collapse at once when an earthquake occurs. Therefore, in that case, unless we take measures to improve the objective situation, it is possible that your subjective view will gradually fall to the lower side of the result. Everyone is interpreting this, but the reality is that we are discussing it individually.

Hiroi: .

From what you've just told me, I understand that there are various interpretations and developmental discussions.

Member: You just talked about the evaluation of natural resources. It is true that there may be a cognitive bias or an aspect of being used to it, but in the case of local areas, they may have an image that natural resources are connected to disasters. There is a possibility that the fact that there are many natural resources is connected to the fact that there is animal damage or that there are many natural disasters.

For example, if I took out a sample only in a densely populated area (DID), I felt that it would be interesting to analyze whether it would change a little or not. Unlike the case where there is greenery in a city, there is a possibility that the greenery in a mountainous area overflowing with greenery is recognized as a risk, so I wonder if there will be a difference. I was asking because I thought it would be very interesting to investigate that area in detail.

Member Nagumo: .

For example, in Kamakura City, the quality of air and water is not very good when viewed from the objective data, but since it is nature in the city, the greenery is very noticeable and appreciated, so the subjective evaluation is high. I actually feel that the evaluation is completely different depending on what the reference point is. Thank you very much.

Chairman Maeno: There have been really good discussions since the first half of , we have a proposal for a reference logic tree. Is this a presentation from Inoue-san?

Suzuki (Digital Agency): Thank you, First, I will talk a little with Digital Agency, and then I will pass the baton to Mr. Inoue.

Please refer to page 12 of Handout 3. I will prepare the screen now.

Thank you for waiting.

(p. 12) Regarding the creation of the logic tree and its support, which we have been consulting with you since last fiscal year, in May we asked for the cooperation of the type 2 / 3 / X Digita adoption organization.

As for the organizations selected for the Digita Issue Fund for this fiscal year and the 2023 supplementary budget, we asked them to create it explicitly in this field, and asked them to create it by specifying the field as shown in the lower right of this document.

In May, I explained that we would show how to proceed with the creation of a logic tree around autumn after Digital Agency conducts consideration, but without waiting for that, some local government have informed us that they will advance their own efforts.

In many parts of local government, it is difficult to prepare logic tree independently.

With the cooperation of Mr. Nomi City of Ishikawa prefecture, we have just started working on organizing the preparation procedure.

This is the part that says "Preparation Procedures (Hypotheses) in local government" on the left side of the document.

As you can see in this picture, Mr. Nomi City spent a long time discussing this logic tree with everyone.

(p. 20) At present, we are making this reference logic tree public with the help and cooperation of Dr. Inoue and Dr. Shirasaka's laboratories.

The first level to the third level are indicated by the national government, and the first level is set as "improvement of medical care and nursing care environments." Please make it without moving it.

I think it is a normal logic tree to divide this into MECE, but this time, we have set the second level as "Improvement and expansion of medical care services," "Improvement and expansion of nursing care services," and "Promotion of citizens' health."

Regarding the third level, we have further divided the second level. For example, in the field of medical care, we have organized the third level by clearly indicating that there are some areas where medical care and nursing care are almost covered, such as "securing medical care workers," "improving medical care and nursing care-related work efficiency," and "expanding care for specific diseases and dementias," but there are also areas where nursing care is not covered.

As for Level 4 and Level 5, I have organized and presented them in the form of applying the policies of local government. As for Level 5, I will list the projects actually implemented in local government, and write down the results in the form of a summary in Level 4.

However, how to connect Level 3 and Level 4 is quite a thorny issue. In the presentation this time, we have reduced the number of lines to emphasize ease of understanding for the people of local government, but I explained that I would like you to connect Level 3 and Level 4 while discussing how to connect them.

(p. 12) We discussed the current logic tree with reference to Mr. Nomi City, but in Nomi City, there were 1500 projects in the budget project and operation inventory of the first level part or the region including the first level. We asked you to narrow down and identify 60 projects from among them.

Based on this, we held one or two BREST meetings. However, in the BREST meeting, it was not a BREST to which the fourth and fifth level projects were applied. The values we want to realize, which are considered to be adopted projects in Nomi City, were considered to be safe and secure communities, including medical care and nursing care, as a smart inclusive city. However, how to apply the values we want to realize to the second and third levels was mainly discussed.

I have indicated that the Government of Japan will not change the second and third levels by comparing the second and third levels with the logic tree shown by Digital Agency, but I feel that in order to create a logic tree for each local government, it is necessary to revise the second and third levels by comparing them with a form that suits our own ways of thinking and values.

Regarding (5) through (8), I would like to make a hypothesis. Going forward, we will plot important measures that fit the Second and Third Levels in the Fourth and Fifth Levels. In this case, it was discussed that it would be important to plot what is consistent with the purpose while discussing what it is, rather than just listing existing businesses in a categorized manner.

So, we are talking about selecting KPIs after looking at the tree temporarily placed there.

As for the future, it is hypothetical at this point, and we are asking Mr. Nomi City to proceed with the work for the next meeting. As for how the logic tree will be created in the future, I believe it is still a place that should evolve from now on.

Today, I am explaining this, but I am asking Mr. Nomi City, who actually participated in this meeting, to make a statement, so I would like Mr. Nomi City to make a statement about his impressions of the actual work and his feelings at this point in time.

Is Manager Shimazaki in?

Nomi City: Yes, please.

Thank you again the other day. I learned a lot over a long period of time.

Among them, there was a story that logic tree is a tool for telling stories, and it is not a mere classification or taxonomy as Mr. Suzuki said.

It was a tool to make it easier to say what I wanted to say, and I think it was important to go back and forth between the fourth level and the third level in the process of creating it.

I understand that it is a very effective tool, but in fact, we are currently holding various discussions within the department, but to be honest, we have not yet learned how to proceed within ourselves.

However, I understand that this is a necessary idea as we advance not only the Digita project but also the city's measures, so we are now discussing the creation of a system within this division.

Based on the materials received from Dr. Inoue, we are working to deepen our common recognition in the future so that we can submit materials to you again.

We are working on it with the hope that something can be done by the end of this week, but I would like to proceed with it with your support.
That's all.

Suzuki (Digital Agency): Thank you, Yes, thank you.

Let's finish the Digi-cho part for now, and may I ask Mr. Inoue to talk about Mr. Inoue's materials? Thank you.

Member INOUE: Based on the analysis of the : I see. I will share the materials.

(Material 4, Cover) The other day, I visited Mr. Nomi City and talked with him. At first, I kept in mind the format of the workshop, which is how to make it, but before that, in the first part, I did a lot of brainstorming, including the main idea, how far we will go, and the system. I think Mr. Suzuki told me earlier that he spent a lot of time there.

(p. 2) Initially, the design was held under the assumption that we could complete the process in about four meetings, and this meeting was held under the recognition that it was Workshop 1, but in fact, we discussed how to proceed in the future.

However, if we proceed with this part in a perfunctory manner, it will be really only in form, I think. So, I reconfirmed that it is an important attempt to confirm the direction, purpose, and system.
Times.

(p. 3) At that time, I talked about having a project system in place.

Although the term "project charter" is used here, I asked you to clarify the purpose of the project, the schedule, and the roles of the people involved.
Then, I asked you to clarify the stakeholders and people involved in this project. This is also attached to the attached table.

We are not asking you to do a detailed project charter of a large-scale project or a stakeholder analysis. We just told you that we will clarify the points that should be clarified, even if they are rough.

So, although it is not shown here, I once again felt that the stakeholder part could be something like a system diagram, and I think it would be fine if the roles were clarified there.

(p. 5) The first thing I told you was a brief review of this logic tree positioning story.

As I believe Mr. Murakami will explain later, I talked about organizing the experiences of citizens and the administration in a way that makes use of the Comprehensive Plan and the Basic Plan, rather than discarding them.

(p. 6) There are different levels, but from Level 1 to Level 5, I talked a little about the concept of these levels. If it is Level 5, "provision of public services" and "change in citizen experience" are Level 4. I put words like this, but this is not a consensus. I think it is okay to sort it out like this to a certain extent, so this is the material I showed to Mr. Nomi City.

So, we will discuss it in the future, and the words here will change.

It is a material when I talked about the importance of connecting with stories as a way of thinking.

(p. 7) Actually, you are going to make a tree like this, but this time, I think you are going to put your hands into the second level.

In fact, during the workshop, we asked them to organize the fifth level. We said that we would try to create the fifth level and then create the fourth level in a way that would connect the third level in our own way. We said that we would try to connect the measures that are currently moving in a way that they are fully implemented.

So, the process is to go up from the 5th level.

As the next step, I think it will be the second or third meeting of the workshop. This time, we will go down from the first level, and we will review whether it is consistent, whether there are any other areas that should be increased, and whether there are any areas that should be integrated. We will go down from the top.

I am assuming that it would be good to go back and forth and form it while repeating this.

(p. 14) Regarding the part that I asked you to do in advance, I would like to reiterate that Nomi City has organized such comprehensive plans and projects, so I asked you to narrow down the parts that seem to be in line with the theme of this time.

At first, I asked you to narrow down as many as you could in a vague way, but at that time, it was about 150. I asked you to dig down one more step and narrow down the number to about 60.

It is difficult to confirm the content of each and every case at the workshop on the spot, so I thought it would be easier to proceed if you could prepare a certain amount of information in advance.

(p. 15) At that time, I would like to give you such an Excel sheet in the future.

As I gave it to Mr. Nomi City last time, I asked him to disclose it during the workshop, not in the form of advance Issue, and to sort it out a little by the next time.

I think it is a little detailed, but in a), the business that is currently operating and its positioning, and in c), the outline of what it is, and the beneficiaries of its services. I think it will be arranged to a certain extent up to here.

However, in e), the values and values brought about by the Issue of the beneficiaries and their realization. If you try to write this part in detail, it will take a lot of time and effort, which I talked about last time.

Therefore, regarding e) and f), I would like you to work with Mr. Nomi City in the future on whether it is good to organize them in a very narrow place, and I would like to consider it while consulting with the workload there.

I spoke about the first meeting of what we are going to do at the workshop.

Chairman Maeno: There have been really good discussions since the first half of Okay. Let's start the question and answer session. What do you think, everyone?

Member Ohta: I'm Ohta . Thank you for your explanation.

After listening to your explanation, I understand that there is considerable flexibility. According to your explanation, it is okay to change the second and third levels, but I would like you to make sure that it is conveyed properly just by looking at the materials. Also, even if a logic tree is created once, I think that in many cases it will be reviewed and improved in a year, or half a year at the earliest. I think it is better to convey that it is not a rule to make a logic tree once and keep it for three or five years like a golden rule.

Another thing that I thought was good about Inoue-san's explanation was that he focused quite a bit on the part of the fifth level project and tried to collect evidence of what impact this project has on the goals it should aim for. After all, I think there will be changes if you focus on projects that you are willing to do or sections that you are willing to do. Of course, it is important to create a cross-sectional and comprehensive logic tree together, but what we want to avoid is that it takes nearly a year to create a product, and when it is completed, the person in charge of creating it is transferred. In that case, it would be a shame if the person who was newly transferred stopped moving because he or she doesn't know well.

I think it would be good to make changes and changes in behavior and society visible at around the second and third levels. In that sense, I think it would be good to be able to see not only outcomes that can be seen three or five years later, but also initial outcomes that change immediately. If so, it would lead to so-called EBPM, and feedback would be received quickly, so I thought it would be good to devise the expression of materials and implement training so that such an operation image can be created.

Member INOUE: Based on the analysis of the : Thank you very much.

This time, I talked with Mr. Nomi City about creating a form by August, and reviewing it with the mayor at the end of August or the beginning of September. In addition, I talked about the concept of updating it in the middle of the fiscal year, not making it once and finishing it, so I think that is exactly what Mr. Ota said.

In terms of flexibility, Mr. Nomi City is involved in this project in a prototyping manner, but we cannot be involved in every Mr. local government individually, so I think it will be necessary to have them accompany us to various places, such as consultancies with whom we have a relationship. Therefore, I think it would be good to proceed with the project in a way that allows them flexibility.

Seki: First of all, I would like to say that non-profit organizations often make this logic tree, and Code for Japan does it quite a lot. When non-profit organizations make it, they first enter from the vision and then dig down from there. In the case of local government, there are individual projects, and they make it from the bottom up, so I heard that the order is different and it is interesting. In the case of local government, it has to be so, and I was convinced that it would be easier to do so. When making it, we have to gather across departments and discuss it, and I think that such discussion itself is meaningful.

I really felt that when we expand this initiative, there will be an act like throwing everything to a consultant. To be honest, I think it is quite difficult to make it. While everyone is busy, if you don't have any regrets about what you are doing, it will be quite difficult for everyone to make time for you, and the skills of the staff who will manage it will be required. So, we have to make sure that it doesn't become like the usual comprehensive plan throwing everything. Discussion itself is important, but I think there is a risk that it will be outsourced.

I felt the risk that the logic tree would soon become a mere shell unless I made it clear that it was something to be created by accompanying people, not something to be made by them, and that creating the logic tree was very important in administrative management. In addition, I thought that the materials and KPIs to be collected for creating the system, as well as the timing of the work to be done, could be added on to the existing framework, such as the creation of a budget and the evaluation of projects, so that the work to be done only for this purpose would be reduced, so it would become more realistic.

Member INOUE: Based on the analysis of the , at first, I thought that he would work on it during the workshop, but he said that he would discuss it with us first, so I feel very encouraged about his motivation in that area. However, I think that there may be times when you are confused about how to proceed, so in such cases, I say that you should consult with us. Mr. Nomi City is the main person responsible for preparing the report.

Hiroi: I have also done similar things in policy recommendation AI and have had difficulties, so I would like to ask if this is different from the logic model used in so-called social impact assessment.

Second, I would like to ask what your thoughts are on whether the arrow of causality ends with an arrow, whether you intend to conduct quantitative evaluation (strength and weakness of causality) and evaluation of time lag, and whether it will be created only by administrative officials, with the participation of residents, or with the knowledge of experts and experts. I think there is no end to this.

Managing Director Murakami: Mr. Nagumo At this point, I would like to explain Dr. Hiroi's questions while looking at Slide 13.

Regarding the first point, as you pointed out, this project is an effort to make a logic model that measures social impact into a logic tree by checking it against each KPI. First, we will analyze it using the well-being indicator, and once we have extracted the remaining policy fields in Issue, the next step is to organize the efforts related to this Issue in the form of a logic tree. In that process, I think it would be good if the city public office staff and residents would brainstorm and discuss what kind of efforts are really necessary from the same perspective.

Please look at the paper. As a point to keep in mind when performing the work, first of all, we ask you not to fall into taxonomy. Since it is a general theory, there may be exceptions, but there are as many projects in public office as there are in organization, and if there are divisions, there are as many projects as there are section chiefs, and if there are sections, there are as many projects as there are section chiefs. Each person in charge proposes what he or she can do within the scope of his or her jurisdiction. A coordinating department such as the Fiscal Affairs Division fits it into the budget frame of the entire city and public office, for example, cuts off 80%, manages it somehow, and brings it to the assembly. I think this is the standard way of "policy planning" seen in many local government.

A common kind of comprehensive plan is a taxonomy that arranges the framework neatly, which is a little different from what this logic tree aims for. In the era when the population and demand were growing and tax revenues were growing, it was important to make a fair distribution. Therefore, fair taxonomy was also meaningful, but with the population decreasing and tax revenues decreasing, what is needed now is selection and concentration of resources and efforts. Which fields should be selected and concentrated to improve the well-being of residents? That is what I want to know. Therefore, it is meaningless to write a logic tree neatly to create a new taxonomy. What is important is to switch the head of the administration to "selection and concentration" instead of "fair distribution." To that end, I have sent a strong message that we should take this opportunity to thoroughly review what Issue needs to be solved now, not only at the department level but also within the administration, while relying on the well-being indicator.

As for the specific method of work, I would like you to say that for the time being, regarding the first, second, and third levels, please use the reference indicated by the government as it is, from the top down. Probably, if we ask you to make everything freely from the beginning, there is a risk that we will end up in a situation where we do not know what to start with. In fact, as Mr. Seki said, and as is usual in private sector, this work is meaningless unless it is entered from the top down. Please look at the set of the first to third levels in the reference model, and then, in the fourth and fifth levels, try to insert important efforts that seem to fit there among the efforts being made by public office Imaichi.

However, there is no meaning if you just apply it and it ends. After applying the 4th and 5th levels, if you look back and see that this project should have been important for our city, but it has developed into a story that this 3rd level is strange, it is fine to change the 1st to 3rd levels themselves in the reference provided by the government. That is what I am telling you. As we move back and forth between the 2nd and 3rd levels and the 4th and 5th levels in this way, I think that the mutual understanding of the parties concerned will gradually deepen, and we will see what should be chosen and what should be focused on.

There are no correct answers to logic tree. It is not a task to find the correct answer to logic tree, but I believe that the process of discussing logic tree itself is meaningful. In this work process, I would be grateful if the people of the public office of the city would remember the desire to be purely useful to the city government when they entered the office and find important initiatives.

I personally recommend that you "look for the details that have eaten into the core." When you think about the Issue to be solved at the end, there are actually specific efforts such as this one, which will be the base point and breakthrough of all efforts. While comparing various Issue and efforts, and through trial and error, you can actually find a breakthrough effort that will be the most important key effort. That's the story.

For example, while promoting comprehensive care for the area, we were discussing various ways to promote the health of the area and take measures against pre-existing diseases, but in short, it could be said that we could start a digital community center and create a flow line to concentrate life functions there. This is because there is a hidden causal relationship that elderly people working hard to go out to participate in events at busy places in the digital community center will eventually lead to an increase in the home-based mortality rate, which will have the most impact on reducing medical care expenses.

However, if that happens, it will be possible for the department in charge of transportation, which actually has nothing to do with the Social welfare Department, to reopen the community bus service, which has been suspended on Sundays. This will increase the rate of attendance at events held at the Digital Community Center, and as a result, it will be the most easy-to-understand and effective effort to reduce medical care costs. Such a relationship can be seen. It will be an evaluation that the community bus was so important. In this way, I would like to clarify the connection between the initiative that I think is the key and the real social impact.

In the case of Nomi City, which is proceeding with the work in advance, from among about 1500 projects, we first select about 60 projects that are likely to be related, and validation is performed again to see which of these projects fits the logic of the second and third levels defined by the reference logic tree. As a result, the initiatives and indicators of the fourth and fifth levels that are likely to fall into there will be clarified, and then we will go back to discuss whether the relationship between the second and third levels defined by the reference tree is really good. If this round-trip activity is repeated, it will become clear what the important initiatives are beyond the departments, and how they are connected to each other.

Therefore, I came back to the previous meeting in Nomi City with a request to actually try this round-trip work.
Next month, I will visit Nomi City again, and I think that initiatives that are truly deeply related to social impact, even if they are citizen-led initiatives rather than projects in public office, can be included in this logic tree. However, if I say that we will include them from the beginning, public office will be overwhelmed by re-examining citizen activities, so I am saying that we should pick up projects from the budget of the city of public office for the time being, and gradually narrow down what should be written in the logic tree by going back and forth between the second, third, fourth, and fifth. If anyone notices this in the middle of the process, I think that it is fine to include projects that the city of public office does not pay for, but initiatives that the citizens are doing on their own.

Next, the process of discussion is important. If the Mayor Bureau or the Governors' Office works hard, it may be possible to write a logic tree. However, as a result, based on the causal relationship that has been highlighted across departments, it is not so easy to involve the site and the person in charge even if you try to drag in the department in charge of transportation, which is not directly related to the story of medical care.

If we go back and forth between the Issue to be solved derived from the well-being indicators and the priority policies of the city government, the causal relationship between the Issue to be solved and the group of measures with which it has a deep relationship will be revealed, and the "detailed discussion that has eaten into the core" will be seen. The process needs to be replicated in a way that involves each department.

Community development starts from the multiplication of administrative measures and citizens' efforts. Even if only a community center is built, it is meaningless unless there are citizens who are active in it, and even if citizens want to be active, they cannot start moving unless they are on the spot. For example, there are activities in which elderly people, centered on digital community centers, are lively, energetic, and fun to do until the end, and as a secondary effect, how much can the medical care community, which reduces area expenses, permeate into the life of area? We can see digital community centers as hubs for such initiatives. If we take up parts that are surely causally related to social impact and make them into logic tree, we can see the form of such initiatives.

If you organize them into the first five levels of the logic tree, set the necessary KPIs in each level, and drop the impact into a logic tree connected by logic, you will see the value of the overall measures.

In doing so, it is also important to have a means to measure KPIs. At present, Digital Agency is making a tool, and we will develop a tool to measure the attendance and participation rates of each initiative, such as managing attendance when participating in a health promotion class and posting photos of dishes as they are in a healthy cooking class. Therefore, we would like you to consider a more effective policy implementation system while measuring the effects of the policies systematized by the logic tree in real time, involving related parties across departments, while utilizing this tool.

When we talk about how to involve departments that do not move in a vertically divided administration, we are gradually seeing not only key initiatives but also digital tools that are common to all areas and the need for mobility development. In addition, by measuring this in real time, it will not only be support from the outside, but will also be an important means of gradually gripping the motivation of other departments and fields. In addition, if related measures and their effects are connected by logic tree and a KPI system is finally organized, it will be easier to connect with social impact finance from external private sector companies and investors. We are now discussing it based on this hypothesis.

Member: The explanation just now has deepened my understanding, but as Mr. Koga wrote in the chat, I thought the same thing. In the materials this time, there was a comparison between the subjective and objective indicators of Aizuwakamatsu.

If you look at that radar chart, you can see the factors that have gaps between the two and the factors that are low in both. Can I understand that this is the flow of selecting one or two important policy areas first by relying on this?

Another point that we, including ourselves, need to work on is that, as Mr. Imamuraue said, if there is evidence that going out is linked to health, for example, it will be more concrete and easier to create a logic tree for medical care and nursing care measures for the elderly.

Depending on the policy area, there are cases where the causal relationship is still a black box, so I think it will be an important point to work on that.

Managing Director Murakami: Mr. Nagumo : With regard to your first question, that is correct. In the case of logic tree, I think it would be ideal to look at the analysis of the well-being indicator around Level 2 and include the important policy Issue and area. In some cases, it may be possible to include some areas in Level 3.

In that way, I would like to be able to facilitate discussions on what "values to be realized" should be in the second or third level by promoting dialogue with citizens from the well-being index or through the well-being index.

The second point is, I have not introduced it today, but in fact, I have prepared a list of possible KPIs for each of the items from the first to the third levels of this reference logic tree. About two-thirds of them are objective indicators adopted as well-being indicators, and the answer to this question is also a candidate for KPIs for this item in subjective indicators, so I have organized them. I think everyone in each local government should choose which KPI to select for which part of the logic tree.

In the preceding efforts by local government, we also received consultations about wanting missing KPIs or not knowing how to measure KPIs, so I think we will proceed while supplementing or creating them. If there is any supplement from Mr. Inoue, please do so.

Member INOUE: Based on the analysis of the Wellbeing Indicator, I think it is desirable that our town wants to focus on this area, and that leads to the Issue Gold Application.

However, this time, I don't think the application for Issue Kin is based on such an analysis, so I think we can proceed with the process you mentioned.

In addition, KPIs are presented as a set in the reference logic tree, but they are not a perfect reference, so I would like to make an excuse or supplement again. We will give you the flexibility to use any indicator you have that is more suitable.

Member Nagumo: . Is that okay? Can't you stop once? I think this is quite misleading or confusing.

We have already been advancing the process of putting the spotlight on where the critical to wellbeing area is from the subjective and objective indicators of wellbeing indicators in the form of OASIS training, and I explained it at the Expert Meeting two times before. I am opposed to the idea of asking the same local government for a different method. I feel uncomfortable that we are discussing a different method here, even though we have already consulted the Expert Meeting. In addition, originally, it was only about creating a logic tree, but if it is expanded to the future methodology, I think we should consider overall consistency.

First of all, from the top down, which area should be spotlighted? The part that is relatively close to the mission or purpose, and the very detailed part that is close to process engineering from the 5th level. Even if we ask them to put all of this together, I think it can be seen that the people of local government cannot deal with it alone and will be left to an external contractor. Therefore, we should think about it more carefully, and I think it is dangerous to say that this can be done with this example.

Managing Director Murakami: Mr. Nagumo , let's talk again later. I would like to coordinate well.

Chairman Maeno: There have been really good discussions since the first half of , I think it is very important to talk about which side to attack from. Reform of Working Practices, which I am working on, and development, which is a product of a company, are doing the same thing, but it is very difficult. So, I think that the current heated discussion is correct.

Member Nagumo: . Although it is not perfect this time, I have created the GDW number and am thinking about what to do in the future. I would like to ask your opinion on whether it should be created in the area Happiness Indicator. What do you think?

Member Kan Suzuki: Well, first of all, I think it is very interesting, or rather, it is a good feeling. Today, partly because I could not attend the meeting at first, there are some parts I do not understand properly, so I would like to consult with Mr. Nagumo after seeing the detailed materials.

Member Nagumo: Yes. I understand. I will set up a meeting once.

Chairman Maeno: There have been really good discussions since the first half of , and it may seem tense at the end, but it's true. It's important to start with the philosophy of the top, and I understand the way of thinking that you want to connect with the policy side, and I think that something really important is happening because it is heated. Mr. Murakami's passion, Mr. Nagumo's efforts so far, Mr. Inoue is doing his best, and the opinions of everyone are very important, so we really don't have enough time.

Last time, I thought that in the first half, all of the members wanted to write a paper. In the second half, the members really had to talk and talk and reach an agreement. We have to do this. We are aiming for something really important and really difficult, but if we don't do this, Japanese regions won't improve and we won't be able to create a world of well-being. I think today's discussion was really wonderful.

I am also the chairman, so I don't speak much, but I am grateful that you are all working with all your heart in your respective positions, and I sincerely hope that we will continue to have great discussions and improve Japan. Thank you very much.

Suzuki (Digital Agency): Thank you, , for your very valuable opinions today.

We would like to continue our efforts while consulting with you. The next meeting is scheduled to be held around September.

Thank you very much for taking the time to attend today. I would like to conclude with this. Thank you very much for your time today.

End