Study group on the ideal way of "Mobility Roadmap" (2nd)

Overview

Date and time: Wednesday, June 14, 2023, from 10:00 to 12:30
Location: Kioi Conference Seminar Room C on the 4th floor of Tokyo Garden Terrace Kioi-cho (online)
Agenda:
1. Opening
2. Presentation, Discussion
  - Mr. Noriaki Izumi, Director of the Architecture Strategy Planning Office, Information Economy Division, Commercial Information Policy Bureau, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
  - "Issue and Current Efforts toward Social implementation of Robots in Coexistence with People" (Member, Muramatsu)
  - "Efforts by the Automobile Industry toward LCA and the Future of Issue" (Member of Kawabata Group)
3. Adjournment

Conference Video

The conference is available on YouTube (Digital Agency official channel).

Materials

Minutes

Mr. Suzuki, Planning Officer: , I would like to begin.
Today, I would like to hold the second workshop on the ideal way of "Mobility Roadmap".
I'm Suzuki from mobility Group in For the public Group, Digital Agency. Nice to meet you.
This study group is live streaming. After the end, the recording of this recording will be released on the Digital Agency website in the form of a video.
First of all, Mr. Murakami, Director-General of Digital Agency, would like to offer his greetings. He is on his way to Japan, so would it be possible for you, Mr. Chairman, to give his greetings first?

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
Thank you for coming in spite of the bad weather.
You're here. Please.

Director-General: We are sorry.
I will study hard today.
The atmosphere within the Government has greatly increased, and at this time, we have been asked to thoroughly list the regulation and systems that are causing problems on the ground. I would like to ask for your cooperation.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is , I also use the word "Mobility Roadmap," which is a very broad concept, so I think there are various viewpoints, such as what you usually think, comprehensiveness, our lives, area, and the relationship with industry. Please do not hesitate to speak up, and I would appreciate it very much.
However, I would like to take a lot of time for discussion, so I would appreciate if you could make your presentation and remarks as short and concise as possible. Thank you.

Mr. Suzuki, Planning Officer: .
Then, I would like to ask Chairman Ishida to handle the proceedings from here on.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is : Regarding today's agenda 2, presentation and discussion, I would like to ask Mr. Izumi, Director of the Information Economy Division of the Commerce and Information Policy Bureau of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, to make a presentation.
Best regards

Director Izumi:
Regarding the National Comprehensive Development Plan for Digital Lifelines, the Secretariat explained the outline last time, and it is difficult to say whether I need to come here. However, since I was summoned by Director General Murakami, I would like to explain what I have been thinking about and how my intention is expressed in the materials. To be specific, I would like to explain how I, as an official, coordinated the instructions given by President Saito while secretly contacting Mr. Ishida and Mr. Suzuki. Basically, the materials are Minister Nishimura's presentation materials, and I would like to explain more than 30 pages in 15 minutes, which is typical of an official, and I would like to explain using animations and so on so as not to be superficial.
Although there are various names for the Comprehensive National Plan for Digital Lifeline Development, the key point is how to create a area Living Area in which the population decline will progress. This is basically the same as the expansion from ITS to Mobility Roadmap. However, the key point this time is to end up with a 10-year plan. To make it a 10-year plan is not to build a demonstration experiments and remove equipment, but to make it a plan to build up a 10-year plan by expanding it from the end in order or from the middle in each direction, using the analogy of bullet trains and expressways. It took public office 45 days to finalize the word, which was to be distributed throughout Japan, through coordination between each ministry.
In doing so, from point to line, and from line to surface, the intention is not to dot the demonstration area with points, but to bundle them to a certain extent into large points, connect the large points with lines, and when the lines overlap, they become surfaces.
At that time, we could not wait for 10 years, so it was named "Early Harvest." Although it is not Beaujolais, we should enjoy tangible output as soon as possible, and look forward to the future of Japan while looking at the railway between Shinbashi and Yokohama, which will be a dream for the next 10 years. This is the way to proceed. In doing so, I would like to bring a sense of the whole, including hardware, software, and rules on governance, rather than temporary, so that large-scale investments by the public and private sectors will be concentrated in the same direction. This is the main part of my explanation today.
Other than that, I would like to speed up the process a little, but I would like to draw the entire architecture diagram at the Digital Architecture Design Center (DADC) under President Saito, and I would like to explain the meaning as a person in charge, rather than drawing it and finishing it.
It is a great challenge, but when related ministries and agencies and industries are to coordinate the efficient and rational functioning of society as a whole through the connection of services and systems, it is not enough to first pull out the users and the target autonomous mobile robots and move them, but there will be servicers who provide services there.
If there is a servicer, it is naturally necessary to have a system that manages operations such as automobiles, ITS, air traffic control, and UTM. If functions are assigned here, the function of service provision will appear between "using services" and "actually transporting, investigating, and working."
In relation to this, the management of operation is not so difficult at present if only one vehicle is flown. As the density and frequency increase, the UTM and ITS must have functions such as directing routes, monitoring, and adjusting collision avoidance, not on the robot side.
Then, as an exception process, functions such as abnormal approach, emergency alarm, and emergency evacuation are naturally required on the autonomous mobile robot side. At present, this is also done in the automobile field, but in that case, it is necessary not only to prevent accidents on a per-aircraft basis for a short period of time, but also to create a mechanism to improve society while collecting information such as close calls. This may be the future of the Digital Investigation Committee, but such functions are also necessary.
Then, of course, there will be players such as multi-side platforms represented by information mediation systems, services, and woofers, and since information must be collected at infrastructure locations, it will not be possible to use the aircraft alone.
In this form, instead of leaving everything to the infrastructure side, spatial information, such as 3 d infrastructure, will be collected and distributed on a public platform to some extent, or changes will be collected.
It is a feature of the discussions in which professionals gather at IPA and DADC to advance the overall picture while taking a bird' s-eye view of what functions depend on each other. It is very difficult to understand if you look only at the outputs, but as I mentioned earlier, when I collect the documents by drawing them in a meaningful way, in particular, the red frame is an important part of the physical infrastructure, and it is an important element of the future plan. This is the first two sheets, and I have almost burned out. At the present time, the Digital Architecture Design Center is compiling these documents, or studying them, with some of my participation, or almost all of my guidance.
Then, I would like to talk about the content quickly from now on.
In any case, our goal is not to discuss the supply and demand of daily life in normal times, or in times of natural disasters and emergencies in each use cases, but to discuss dual use, or flipping, as two sides of the same coin.
On the next page, in particular, from points to lines and from lines to surfaces, in the end, while looking at the map of Japan, the target is digital infrastructure, infrastructure development, software, hardware, rules, and public interest. If we do not act as a leader combining the public and private sectors, we will make things and use them for someone else, like giving bread to dogs, and no one will eat them.
Next, in that case, what is the general-purpose infrastructure for digital services? It is probably necessary to have such a horizontal function that collects and distributes data across industries and business categories. As a result, this will be data-driven, so it will be a prediction structure using data, not a reaction driven by things, so X, I think it will be a transformation that reverses master and slave.
At this time, as I said earlier about early harvest, for example, when we fly automated driving or drones, we often focus on the mobility, its operation, and infrastructure. However, as the Chairman said at the beginning, it is important to discuss both red and blue at the same time, because the perspective of service is important, not just the use of goods.
On the next page, I will show a specific example of how it will be in terms of services. In data connections, I am not sure about it, but if you are doing something that should be good if you are submitting it with data, it will probably not be good. In that sense, while firmly maintaining the purpose, for example, by having data, who can deliver it to where, and if other information is shared, privacy can be protected and optimal delivery can be performed. In that case, automated driving or drones is a vehicle. This is one of the goals or functions of data connections, and we are considering this in the form of a mechanism.
In that case, it is not enough to collect data only in data connections, but the issue of having this place be designated as Mobility Roadmap, which is further indicated in the red frame when data connections is conducted, will be properly coordinated across business operators and industries. In that case, it is meaningless to ask where my luggage was a week ago, so where it is now, or where it will be in the future depending on the situation, not only the data format but also the format of the thing must be standardized. The spread of such places is illustrated as a document.
Under such circumstances, as you always tell us that product-oriented is not good, I would like to discuss the project of Early Harvest. For example, regarding the drones route, I would like to discuss the service, first of all, the inspection, and second, the service of delivering heavy goods to a remote place or in an emergency rather than carrying them far away. In this regard, I would like to discuss the route, as a corridor, the sales route equivalent to an expressway such as inter-city expressway or intra-city expressway, or the last mile, or the place where heavy goods are delivered to a single house.
The image of the infrastructure and architecture at that time will be described in detail later in Minister's Materials 17, 18, and 19.
Next, with regard to automated driving, the press is focusing on such things as the automated driving between Numazu and Hamamatsu. As for services, how to spread distribution and people's flow throughout Japan as I mentioned in the beginning, and how to position the Shintona of 100 kilometers as a firelighter, will naturally be the center of the mobility Working Group. automated driving
At that time, as a digital lifeline, it has not been decided whether it will be a automated driving lane, or whether it will be prioritized or dedicated at this point, so it is called a automated driving vehicles lane. However, if V2V has limitations or depends on the processing capacity of vehicles, it will take time to realize it. In addition, if we look at the accidents that have occurred in the United States, California, and other countries, it will be difficult to extend the deadline.
The European Accelerator Research Institute is the best facility in the world. In that case, there is a safe V2X infrastructure, so please polish your industry here. Industry will grow using the infrastructure of public office, and it will spread throughout the country. What kind of road or V2X infrastructure will increase the growth potential of V-side industry? If you could discuss this point with the members of the Committee, we would be very grateful. The infrastructure in that case, like drones, will be explained in detail later.
Next, DX for infrastructure management. If we do this, it may be 1-chome, 1-banchi, where the Digi-cho is conducting this kind of examination, but in the first place, it is meaningless if the cycle of infrastructure management itself is done individually on paper or in drawings. Therefore, I would like to finish the 3 d information infrastructure with a 3 d digital infrastructure that is not related to ground or underground, regardless of whether the building is indoors or outdoors, and in some cases, whether it is at sea or underwater, while understanding the underground objects that are easily enforced by the government and local government. I will explain the infrastructure management architecture in detail in 17, 18, and 19.
In this way, early harvest is reported in material form, but it is a bit bad to say it is a show, and how to proceed while showing it. The next page is the architecture of the digital lifeline.
We did our best to write this with the guidance of the people gathered at the DADC, but it is difficult to understand it even if you look at it, so I would like to spend the remaining time explaining this slide.
First of all, as I said at the beginning, I will use an animation only on this page, but when thinking about how to deliver digital life to local life, such as a detached house, there is a limit. Therefore, we will develop a base like the Community Center 2.0 to some extent, and use a base like the Community Center or the Digital Community Center, which is not called a community center because it is a city public office, town office, village office, or government office, to consider a base for people's flow, distribution, or service provision in normal and emergency situations. The topology of the local area centered on the Community Center 2.0 or the Community Center 2.0 is the same in both the city and the local area, only the densities are different.
Next, we will consider the topology of automated driving or Expressway drones by connecting the community centers in the form of a main road. The topology between the base and the community center is basically the same, and the infrastructure of the network and equipment can be basically the same.
Among them, the hub is called Terminal 2.0, although it is not Michi no Eki 2.0. Naturally, we will try to make the same topology between Terminal 2.0, in the form of thicker main roads, transportation capacity, people's flow, and distribution, by analogy with urban expressways, Shuto Expressways, and Hanshin Expressways.
This time, the largest one of Michi no Eki 2.0 is connected by the analogy of the inter-city expressway and the Tomei Expressway, while being linked to the smart interchange and the like by the analogy of the inter-city expressway. Then, there are only automated driving and drones, which are different in scale, and basically, dedicated roads are inter-city, intra-city, and trunk roads. Finally, in the countryside, characteristics will appear including small drones.
If we consider this backward, it will be this figure. As I explained earlier, the drones, automated driving, Terminal 2.0, and Community Center 2.0 are the catchy places in the media. As I explained earlier, the Community Center 2.0 will be firmly established in the countryside, and the Community Centers will be connected to each other. Then, the larger Terminal 2.0 will be located there, and the distribution, distribution, and people's flow between the Terminals 2.0 and the automated driving Road and the larger Smart Interchange will be deployed. If the automated driving Road and the drones Route are based on the digital communication infrastructure, which is the same in areas with high traffic, thick areas, thin areas, rural areas, and urban areas, the cyberspace or the boundary between the cyber and the physical will be connected by networks, etc., and the communication and the overall image will be based on the rules. Therefore, the Community Center 2.0 and the Roadside Station 2.0 will be deployed in the upper right corner where "physical space" is written, and the lower part will be the digital communication, large-capacity, high-speed, and low-latency infrastructure, which will be the point. If we go around, it will be this picture.
These architectural design and diagrams are difficult to understand at first glance, but the Secretariat is working on them with intention.
As for measures to strengthen support, I believe there are, of course, Digi-katsu, drones, and automated driving. As for project support, there will be various ways to cut projects or infrastructure. This is a bird' s-eye view.
This time, in terms of hardware at that time, we have listed various things like this. Our hardware development policy is to develop communication infrastructure nationwide, cameras, IoT infrastructure, and hubs for transportation and logistics, so that the same analogy can be drawn between data centers, optical fibers, communication, 5G, MEC, and the like, which are unified nationwide, in other words, traffic signals are not only in the city but not in the countryside, but are different in density.
In terms of software, the middleware layer will be important so that various contents, particularly 3 d information, can be searched in a horizontal manner and then shared. In addition, it is hypothesized that the sharing of search indexes will lead to the construction of a data space.
As for the rules, I think one of the points is that the investigation of the cause and countermeasures at the time of a close call or accident are basically positive, and in short, they are not used to search for criminals, but are connected to digital innovation. In that case, the function of collecting data should be in the public interest to a certain extent, and the development of a public interest digital platformer should be considered.
In the end, there were no good candidates when I created the materials, but it is important to collaborate with a local government, a company, or the like that will consider area development in the future. If we try to do it, or if we try to do it, it will be no better than demonstration. Therefore, in order to set and improve a certain type of KPI, I would like to firmly bring it into the cycle of hypotheses validation, whether the hypotheses or prototypes were good, and if not, what kind of correction hypotheses are necessary. At this point, I have not pointed to a specific area.
Finally, in the implementation Plan, there are various points, lines, and areas, but the point is the implementation of areas, and the point is what should be done in order to fully share the best practices with the Digi-cho.
At that time, in the end, I wrote that it would not be exhibited unless the entire package from the operator to the service and infrastructure was properly packaged, and I marked in the documents that dozens of places above that were not the purpose.
Also, it is a reference that the level of drones or automated driving is a little different.
As for the promotion system of the Government, I asked the members of the Digi-cho to wave their flags this time, and they agreed that these ministries and agencies would gather their names for one plan. I can only say that it is a planetary alignment, and I just happen to be the secretariat, and with the guidance of Director General Murakami and President Saito, Mr. Ishida and Mr. Suzuki, I beg your pardon if I say by chance, they discussed it, and it was like this.
We are currently on board, indicating our future plans and so on.
Finally, I am making this kind of flyer. In the last few minutes, as a prank of mine, I want you to use this place. In this picture, I hope life in the countryside will be better. I am gently hiding this kind of picture. As its authority, I am trying to use this kind of picture with a sense of fun, although I am not searching for Wally, to create an image of the Digital Community Center and Michinoeki 2.0. I am doing this without giving up my mind.
At the end of this month, while proceeding with the implementation meeting, some people will be asked to become members of the working group. Needless to say, we will organization the working group and thoroughly discuss the matter within the working group. That is all for my explanation of policy.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
I would like to have a free discussion from now on.
If you are a committee member participating on the web, you can use the hand-up function or speak directly. What do you think? Anyone will be fine.

Director-General: , while you are thinking.
We will work together, and as I introduced, we will establish the mobility Working Group and the Mobility Roadmap Working Group. After the establishment of the Working Group, we will separate the topics to be discussed by the Implementation Conference, and in order not to do the same system in two places, we will discuss the topics at the Implementation Conference, and as a result, Mobility Roadmap will pick up the heads that have returned. The roadmap is to organize the agenda to be addressed by all ministries and agencies. If there are remaining topics that will not be discussed at the Implementation Conference but will need to be discussed in Mobility Roadmap, we will continue to discuss them. I would like to add that we are thinking of moving the agenda for the next six months or one year.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
With a tentative goal of 10 years, all ministries and agencies will discuss a wide range of what mobility represents.

Director-General: , the Study Group, which was scheduled to be held four times, will be held for the fifth time. One of the reasons for this is that the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism will also establish a framework across ministries and agencies as a local public transportation. Since this is logically the same relationship, I would like to ask you to explain it. Therefore, we will work together with each ministry and the whole party here.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
I would like to start with Mr. Koda.

Member Koda: Thank you very much for your very interesting story.
First of all, I thought it was wonderful that digitalization could simplify things that do not need to be done by humans and guarantee safety. I also thought it was wonderful that by having community functions, the last one mile place can guarantee the same sense of security as before.
On the other hand, there are many people who use this kind of mobility, especially in mountainous area, and I think that elderly people and others are in the last mile. It is very important to show them a service rather than a tool called mobility, and how they can use this service and how they can enrich their lives. Otherwise, I think that we may have to offer bread to the dog as you said.
In addition, I thought it would be wonderful to use the services of normal times to prepare for emergencies. But I also thought it would be necessary to think about the second and third ways to make more use of digital technology so that we would not have to use it now in the event that digital technology does not work or the Internet environment is in a catastrophic state.
That's all.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
Akimoto-san, please.

Akimoto Acting Member: My name is Akimoto JUTM. Thank you for your explanation.
I have high expectations for the Digital Zenso, so I hope you will go ahead with it.
In particular, in the field of drones, I am Akimoto, who is here today on behalf of Mr. Suzuki, a member of the Japanese Unmanned Aircraft Operation and Management Consortium.
In the field of drones, there are various subsidies and so on, and implementation experiments are being conducted, but as expected, 80% of them are probably failures due to fatigue from demonstration. It is finished two to three days later. Under such a situation, no data can be collected, and it cannot be reflected in the next system. I believe that such a situation has been continuing for a long time. Over a 10-year span, instead of so-called demonstration, projects to take root in implementation, infrastructure, and area will be advanced, and I have great expectations for this.
I would like to ask three questions. This is our reflection. I am also the Deputy Director of the Fukushima Robot testing Field. Since it is the testing Field, we have to collect various data and manage safety. We have introduced an operation management system, but no one uses it. We don't use it. We don't operate it. Of course, the data obtained from the system cannot be used at all, so it is important to properly enforce the rules for using it. For example, users do not make a rule to join the operation management system and leave the data, so it is difficult to use it. We are reflecting on that.
My second question is that if we look at mobility as a whole, not just drones, there are naturally many kinds of drones on the sea, such as uncrewed ships and underwater mobility. In that sense, this time we are talking about automated driving and drones on the land. Since we are a maritime nation, we are creating an AUV public-private platform that will cooperate with mobility on the sea in the future, and the Cabinet Office is formulating strategies. Since discussions are delayed now, I would be grateful if you could expand the concept of the Digital Zenso.
The third point is about the communication architecture you explained. In particular, since drones is flying in the sky, it is necessary to connect to communication by stunt. There are radio waves such as LTE and radio waves for robots provided in Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, and a radio station license for an unmanned image transmission system has been institutionalized. There are also Wi-Fi 2.4 giga, IMS band, and satellite circuits. There are various types of communication, but depending on the operation, communication may or may not reach you. If you can create a proper communication architecture by taking into account the communication infrastructure, and the characteristics of communication, such as transmission capacity, delay, unstoppable, and reliability, I don't know how many hundreds of communication systems will be flying in the same area, but at that time, there will be problems such as insufficient number of channels or insufficient data transmission capacity, so I would appreciate it if you could consider the architecture of such systems.
That's all.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
Mr. Yamamoto is raising his hand from the web. Thank you.

Member : Thank you for your presentation.
On page 8, I would like to talk about the implementation of data connections Infrastructure. Of course, I think it is very good that we are organizing from the perspective of people's flow, commercial distribution, distribution, and service. But before that, I would like to talk about how roads and travel space are used. I believe there will be the drones I mentioned earlier. First of all, if we do not have data on how roads are used, we cannot check digital PDCA. I think we must do this.
In the nineteen seventy of the year, in the 1980s, Japanese road development was carried out on a large scale, but in terms of how national, prefectural, and municipal roads are used and whether supply and demand management is being carried out comprehensively using IT, I don't think that is the case.
In order to realize a comfortable and safe road space, as Dr. Ishida said last time, we need to manage the supply and demand of roads, reduce CO2 emissions and traffic congestion, efficiently repair roads, and conduct road pricing in the future. I don't know yet, but unless we thoroughly understand when, where, how much, how, and how much cars, pedestrians, bicycles, recently electric scooters, and cars and robots in automated driving are traveling at speed, I don't think we will be able to understand what priorities we should take, how good or bad we should be. First of all, it must be thoroughly developed separately from MaaS information such as railway and bus usage information and timetables.
I used to work for an automobile company, and I was in the business of monetizing probe information. Now, if I use probe data, I can find out which intersections are prone to accidents, which roads are slippery, which roads are bumpy and need to be repaired, and so on. If we don't improve these things publicly and collectively, I don't think we can understand where and how we started and what happened.
It is true that there are various Issue, such as personal data conservation, the cause of the data provider, and who will operate it. But when we look at the next 10 years, it is not too late, so in addition to the perspective of user services, in addition to data connections, I would like to see an arrangement of how roads are used in Mobility Roadmap.
That's all.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
Mr. Muramatsu, please.

Mr. Muramatsu: I would like to give you a general answer about .
I would like to make a few comments. I will make a presentation later, but I think there will be many opportunities for us to work together in the last mile. I would like to create such an environment seamlessly, so I would like to continue our cooperation. Thank you.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is May I speak to you for a moment?
There are two. For example, if you look at page 19, it is related to what Mr. Yamamoto said, but physical infrastructure is not included very much. I thought you could argue a little more strongly about how to use physical infrastructure by digital. That is one thing.
In addition, I think it is a really good idea that the model can be applied anywhere in topology, and I can feel encouraged, but I think it is a matter of distance and software. When software changes, people's feelings change, or various area characteristics that cannot be dealt with by topology. When we consider global development, we need to consider various characteristics of area and various things, including climate. I would appreciate it if you could put your soul into these details.
Kawabata-san, please.

Kawabata Member: I was a child when we were in planetary alignment, so I thought it was wonderful to have government agencies work together in the same way as planetary alignment. I'm sorry I'm an astronomy fan. In fact, I'm trying to overcome the vertical division of government agencies, so I was listening to it thinking that there would be more coordination in the process.
For example, it is very important to link 17 cyberspace and physical space, and as Chairman Ishida said earlier, it is important to think about how to use and defeat existing physical space. As I believe you have briefly mentioned in relation to time, I believe that before digitalization, it is necessary to strengthen existing infrastructure and create a mechanism to utilize the advantages of digital technology.
For example, I am currently teaching at mobility University in Iitoyo, Yamagata Prefecture. It is a snowy area and physically distant from organization, so the premise is quite different between Tokyo Prefecture and the countryside. When I go to a place with a local economic zone and a place with a small basic local government, the infrastructure itself is different depending on the case, and the physical thing is actually different. Even if I try to use something, it needs to be developed before digital can be used, or there is no mechanism to use digital well, so if I say something like this or something like this in the sense of Tokyo Prefecture, it will stop there. If it is only in organization, like a university, we can coordinate, but I think it is difficult to do so within the cooperation of ministries and agencies, which is the same as the planetary alignment I mentioned earlier. I think it will be difficult to coordinate the mechanism to quickly respond to any problem, even if we have cooperation. I don't think there is a mechanism that can be done so quickly when actually doing it, so I thought it would be very important to build a mechanism that can be done so quickly, and to build relationships between Tokyo and people. I think it will be difficult, but I would like you to continue to do it.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
Director Izumi, if you have any response.

Director Izumi: , I would like to speak only as an official. First of all, there may be various characteristics of the mobility or area in the hilly and mountainous area. This is related to Mr. Ishida's comment later, so I will say it again. I myself do not think that anything should be solved in automated driving or in drones. Therefore, I think that reflecting the characteristics of area in the unit of community center 2.0 is probably compatible with Issue Kin of Digita.
In anticipation of this, UTM talked about the point that I am not a automated driving traveler. For example, I chose use cases among DADC and IPA. When public buses are inefficient in a great region, if you want to take three sets of public buses, one for a hospital, one for a pharmacy, pay, and then return home, it takes three hours because there is one bus every hour. I tried to stop the people's flow due to COVID-19, but it didn't stop. Because I had my prescription faxed to me for health consultation, but I ended up taking the trouble to pay. Instead of taking three buses, I took a round trip. It was such a ridiculous fact.
Here, I would like to take an analogy with Yamagata Prefecture, but if we start talking about digital infrastructure now, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications will be angry with us. What we need to develop as a digital lifeline is high-speed communication, large-capacity, and low-latency infrastructure throughout Japan, where it does not exist now. Physical distance will be irrelevant.
Then, when you can receive remote medical care and public service, the only thing you need to move is the medicine bag. Then, instead of taking three sets of public buses, you only need to move the medicine bag. It can be in the drones, or someone can throw it into the mailbox with a bicycle.
As I will explain later, on the other side of making full use of the physical infrastructure, it is premised on the downsizing of the legacy physical infrastructure, and the full development of the digital infrastructure in the future is not balanced. People are angry when I say, "This is too late, this is too late," but I have no intention of participating in discussions that will spread throughout Japan.
I have taken over the thought from Mr. Saito, but if we do not have a vision of how to efficiently downsize legacy infrastructure such as water supply and change it into a good one, people in the clan will ask us to create such legacy infrastructure, and that is why we are told to invest in concrete.
This vision of ITS, the mobility Vision, can be seen in the first discussion, and I believe that there will be such discussions from all of you. This is not something that METI is not doing, or that IT should do it properly, but because everyone has the same opinion, I would like to write about it together.
In this regard, I would like to once again tell Mr. Akimoto, Mr. Suzuki's representative, that what we must be particularly careful about is that if a person who likes flowers runs a flower shop, the business will definitely be ruined. There are many people who like drones and automated driving, but what we must do is infrastructure. On top of that, we must foster a dynamic industry.
At that time, when I looked at the point of moving people efficiently as I mentioned earlier, I think that there will be many viewpoints other than efficiency mobility if I expand the viewpoint a little bit during normal times and emergencies, such as moving only medicine bags, e-commerce orders, immediate shipping, or the immediate delivery of emergency supplies in the event of a disaster. I would like to use it in that context.
At that time, I would like to make comments in order. The fact that UTM is not used is UTM for a specific topology, and I would like you to discuss again what the final social structure is.
For example, in the form of an airfield in the United States, there is an independent UTM in an unmanned airfield where all the people cannot be deployed. Let me introduce this. When I first went to Mr. Suzuki for a request, a flying car is to add air traffic control and road administration, which allows you to run as you like as long as you have a license. Mr. Suzuki said that it is an act of God, and Mr. Suzuki said that you are going to put it together. This is the ball that has been flying to the present. Perhaps what Mr. Akimoto said was a custom in air traffic control, or UTM, which is appropriate from the viewpoint of customs, may be strange from the viewpoint of road administration. How to create such an infrastructure in mobility after ITS revision is the point of this study group or the digital lifeline plan to register it.
In that sense, the fact that drones is inseparably divided into land, sea, and air is, of course, called mobility in 3D space, a moving object, or a moving feature, but I think it is the same when considered in that way.
At that time, we talked about communication. As you said earlier, whether people move or medicine bags move, of course, wireless technology is cool in appearance, but if we take pictures from outside cameras without pulling a thick wired clay pipe and raising the information taken in drones, for example, the Hanshin Expressway, which is an expressway for the wealthy, does not have any blind spots for surveillance cameras. Such infrastructure has already been established. As an engineer, I cannot agree with the idea that we are competing for wireless bandwidth by taking the trouble to raise Draco information to reproduce accident information. We are discussing technology vertically, only vehicles or something, so it is absurd. Therefore, I believe that the architecture should be broader and have a sense of the whole.
In addition, as Commissioner Yamamoto commented, of course I agree with how the roads are used, but my current design is that I should not spend too much on how the Tokaido and Nakasendo are used.
As I mentioned earlier, it is important to have hypotheses about the design of intercity highways, urban highways, urban trunk roads, and local roads, and to correct the hypotheses while demonstration experiments them. First, let's take a look at the traffic on Nakasendo Road, which takes infinite time. I don't deny this, but as you all know, the approach of ethnography is biased unless it takes one or two years. When doing a speedy project called early harvest, ethnography is important, but I think the process of correcting hypotheses will be more important.
It is not enough to ignore how the current roads are used. As Dr. Ishida said, I would suggest that we stop sharing maps when we talk about what to do with community roads. It is an investigative approach that uses digital information to manage and overlay probes to understand the current situation by differentiating from hypotheses about what is happening. If it is a hypothetical validation approach, I think Mr. Yamamoto's comments can be satisfied.
In that case, I think it is important to have hypotheses based on the premise of digital infrastructure, such as having road information in 3D, and not taking pictures of traffic light information in different colors with cameras, but using communication.
The validation pattern of Issue Gold, which is based on the hypotheses, is the most compatible with Issue Gold of Digita. Or, I think that the places that have been promoting Digi-cho with hypotheses will become one in the future.
In addition, Commissioner Muramatsu said that it would be good if we could discuss not only the last mile, but also how it will be delivered to individual homes, such as the last one meter in the case of medicine bags. It is a love call from us that we would like to cooperate with DADC as a place for the ecosystem.
As I said earlier, it is important to downsize the physical infrastructure, but as I said separately from Mr. Ishida, I would like to make the tram an anti-pattern. Even if the current infrastructure requires the cost of acquiring a new dedicated road, if we run the track on the road, the train will not speed up, and even the train will stop at a red light for automobiles. I think that is because the architecture is defective or is driven by short-term restrictions, so when using the physical infrastructure, the point is how to create the dedicated road or dedicated infrastructure while downsizing the legacy infrastructure.
On top of that, if speed and area characteristics are provided by Issue gold of Digita, and colors are provided in places with distances, distribution without people on board, and immediate shipment, I think our design theory can be validation.
This is also the case with Commissioner Kawabata's cyber and physical. If you try communication once, you can see that it is an 8K uncompressed video conference system, or a video conference without delay. I have done it before because I was a scholar. If you connect Odaiba and Sapporo with an 8K uncompressed video conference, you can play Jankenpon. You don't need the sense of place that you normally have in a meeting on the spot. If you deploy it not to each house but to around the community center 2.0, for example, it will become a base for teleworking, the gap between the local and central government will disappear.
While thinking about this, when the weather does not affect us, I think another anti-pattern is an analogy of the Yamagata Shinkansen. To run 250 kilometers to Sendai, when you enter the Yamagata Line, you have to wait for the Shinkansen to pass by on a single line. There is a railroad track, and people rush into it, so you can run only up to 80 kilometers. I think this is an architectural mistake, so I will make it properly.
The key point at that time is not that it is important to run the Shinkansen on the legacy infrastructure, but that I think the point is what kind of data can be shared and what kind of applications can be created after carefully considering low-latency or uncompressed communication in the communication infrastructure. I will reply roughly.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is Go ahead.

Director-General: Three important points will come up in the future, and I would like to say only about hierarchical structure, monetization, finance and responsibility.
The hierarchical structure includes narrow streets that support life, main streets of towns, national highways, and expressways. It may be better not to say so. Some companies have various structures such as low-speed roads, medium-speed roads, and expressways. In the future, when creating a roadmap, I don't think it is a matter of simply revising the Road Traffic Law, but it is probably necessary to redefine the road field.
Whether or not to make a decision to put the hierarchical structure in the head when introducing the road map in the future is a quite big problem. Roads are roads, and roads are roads whether they are narrow streets or national roads. At present, there is no difference except where the administrators are different, so I think we will have to discuss what to do with this in the future.
The second point is that it is difficult to create a hierarchical structure only based on the functional theory of roads when doing so, and I think that the discussion of demand is necessary there. Electric power is also often described conceptually as low voltage, medium voltage, and high voltage. Just as there is a world in which electricity can be generated at high voltage and received at high voltage, and it is a world of low voltage after all, I think that transportation demand is also a demand that supports life, a demand that is the same level as the main street of a town, and a demand that supports intercity travel, and I think that the last thing is finance.
If the business architecture of the business model does not follow the back side of this, even if the system architecture is structured in a hierarchical structure based only on functional theory, it will follow the business architecture when it is written. I think it is a matter of whether or not the business, which continues to the supply and demand of each layer as a result, or the finance will follow properly. I would like to be aware of this as a common point of view. The basics are these two.
Finally, Mr. Kawabata's point on the theory of responsibility is a very important issue, and I believe that those who have been engaged in policy making on the ground are well aware of it. In fact, I have done a lot of regulatory reform in the National Strategic Special Zone, so the hardest thing for officials at the end is to say that it is okay to have discussions as they please, but they think that they will wipe off anyone.
Therefore, in order to create a roadmap that works properly, unless design is made to the landing point of the final responsibility theory, even if we say that only the systems we want to create should be created and that the responsibility should be taken by public office, public office will not accept any institutional theory that cannot take responsibility. Therefore, if the policy proposal side does not take into account the responsibility sharing theory and who will be responsible for which, it will not be realized.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the National Police Agency also want to do more and more new things, but they don't know the final responsibility well, and they just say hello. To put it the other way around, officials hate it the most. If you can understand this as a culture, I thought that not only cooperation between ministries and agencies but also cooperation between the public and private sectors would advance.
That's all.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
In closing, I would like to ask one thing. I believe that you are right. We sometimes fall into the misunderstanding of the purpose and means. What is the last thing? We need strong support from the people to take responsibility. If we do not always think about it, the more specialized we become, the more self-purposed we become. I have always been concerned about this. I hope that you will continue to do so at this meeting. Thank you very much.
Then, Mr. Muramatsu, please make your next presentation.

Mr. Muramatsu: I would like to give you a general answer about Robot Friendly Facility Promotion Organization. Nice to meet you.
Today, I have four points. Some of you may have never heard of the word robot-friendly in the first place, but I would like to start with an overview of it. The second point is about mobility in the last mile.
What is the last mile mobility? I would like to talk about the status of consideration of getting on an elevator, going through a flapper gate, and going over a small step. I would like to tell you about cooperative control of robots, and then finally I would like to talk about the future Issue. I would like to take some time.
First of all, what is robot-friendly? It refers to an environment in which robots are easy to introduce, both in terms of systems and hardware.
Until now, there have been sites where robots have been introduced individually, but if they are introduced individually, they are expensive, have sharp specifications for individual users, or lack generality, and in the end, they have not been widely used in society. In this situation, we are helping to lower the hurdles to introducing robots by unifying the specifications of each manufacturer by developing standards, etc., and by quantitatively visualization the size of a robot's tire in centimeters and what it can exceed. We are proceeding with the idea that unification of the hardware and software standards for robot introduction will make it easier for last mile drivers to introduce robots.
In order to realize such robot-friendly environments, the Robot implementation Model Construction Promotion Task Force was established in 2019 under the leadership of Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and NEDO. From there, we became independent in the facility management field and the last mile field, and are now working in the four fields of elevator, security, physical environment, and group management. I will explain the details later.
Our ultimate vision and goal is to solve the labor shortage with technology, not to lower the quality of the hospitality that Japan is proud of, and to improve it with technology. Currently, we are supporting the creation of robot-like environments and the introduction of robots with the cooperation of various people.
In order to achieve such a vision, what kind of Issue resolution process we are conducting is, if anything, a bottom-up approach, in which we are working to resolve various Issue problems by gathering people from across industries.
I think it would be easier to understand a specific example. First of all, I told you about an example of an elevator. For example, a cleaning robot cannot get on an elevator. The reason is that it is not equipped with hands and cannot press buttons. If you try to modify an elevator, it will cost 3 million to 5 million yen per elevator. If you just introduce one robot, it is difficult to achieve cost-effectiveness. Therefore, we will invite people who want to provide a new service that combines a robot and an elevator, form a conference body, and visualize where the Issue is. While discussing how people who use robots and facility owners can modify elevators, and how servicers can organize operations such as cleaning, security, and transportation, we will specify the area where all parties concerned can consider the cooperative areas at once. By standardizing the area, everyone will eventually gain cost benefits, economies of scale will be realized, and the labor of field surveys such as going to the site to measure the height of steps will be reduced. We are working on the process of solving your urgent cooperative areas from the bottom up. We are working on this process. Issue
As I said earlier, we are working across industries, but as members, we are working with the support of various people, including developers, manufacturers, and loan servicers, so as not to be biased toward any one industry. As you mentioned in Word, we are working together to create products that can be used in the form of market-oriented so as not to become product-oriented.
So far, I have been talking about the process, but now I would like to explain what we are doing to solve the last mile Issue.
First of all, in our conversation so far, I have mainly talked about transportation. When we say service robots, we are talking about these four, security, cleaning, transportation, and guidance. I will talk about them now.
This is also the beginning of the robot-friendly concept I mentioned at the beginning. Up until now, when there were robots from Company P, Company Q, and Company R, when you wanted to get on an elevator from Company A, Company B, and Company C, there were nine mechanisms, three by three. By standardizing this, we have standardized it, and we have created a foundation that if everyone uses this protocol, development can be made more cheaply. In fact, we have established a standard for the communication protocol when a robot and an elevator communicate.
At present, we are aiming to solve the urgent problem of Issue little by little, but to be honest, there are still many parts that have not been advanced at all. The reason is that although the standard has been established, introduction examples are yet to be seen, and even though you are living in Japan, I don't think there will be many opportunities to see robots. However, there are still many obstacles to introducing robots. While use cases has finally been established by involving robot manufacturers, elevator manufacturers, and various people, there are few people in charge who know the whole know-how. To break through this current situation, we are currently preparing an introduction and operation manual on the cooperation between robots and elevators.
At the same time, we are also working to brush up on and spread cooperation standards. Even if we can make a good product at one site, we cannot achieve economies of scale unless it spreads, so we are helping to spread it.
Next, I talked about the vertical movement of the elevator earlier, but I think there are various hurdles to moving the elevator horizontally. You talked about the last one meter, but when a robot arrives in front of your house, how to push the ping-pong button at the end and the robot leaves the object, we need to properly consider such a mechanism, and I am working on it now.
The use cases we are assuming is a relatively large facility, but it is necessary to sort out what kind of passage is assumed by each of the robots not only for delivery, but also for cleaning, guidance, and security.
For example, when cleaning the floor surface, we are working on this while considering what kind of use cases to use, which door to go through and where to go, and what to do when it is raining to use a security robot to go outside or inside the building.
As for the current situation, we have taken a step forward on the vertical movement of elevators, but we are also moving forward on the horizontal movement of elevators. We are currently working on how to ultimately expand the horizontal movement of elevators, including the equipment of each facility, such as doors and flapper gates. Specifically, we are currently proceeding with the issuance of standards and guidelines.
My third point is that we are conducting visualization in environments that are easy for robots to introduce. Barrier-free is a good example, or I think it can be compared, but it is a similar place. For example, a robot in a restaurant or the like may not be able to cross a step of even a few millimeters. If it is limited to a restaurant or such a place, it has an optimized structure, moves smoothly, detects an obstacle to see if there is something in front of it, and avoids it smoothly. However, since it is in a restaurant, it is not necessary to cross a step of 2 or 3 millimeters, but when the robot wants to go to a public space, it cannot carry things unless it crosses a step or a ditch. Under such circumstances, we are now working on visualization in robot-friendly environments step by step. This is the field of physical and environmental characteristics.
Currently, for example, if there are three robot manufacturers, everyone goes to the same place three times, make the same measurement three times, and perform the same test three times. If the physical environment is properly visualization, our robot will be fine because the step is 5 millimeters, and we can save the trouble of going all the way, and we can reduce the cost of introduction. In addition, for facility owners and other users who use robots, if such visualization proceeds, it will be more cost-effective, and the hurdles for introduction will be lowered, and it will be possible to determine that this robot can be introduced immediately. In addition, we believe that it will be effective in terms of the speed of introduction.
In the background of the current situation, we are working to standardize and visualize the parts that are currently handled by individual companies as much as possible, and to create environments in which various parties can enjoy the benefits of visualization.
Next is centralized management (group management). Ultimately, in group management at the last mile, how to prevent robots from meeting each other and how to prevent traffic jams are important, I think.
I am sorry to say this, but in the absence of group control, if a robot walking out of a store and a robot walking into a store meet, it is okay if they are human beings, but if they are robots themselves, if they are not group controlled, they will meet and stop. This is a problem that has not occurred yet because robot implementation is still in the future, but when robot implementation advances little by little, a situation occurs in which robots cannot do what humans can do very easily, and they cannot avoid each other when they meet. To solve this problem, we are promoting group management and cooperative control.
In such a case, I think there are three possibilities for standardization in the area of group control. The first is about systems. If one robot platform is installed in one facility and one town, and one city uses a platform called X and another uses a platform called Y, and the communication specifications are different among A, B, E, and F, it will be difficult to introduce and modify the robot system. That will increase the cost because each platform must be customized. Therefore, one possibility in cooperative areas is that the content of communication with the robot can be the same regardless of the platform.
The second point is that I believe there is a possibility that we can standardize cooperation between platforms when it comes to cooperation between various organizations, such as between facilities or cities.
Finally, in standardization area 3, I am writing about the world of analog. To put it in an extreme way, we are considering the possibility of solving the Issue problem in the near future by organizing analog operations such as asking robots to keep to the right and limiting the number of robots that can enter the elevator hall to one.
I explained the four Issue that we are working on from the bottom up in the near future. Finally, I would like to tell you that we are working on Issue in the medium to long term.
The first is business. Without business, robots will not expand, and I think it is important to realize cost effectiveness. In the example earlier, when you want to renovate an elevator, it is often not cost-effective to have only one robot or one service. Do you need to spend 5 million yen per elevator to operate one service? If there are two services, divide two by 2.5 million, divide three. If services using robots expand more and more, it will be easier to achieve cost effectiveness by sharing. While it is important to increase the number of such use cases, I would like to support the creation and expansion of business.
In order to realize this, I believe that mutual assistance and public assistance are important. In the last mile discussion earlier, there is data in public spaces, but on the other hand, if you enter a facility or indoors, there is no data anymore, so you cannot do anything. Then, the robot will stop. In other words, it is possible that the service cannot be provided at once, and people will be asked to help in the last mile, so the number of people will not decrease and the cost cannot be reduced. Therefore, I think it is necessary to consider the service, data, and infrastructure at once.
Next, I would like to talk about the responsibility demarcation point. I think this is a really difficult Issue. If the robots walk out of the elevator and say that they have met, whose fault is it? Is it the fault of one of the robots, the elevator that manages it, or the building operating system that controls it? With so many stakeholders, I think it is quite difficult to determine who and how to divide the responsibility demarcation point. In addition to the operation aspect I just mentioned, I think it is necessary to sort out the responsibility demarcation point step by step among many people, including who owns the robot, local government, the facility owner, or the servicer.
Finally, it is the most important part, and I of course understand that this is a part that is really not easy, but I think it is most important to foster social acceptance. Robots are not perfect. However, I don't think humans are perfect either. For example, smartphone zombie may be more dangerous than small, slow-moving robots. Even if a small robot is passing by, it may be enough to bump into it. If we demand perfection from robots too much, the cost will increase and the cost will remain high, so I think it is important to promote it by dividing and cooperating while acknowledging each other's parts that are not perfect. At that point, in connection with Mr. Izumi's presentation, I would like to present a catchy picture at the end. I wish I could draw such a world view. I hope to create a future in which robots are moving in various places and will cooperate in your lives. Thank you.
That's all.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
Then, I would like to discuss freely. Thank you for your cooperation on the web. What do you think?

Saito: While we are talking about LCA, there is also a story of a digital product passport. From the perspective of the circular economy, we are trying to create a platform in Japan just like in Europe. It is a little unclear what the relationship between the digital passport and the current Catena-X will be like. Now, to tell the truth, we are talking about the rules of the battery passport, and assuming that there is more of a Catena-X, people in the automobile industry are looking at it and saying that we need to create a battery passport system, or in other words, share such a service. , thank you very much.
DADC was also considering a service robot, but it is difficult to decide what kind of thing to consider, so it has stopped now.
On the other hand, in the world of building OS and what smart buildings are like, there is a movement to consider robots as well.
As you said earlier, for example, in relation to the cooperation with elevators, in terms of management of entry and exit, conversely speaking, in the same way as management of people, for example, on the building side, it is necessary to do the same thing, such as authentication of the robot, so while attaching an ID to the robot, confirmation information is received whether or not it is OK, and it is necessary to consider recognizing that this robot is a proper robot and allowing entry and exit. This is the same argument.
One of the stories I am doing here is that in a sense, if we discuss together in the world of smart buildings, there will be a solution in a certain building in addition to the solution by individual robots, so it would be good to have such a discussion.
In addition, there was a story earlier about a meeting between robots, but it is the same for drones. In fact, drones itself has separate operation management, and if you rush into it at a certain moment, you may collide with it. In such a case, you create information that puts the plan and current position of each drones on the space ID. For example, if you recognize in real time the information that my flight route is like this and that I will reach here at a certain moment, then it is dangerous to enter it, so let's wait a little or avoid it. You can think about operation management and route control.
In terms of service robots, there are currently various operators of operation management, and whether all of them will be operated by individual operators, or whether they will share a certain space with everyone and enter it while confirming each other what time it is okay to enter it, is probably a story of how to create an architecture. Perhaps such a discussion should be made on a similar architecture if it is a world in which robots are operated, and in terms of service robots, within the overall picture of drones's team working on autonomous mobile robots, for example, what kind of safty and security world is being created? This is the second point.
Third, in the IoT world, including service robots, we need to talk about governance mechanisms, including security. In other words, not only robots alone and those handled by the Robot Friendly Association, but also, for example, as an extension of the data strategy that Digital Agency will be working on, there will be talk about whether it is OK for most of them to use IoT data, and there will probably be talk about how to design cooperative areas. This is not limited to the scope of METI's responsibility, but the scope of Digital Agency's responsibility is also common to cyber security, so I think it would be good to have Director General Murakami think about cooperation with such organizations, mainly in Digital Agency.
As an extension of the previous story, there is a story in which various service robots enter indoors and individually investigate, for example, what the barrier-free situation is like, but at that time, there is a story in which spatial information is shared in the building OS.
So, for example, if a service robot recognizes it somewhere, it can put the information in a space where it can be shared, and another robot can control it while watching it, and it can also take over the new situation that it has recognized. I am thinking about sharing spatial information. In the debate over who owns the data, it is necessary to create a cooperative areas in the public domain. I would like to see such a discussion included in the data strategy.
Earlier, Yamamoto-san was talking about visualization of mobility in ITS. So, the story of visualization of mobility is the same as that of autonomous mobile robots today. Earlier, it was an image of grasping the congestion situation of roads. Now, in the story of how to visualize robots in space, I think it is easier to decide the route of the robot if we share the location situation of the robot and the people, including the story of collision avoidance with people. Then, it is better to have it in cooperative areas.
Therefore, in the Digital Agency Data Strategy, there is not much discussion about how to handle actual private sector data and how to handle real data. However, in order to provide various public services and good services, I think it would be good to have a discussion about anonymous validation. While advancing such a discussion, I think it would be good to talk about understanding the actual supply and demand situation, which was mentioned by Mr. Yamamoto earlier.
To put it the other way around, I think it is also necessary to consider how to handle data in this kind of forum in Digital Agency. If data held by private people can be used as public data, I think it is better to raise it as such data in Digital Agency, and create an environment in which it can be used across ministries and agencies.
That's all.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
How do you like it? Go ahead.

Kawabata Member: It was very organized and easy to understand, and I was asking because I thought it was very important to be able to grasp Issue very well.
Perhaps because there are not many women in the technical committee, it is the current situation that if you call them in detail in various places such as mobility, or if you call them in detail, each field is working hard to discuss them. I think one important thing is to look at them as a whole, including drones, as Commissioner Saito mentioned earlier, rather than just robots.
Also, from the customer side, the user side, and the service side, for example, robot-friendly is actually human-friendly, and when I was raising children, the places where I can use a stroller are quite limited. In that sense, even among people with handicaps, if a robot-friendly environment is developed, for example, a blind person can use a smartphone or a small sensor machine to create an environment in which it is easy to walk or guide in this building.
When we create robot-friendly environments, it is difficult to get capital unless there are many people who use them. In that sense, I think it would be great if we could create the value of human-friendly services. When humans use them, robots will be able to see the people's flow of humans, so in that sense, I think robot-friendliness will increase.
In addition, when I get on various servicers, there are still many people who do not think that I will be a servicer using a robot. Therefore, for example, although I am not saying that I want you to do it separately, I thought that it would be good to have a concept of a building in which, for example, robot management fees are charged, rather than the burden on the person who uses the robot to distribute and move on the same floor when the robot comes in, even though the movement up and down the building is managed by an elevator.
When that happened, there were loan servicers who used it because it would be a loss if they did not use it because they had moved in there. If a building was a little crowded, a large company would come in, and if they did it as an experiment, the top company would do it, and the loan servicers at the base thought that our industry might be able to use a service using a robot, and they grew delusions on their own.
I think it has just begun, but when children born today become adults, there will be a complete labor shortage. Moreover, I would like to leave to the next generation things that will not cause illness or illness due to simple work. I thought that I would like to think about such things.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
How do you like it? Go ahead.

Akimoto Acting Member: My name is Akimoto . Thank you for your explanation.
I am related to drones. It is a friendly, so-called harmony with people, or coexistence. I don't know whether it is a closed space or an open space. In such a situation, problems related to safety and reliability have emerged. I think it is an indoor robot. Is there a registration system for robots?
And as for liability insurance, for example, even if it's a bicycle, it's not a liability insurance, but I think there are some that have special provisions for bodily injury or compensation for damage. Do you have such a design?
Actually, when I started drones, what I said at the first Public-Private Consultative Meeting was that drones also does not have a registration system, and that infrastructure cannot be developed without a registration tax and a weight tax, so-called funds. In particular, the registration tax is a national tax, and the national government is the registration tax to be spent on research development and other such things. The weight tax is a local local government. Where there is social implementation, various infrastructure must be developed and a person in charge must be assigned. Various things will happen, and resources will naturally be required. Based on this, I proposed that a registration tax and a weight tax be created and that they be used to properly develop social infrastructure. However, Ministry of Finance did not approve of this, and I ended up making a proposal.
Of course, that kind of thing happens in the building as well. Of course, the association has to collect money and do such things, and we also have to develop liability insurance. Could you tell me about that?

Chairman Ishida: Since it is , may I ask a question?

Mr. Hidaka: I am not specialized in robots, but today I am familiar with infrastructure and architecture, so I would like to ask Mr. Muramatsu if robots move digitally. When we think about environmental infrastructure, it is impossible to be 100% safe. For example, it is said that a fail-safe design is used, and if there is a failure, it stops. That is why it is good. But it is not so, but it is low speed, so it is okay to collide. Or it is okay to cover it with insurance. I think the necessary sensors and necessary operation methods will change depending on the installation.
In particular, when it comes to infrastructure, there are cases in which it is good to run and cases in which it is not good to stop. I thought that the overall architecture, concept, and system system would change depending on this. I would be grateful if you could tell me what you noticed while working on this issue and if there are any points that would be helpful.
That's all.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is , please.

Koda Member: Thank you, .
I would like to ask a question. Even if it is robot-friendly and does not require perfection, I would like to ask one question. For example, if a robot crashes into an elevator and breaks it, is it the responsibility of the robot? If a robot crashes into an elevator and breaks it, is it the responsibility of the operator of the elevator? If a robot crashes into a person and breaks it, is it the responsibility of the person? If a person is injured, is it the responsibility of the robot? How do you manage how to take responsibility?
The other point is that I think it would be convenient in an age when robots are friendly and come and go around normally, but on the other hand, what measures are being taken to prevent a suspicious robot from entering the office and taking data? I would like to know those two points.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is , please.

Member of Hatano: Mr. Muramatsu , it was a very easy presentation. Thank you very much.
When I was shown the robot initiative again today, I had the impression that it was very close to the initiative of automated driving. I think that almost all of Issue has many common parts, although the severity of the matter is large and small. I had the impression that most of the problems could be solved if you could use the know-how of automobiles, but I have two questions about what you showed me today.
I understand that you are actively working on standardization. You are also very concerned about standardization in automobiles, but in the field of robots, I would like to ask if you are actively working to internationally launch the standards that are currently available.
The other is that coexistence with nearby users is very much expected. On the automobile side, in particular, in automated driving, there is a limit to what we can do by ourselves, so from the perspective of coexistence, we would like to see a division of roles with nearby traffic participants. If you have any examples of promotion, information provision or thorough education for nearby users, I would like to see them introduced.
That's all.

Deputy Member Tanaka: I think it would be good if . I will be speaking on behalf of Mr. Okamoto.
As Mr. Saito said earlier, I would like to explain a little about what will happen if it is connected to the Building OS and what the supply and demand will be in terms of energy, and then I would like to ask you a question.
For example, in Softbank's building, there is a story that various cameras can be attached to the building OS to capture people, and the technology is advanced. In addition, when many robots appear in the future, if we are talking about friendliness, it is only when we have to be careful about robots, such as when people are a little in the way. In that case, the building OS wants to provide energy, such as charging the battery when the sun is shining in the daytime.
In that case, robots will not be able to move as much as they want, when they want. Considering that we will be in such an age, in fact, we, electric power companies, are trying to use renewable energy from area in area, not in large areas, but in small areas, such as EVs and low-voltage areas. When we consider carbon neutrality in area and the balance between supply and demand of energy in area, buildings will be the starting point of a big point, and in fact, robots must be considered as an energy resource. We are just starting to discuss this with the Energy Agency. Please tell us how much we should push forward in the near future and whether it is okay to do so a little later. Thank you.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is , Mr. Muramatsu, there were a lot of questions, but could you please answer?

Mr. Muramatsu: I would like to give you a general answer about .
First of all, I think the key point is business. Now, while you are telling us a lot of thought-provoking content, I think the most important thing is whether it is cost-effective or not. If you spend a lot of money, you can definitely do it, but when you want to really scale it, I think cost-effectiveness is the most important thing. When we focus on reducing costs, for example, for an event in which robots stop by bumping into each other, I think it is important to consider what can be done with the least cost. However, as I mentioned at the end earlier, there are still parts that have not been honestly elaborated in terms of business, so I would like to accelerate consideration in the future based on the contents of the comments I received today.
My second point is how many stakeholders I can increase and whether I can expand my perspective. As was announced by Commissioner Hidaka the other day, there are many stakeholders such as governments, users, and loan servicers, so it is important to build logic and involve these people in the economic zone. As you commented earlier, I thought it was a very good example that people who use strollers are happy to have visualization of the uneven situation. If you look at it from a narrow perspective of a robot, you can think about the cost versus business just by looking at it, but if you expand it to a place where it will be more convenient as a facility or a really good town, I think it will be easier to evaluate the economic efficiency and increase the number of people who can be involved. I would like to expand the scope of consideration for such places in the future.
At that time, we will talk about a registration system that excludes suspicious robots. We are considering a registration system right now. While considering this, I learned that it is necessary to consider a system with a broader perspective. Robots are not so common now, so we are considering a registration system at the present time, but I have a sense of Issue that we must work on it, and I think we must focus on it.
In addition, as we advance standardization, I recognize that internationalization is also an important topic. In particular, Asian companies are strong in the field of robots. Markets have not yet been established in Europe, the United States, and other countries, but in Singapore, I understand that they are developing building operating systems. While cooperating with such overseas countries, I recognize that it is necessary for Japan to consider and negotiate what kind of field it will play, and I would like to offer my minor support.
Electric power is not an urgent Issue because only a few robots have been introduced yet. However, as the number of things that robots can do increases, I think this problem will become important. I think you talked about communication somewhere earlier, but just as it is said that 4G will not work and that communication volume will be insufficient unless it is 5G, I think the more high-performance robots are, the more electrical Issue will increase. In addition, the current Issue for robots around electric power is chargers. If there are 10 robots, there are 10 types of chargers, and it is necessary to prepare 10 chargers. If 10 robots are arranged, there will be no space, so we recognize that it is necessary to unify or share charging standards.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
I would appreciate it if you could allow me to make a few remarks, but I believe that service robots will expand rapidly. Just now, we have established a cooperation between service robots and drones, and safety standards and various other considerations are being made for delivery robots aiming for implementation, so I would like to ask you to do that. As Mr. Saito said, I think it is really important to think under what kind of architecture the whole thing will be considered.
The Organization for the Promotion of Robot-Friendly Facilities is asking us to make private sector, and so is home delivery and drones. The world of self-help and mutual assistance is important, but I think there are things that the government can do without spending money. Public assistance. In that sense, as Mr. Saito said, such a big vision and initiative is the responsibility of the Digital Zenso and the mobility Working Group.
I would like to change the subject a little. The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT) and public transportation are facing a crisis in a truly tragic manner, and the director in charge recently made a statement that the national government should take a step forward. I would be grateful if you could consider such a matter.
Mr. Murakami, please.

Director-General: To add a few words, robots are already being used in factories and industries to a frightening extent, but I think it is better to appeal the gap in why they are not being used so much in citizens' lives. To put it simply, it is a theory of responsibility. The main body to be centrally managed and the distributed cooperative management by it have already been realized, but the moment it becomes citizens' lives, the central management center does not take the business risk because no one can tell who will take the business risk.
Therefore, in fact, the same problem can be found in both autonomous driving and drones, but I actually think that it is this robot that is probably the easiest to be the top runner in the discussion of the social responsibilities sharing theory. While discussing how to ensure that each person can be responsible autonomously as a distributed entity without being responsible for centralized management, from both the technical and institutional sides, using robots as a subject, I think that it is probably better to envision a future in which life robot service operators will integrate into the mobility operators who are the most closely connected to citizens' lives in the hierarchical structure described earlier. I think it would be good if you could discuss this by carefully looking at this point, although there are suspicious robots and others.
Also, regarding the data strategy, I would like to summarize it somewhere and explain the outlook.
That's all.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
Then, as for today's final presentation, Mr. Kawabata, could you please give it to me?

Kawabata Member: .
When I heard about robots today, I heard that when I was working as an engineer in a factory, we used to stagger our lunch time by 15 minutes and use the same cafeteria. Unlike humans, we don't get hungry at the same time, so when I heard about energy, I thought that it would be good for robots to stagger their lunch time. So, it might not be good if people were suddenly sent from rural areas to postwar Japan for postwar reconstruction and they were taken by robots. However, it sounded a little humorous that humans would work there and create a cafeteria without a place to eat, rather than doing it spontaneously. I thought that kind of thing could be done.
When it comes to automobiles, which is my field of expertise, many people still think of automobiles when they think of mobility, so I would like to talk to you today while thinking that they are treated as mainstream.
If anything, in the case of automobiles, as an industry, how can we bring the field in which one automobile is sold to a certain extent to digitalization, and how can we incorporate environmental issues into social initiatives that are suitable for the digitalization Protocol? Most of the places where such changes are said to be required are actually Kyoto and environmental measures, such as the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, so I would like to talk about them.
It may not matter, but as I told you earlier, I was originally an engineer in a research institute. At that time, I was engaged in design of wire harnesses, and seeing electricity in the whole car was not done at that time, but it became electric, so, for example, seeing electricity in the whole car occurred at that time. Therefore, I thought that seeing electricity in the whole car often occurred from the inside to the inside.
I am an automobile journalist, I work at a strategic consulting firm for technology planning, and recently I have been making comments on Nikkei, and I have been teaching at a university specializing in EVs and electric vehicles. I am a member of this committee. Thank you.
Today is a limited time, so I am dividing it into agenda items, but I will skip a lot, so I would like to discuss what is missing during the Q & A session.
When it comes to automobiles, it is difficult to understand structural change if I lightly touch it, so I think it is a premise of the automobile industry.
It is called CASE. This is based on the marketing strategies of German companies. It is said that Japanese companies are called CASE. Originally, it was called ACS and was discussed even in English-speaking countries. Probably, CASE is easy to call and ACS is difficult to pronounce. The flow of connected, automated, shared, and electric vehicles has become full-scale, and mobility has entered a period of change. Perhaps because the Japanese automobile industry has developed, it seems that Japanese companies tend to specialize in in-vehicle technologies such as electric vehicles and automated vehicles and discuss them in depth. This is where the amount of information is large.
However, it is just individual in-vehicle technology, so I think it is okay for engineers to specialize in it. When thinking about this, I think it is necessary to look at the development fields of people in that sector. I think it is about how many years it can be done, but I think it is better not to specialize in individual in-vehicle technology.
The reason is that there was a time in the 80s when only OA equipment was connected to the company. It was like a car from a little earlier. Young people who don't know, when they see a film called "Take Me Skiing," they think that this company doesn't work because they don't have a computer on their desk even though they are in the sales department. At that time, only OA equipment was connected, and people who had a computer used it as a standalone computer or calculated it with a slide rule and a notebook.
After that, computers and smartphones came out, but before smartphones came out, computers still had a lot of stand-alone seats, and they were connected to the Internet, and smartphones came out, and people could do various things while walking, and it was like human beings were connected. That's what cars finally came to. The reason is that cars couldn't get a stable line while moving at high speed, and cars were 20 years behind in terms of communication.
If you understand only this, what will happen in the world after connected cars, what will happen in the future, will be very important. For example, there is a company like Sun that manufactures PCs one by one and hardware, but it disappeared and became Facebook. However, people who create services after connected cars are actually a large industry. If you understand this, I would like you to look at the world ahead.
If we structure it, the mobility and service value chain will be quite wide. It is more like the horizon is going to the back. The conventional automobile industry is only engaged in the automotive technology on the far left. They sometimes said that Tesla is amazing or the corporate value will explode, but it is just a development of cars and automotive technology on the premise of connected.
Actually, we are only doing connected operations, and the operations that will be in shared and service areas in the future are the same as those being done by railways and Toei buses in Tokyo. In fact, operations will make money even if we don't talk about it. So, Mr. private business, who can make money even if he doesn't talk about it, doesn't think about mobility so much. He has been specializing in operations for a long time. Now, if we operate a small mobility that we are investing in, we will definitely make money. It will be a social infrastructure. But if a small mobility is involved in operations, there will be businesses that will operate without investing a lot. I think we have started to think about it due to the novel coronavirus, but operation operators who have been eaten by people will probably be invaded. That will be the point at which we will be able to compete.
Then, Google and Facebook will come out. People are talking about GAFA and BAT, but if something that works is connected, we might be interested in it. The market is big, so we will think about it carefully. But, Google and others are attacking us. So, they have no intention of making cars, and they have no sense of rivalry. Rather, they have to think about whether they can take advantage of the delicious contents in cars or whether they can start some business. This kind of automobile industry will be difficult.
I teach environmental energetics. Like this, I teach scientific knowledge and social knowledge at the same time. It is difficult to work only on the left side, so I teach that I want you to see the social mechanism on the right side. In fact, this is the same for creating industry.
In terms of the environment, the Kyoto Mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol are important, and it was said that it is good to make money positive through capitalism. However, it is important to say that reducing greenhouse gases such as CO2 and making them negative will be evaluated in the same way as economic effects. This is something that each country will continue to protect after the Kyoto Protocol, so it is important not to think that anything related to global environmental problems is a cost.
Scope 3 and LCA, which have been talked about recently, are very important. In particular, although everyone was thinking about doing something about 1 and 2 by themselves, it is now being said that the CO2 generated from purchased and sold goods, the CO2 generated by people who used cars after selling them, and the CO2 generated by people who consumed gasoline after selling it, are also responsible. This is quite important because there are precedents.
The energy issue was skipped a lot, and 23, mainly in Europe, there were already many companies that could not protect 95 grams of CO2, and it was in 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, that we did a lot of work. Because information did not come in, it was not reported in Japan. So, there are quite a few companies dealing with it. Because of that, Tesla actually became profitable. It was a credit sale.
When we discuss whether we can contribute to global environmental conservation, the way of calculation is actually different. For example, Canon Global Research Institute provides information on Volvo. It is said that if a design runs 200,000 kilometers, and the energy mix runs 200,000 kilometers on a global basis, an EV is actually more environmentally friendly than an internal-combustion engine. It is said that this is quite severe when considered based on Japanese standards. The energy mix is also calculated to be lower in the EU mix and such a low in renewable energy. It goes without saying that the Japanese energy mix is quite severe.
The other day, I saw a company doing such a thing. It was an old factory that was about to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Michelin Guide. I saw it being renovated to make it the latest factory. It is being done in Italy, but if you look closely, it looks like a French country pro. The reason is that more than 80% of the energy mix in France is nuclear power, which is not an energy mix that can be applied in other countries, so it is actually under the control of French capital. The renewable energy plant of the Michelin Guide is also an Italian plant, so what we did here is easier to use in other parts of Europe. So we positioned this plant as a pilot plant and transformed it into an environmental plant.
It is quite an old factory, but the number of production is 1.5 million, which is quite a number, and we are making a lot of EV eco-tires represented by Tesla.
In fact, we were already thinking about the entire life cycle of tires, and we went so far as to obtain approval for tires that use about 50% renewable materials, not as experimental tires, but as tires for sale.
The next 29 are quite important. Industry 4.0, digitalization, AI, and robots are used in factories. As Murakami-san said earlier, they are used in factories quite a lot. When I see this, I think it will be applied to the real world.
As I said earlier, who is responsible for this? In the case of a company, it is the top, so the leader takes responsibility as the leader. However, it is not a statement by one company. The CEO participated in UN discussions soon after his inauguration, had a conversation with the President of the United Nations, and even made a closing speech. He is the person who made the rocket start. I think it is important that such a person creates and permeates such an overall picture at the top, and takes responsibility for bad earnings because it is his own fault.
The reason why we are doing such a thing is that we are talking about generating 20 to 30 percent of profits from businesses other than tires, and in that case, we are creating a person in charge of cross-cutting, doing our own capabilities, and cooperating with the capabilities of other companies, including cooperation and public assistance.
It is about the Catena-X. The Catena-X and the digitalization of the automobile industry are quite important. Now, LCA is always included in the automobile catalog. This is the A180d, which is a little earlier than the Catena-X, and I am sorry, but it is listed in the catalog. This is what is required for the product.
However, since the automobile industry is large, for example, if industries are included, it is said that even small companies can collect and calculate CO2 emissions. Catena-X, a platform for exchanging and sharing data between supply chains, has been established as a platform for information sharing. It is like Germany is pulling EU money and doing its best.
Originally, I had already established a network in quality control, so there was an atmosphere in which I did not want to participate very much. However, after Daimler and BMW joined the network, we participated in the network by providing our own systems, so it became a Germany-wide network.
In fact, the benefits of this are clear, and digitalization's moves are consistent with quality improvement and productivity improvement. There is a debate over whether Industry 4.0 is not necessary because Japanese companies have done quite a lot of this, and Catena-X tends to get bogged down in the debate over who will bear the cost. Even if there is a volume of goods that crosses national borders, it will be easier for visualization to do so if CO2 emissions are unified and quality control is possible.
In addition, Industry 4.0 means that we can produce many types of products in small quantities without being affected by blue-collar workers, and it will be easier to do quality control. In fact, blue-collar workers are very high-quality, and even white-collar workers are high-quality people who deliver them from design to factories, so we rely on them. In fact, if there is a 2024 problem, it will be difficult to guarantee blue-collar workers when they enter Reform of Working Practices for small and medium-sized enterprises. I think it will be difficult to do so in time. So, I think Issue is quite urgent.
I think all of these projects are the same, but I have made them while thinking that it is safe to say at the Digi-Cho Conference that they will not change even if digitalization progresses. Commercialization is not a product, but a design of the whole image of customers, services, and platforms. If this is not done, digitalization will be meaningless. It is a pattern in which digitalization and DX are considered as a whole, and it will be dwarfed if it is limited to the automobile industry. Therefore, this figure looks at the entire community development.
Even if we work hard only on the digital platform, there are places where the physical platform does not seem to follow, so we look at the whole picture as a means to provide services.
This is to look at physical platforms and digital platforms, and the platform will provide and improve the functions to provide services. I think it would be better for the conference body to support that. But then, people who provide services needed by society will appear in the world. There are only two things that are good for humans in digital. They can share experiences and give feedback to services. So, I think the conference body should use this to strengthen the platform. I am participating in this conference. Thank you.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is . Thank you very much.
What do you think? I would like to ask for a discussion.
Then, Akimoto-san, please.

Akimoto Acting Member: My name is Akimoto .
I think you are absolutely right that it is important for physical things.
In particular, since Mr. Suzuki is in the aviation field, I believe that he will provide technologies in the aviation field, and I believe that technologies in the automobile field will be the base of mobility in this country.
From the perspective of industrial competitiveness, I think that Japanese strong technologies are equivalent to those in the field of automobiles. I think it is important to apply them to the mobility field, such as unmanned vehicles and flying cars. Of course, design must be done so that high-quality, highly reliable, low-cost parts can be used. The most important point is that automobiles and flying cars, drones, can be charged at a constant voltage or at a common voltage. For example, if flying cars can be charged using an EV charger, flying cars can be dropped off at various locations. The same applies to hydrogen, the infrastructure for hydrogen supply.
If you want to fly long distances in such places in the future, I think there will be flying cars loaded with hydrogen. By sharing infrastructure and parts in cooperation with automobiles, low-cost flying cars will come out. If you use aviation parts, it will cost hundreds of millions of yen, but if you use automobile parts, it will cost tens of millions. I think social implementation will advance. You don't have to build unnecessary infrastructure. You can use it in various places, so I think mobility sharing will work well. This is my personal opinion.
Mr. Suzuki will probably tell you to use aircraft parts, but I think you should use automobile parts.
That's all.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
As you emphasized, I think LCA is particularly important, and there are various ways to earn money through operations, such as subscription and new service provision, but I think that the more we do so, the more important Scope3 on the downstream side will be. How to think about that is a very big theme.
Then, Saito-san, please.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is In addition to Mr. Saito's question, I would like to ask a related question. Mainly in the EU, I wonder if Carbon-relatedfinancialdisclosures are in a different place from Catena-X. But it will be expanded further, and the talk of carbon is only a part of nature, so it will be like Nature-related financial disclosures. I am really seriously thinking about it. In Japan, the more you go to small and medium-sized enterprises and traditional industries, the stronger the atmosphere is. I would be grateful if you could tell me what the atmosphere is like in that area in addition to Mr. Saito's question.

Kawabata Member: First of all, I think it is very correct to use the same thing as a car, and I think there are safety standards, but as for chargers, it is overwhelmingly better to use a car and have other people use it, and I think it is a very good idea considering the location and various restrictions, so I often discuss this with people in various industries. I thought it was a good idea because with digital technology, if data on who uses it, who does not use it, and how much time is available becomes available, it will be easier to install it.
First of all, regarding the digital product passport that Mr. Saito talked about, in Europe, it is reused at the moment. There are many things that are not industrially available. Therefore, recycling is disadvantageous as an industrial structure. So, I want to use it once or twice, and after that, if the quality cannot be maintained, I will reuse it. With reuse as a premise, I would like to go to recycling next. In particular, regarding batteries, I did not have time to explain because there was no industry in the first place, but when we compete for resources, we want to keep those resources that seem to be important as resources in our region. I think important resources such as those in batteries and palladium in vehicles are good examples, but in the last 10 years or so, it has become more than three times as much as platinum. We also want to keep those resources in the region, so there is a strong idea of using ID management like a digital product passport. So, we treat it as if it would be a circular economy if we make it cool and easy for everyone to understand.
In the background, not only Catena-X but also GAIA-X, which was released a little while ago, is being managed properly on the cloud side. In fact, it seems to be understood that it is related to not only the automobile industry but also all manufacturing industries. Therefore, automobiles are positioned as a large user among them.
The topic of Carbon-relatedfinancialdisclosures is actually dropped as a material, but there is a concept of green finance and green bonds, so I think it is included in the concept of financing. I wonder if it will come up in that discussion.
The issuance of green bonds itself has increased rapidly, and the volume has increased considerably during the COVID-19 pandemic. What I saw was two to three years ago, and the date is old, but at that time, the issuance of green bonds increased by a record 30%. It is like a bond that defines the purpose of nature conservation more clearly. One of them, for example, specializing in CO2, is attracting attention. It is issued in the form of green bonds. I skipped the topic of COP, but what can be decided in COP in the world can only be decided here on global environmental issues. It cannot be decided in Institutional Arrangement for Partnership (IAP), so biodiversity in COP15 is too important a Issue, and it is so bad that it can't be helped, so it is coming in order, like biodiversity was done first.
Following the COPs, for example, the Kyoto Protocol came out and is important, but biodiversity was discussed considerably at COP15, and recently it was also on the agenda at COP16 and COP26. Amidst this, discussions are underway on an operational framework such as Nature Governance-linked Bonds, which was decided at COP15. If the World Bank and all developed countries participate in greening borrowing, it will be like creating green bonds internationally for emerging countries.
Until now, it has been said that the role models of developed countries have taken advantage of capitalism, but if emerging countries pursue it, global environmental problems will accelerate, and it will be a problem if it dies out. So, let's buy a role model, and put bonds and finance on it. So, I think it should be said in two lines, that is, European domestic circumstances and that is, let's eliminate European Institutional Arrangement for Partnership (IAP) with American capitalism.
Then, if each government can operate such that interest rates on government bonds can be lowered, for example, if they are used for environmental purposes, it will be easier for emerging countries to become role models for so-called sustainable circular economies, rather than role models for countries that grew up with conventional capitalism. Such things were discussed at COP15 and COP26, and it was largely because they began to move into finance in a realistic manner.
The reason for this is that, since the Kyoto Protocol was changed to the Paris Agreement, not 21 countries but more than 190 countries have agreed to participate, which I believe is quite a big opportunity.
I don't have enough knowledge, so it's within the range I know.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .

Deputy Member Tanaka: I think it would be good if Tokyo Electric Power Company Power Grid.
As a continuation of what I said earlier, when a market is established and the price of energy from CO2 is decided internationally, your energy conservation and decarbonization actions may be, for example, better to close a factory and sell it when the market is expensive than to make your own products.
It would be good to do this financially, but electricity needs to be connected by lines, so we are balancing it. In addition, as I mentioned earlier, we are stabilizing the grid with low voltage and the cooperation of customers. I think it is good to connect energy resources digitally before finance and use them for incentives in combination with decarbonization actions. I would like to ask you to connect energy resources digitally first and use them for other multi-use, EV, robot, and drones purposes.
That's all.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is I would like to ask you not only that, but also to say that you are thinking like this and say a little more.

Deputy Member Tanaka: I think it would be good if For example, I am often told about EV buses. I would like to connect with Mr. Izumi at the beginning. There is a shortage of bus drivers, so even if there is an EV bus, there is no one to drive it. In the first place, I cannot drive it. For example, how do you think about carbon neutrality? On weekdays, we want to move our employees to the plant in the morning, but in the daytime, sunlight comes out, so we want to empty the storage battery of the EV in the morning so that it can be charged there. There is a story about who will be riding on holidays, and we will guide tourists there and use incentives. This is a detailed story, but I think it is what the Director-General always says about connecting use cases vertically, by time zone, and by area characteristics.

Kawabata Member: However, I think it will be such a story if it spreads in developed countries. Probably, the story of extending finance is to extend finance to emerging countries where physical platforms are not enhanced, so in the case of Japan where such physical platforms are distributed but not optimized, I think it will be another discussion.
Japan is quite unique. The point is that when it comes to the need to reduce CO2 emissions, for example, when the number 46 is announced, there are not many countries in which the number accumulated by the industrial world plus the efforts of the people are included. I think countries in which the social system is not perfect but the people's morals can be adjusted are rather special.

Deputy Member Tanaka: I think it would be good if global companies could be in that area. However, since industries will have to go global in the future, I am worried about the energy balance in the financial market when it comes to the fact that Japanese businesses will come out in a form similar to European businesses. It may be that there is no need to worry so much at the moment, but I would like to steadily work on the front side.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is To make the discussion larger or smaller in a sense, I often serve as a member of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, and it is related to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism. About 67% of Japan's total CO2 emissions are related to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism on a consumption basis. The transportation sector accounts for about 20%. The business of private sector, such as office buildings, is also related to building administration and city planning administration. Households are also related. The total of these three sectors is more than 50%. Plus, in the construction industry, we have only been thinking about scope 1. We have only been thinking about heavy equipment at the site, but if you think about steel and cement, it is amazing. 67% will be out.
The Green Challenge by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism was compiled about three years ago. In the same year, if the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT) implements the Environmental Action Plan, which is more rigid, the total will be about 80 million tons. Who will handle the remaining portion? Actually, the Government of Japan is saying that each ministry will cooperate and collaborate in the same way. However, there are many pitfalls in terms of the current business flow. How to clarify these pitfalls and how to cooperate have been announced today.
I am wondering who will make such things bigger, or frame them, and I am not so confident that we will be able to come out there. Such things are really important, but in that sense, we are really in an irresponsible system. I think such things are the world of architecture that Professor Saito is working on, and I think it is a part that can demonstrate its power in data connections, so I think it is really important to point out such viewpoints as problems here.
Go ahead.

Director-General: : Thank you very much for your kind words.
I would like to make a proposal to set up a frame to fuse make and use.
I was in charge of negotiations at COP15, COP16, and COP17 at the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, so when I make bilateral credits, it is very naive. Why do only the people who make the CO2 emissions from automobiles have to take care of them? I made the ones I use. This does not reach the consumers who use them. It is the same as the discussion of tax-bearing capacity in tax theory, and I can't take it anyway.
Why the responsibility for use, the responsibility for production, and the demarcation point of a company are actually design in various social systems is in line with the discussion of emissions. In fact, I first worked on the legislation of the Products Liability Law. I was assisted by Mr. Mazda of Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. of the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association. To put it the other way around, the Products Liability Law is to draw a line between the responsibility of the user and the responsibility of the manufacturer first, and then social responsibilities is design as an exception to the tort law. When we are wondering what is really going on, we always hear the story of which is worse if you cut your finger with a knife. However, in an era where the population is increasing, after thoroughly separating the production and use sides and clarifying the social responsibilities of the production side, it is possible to make a lot of money if you make a lot of money, so the part that is profitable in the industry can be returned to the lives of consumers in the form of salary. In the Showa era, it was such a social design, so I think it was allowed, but we are about to decrease in population. Rather, when it comes to how to use technology in a society where depopulation is progressing, if the responsibility relationship between the person who has the technology and the person who uses it remains the same in the Showa era, we will probably not be able to keep it. design
Nevertheless, when such a thing happens in the Olympic Village, I think it is accelerating the direction in which the side that makes, the side that provides service, and the side that gets on are separated.
That's all I have to say, but I think the problem that we have to worry about when we go to the field is that, for example, when we try to start operation with self-driving vehicles, what is happening is that there is no one who can bear the depreciation cost of the vehicles to be manufactured when a large number of vehicles are not sold, so it does not start as a business, and it is not possible to get rid of the problem of repeating subsidies for a long time.
This is partly because I came to Digital Agency, but when I was engaged in information-oriented policy for a long time, I did not always try to imitate it, but in fact, even in the early days when computers were made, a national policy company called Nihon Densho Co., Ltd. was established, and it purchased and rented all of them. Overall, when new technologies are introduced into a market with a decreasing population, I feel that there will be no answer if we simply pass on the burden of depreciation of the equipment to consumers or to the budget deficit of local government, unless we consider who will bear the burden of depreciation.
In that sense, just as it is said that there is a product life cycle between the manufacturer and the user, and aside from the fact that circular economy is also a marketing term of a certain consulting company, I think there is such a thing. Since the user actively commits to making the product, the mechanism for reuse is made into a set, and the manufacturer does not run away from being used and dives into it. With that as a rule, the country will make a design, so we can dive into each other's world with peace of mind from both sides.
When I write Mobility Roadmap, if I can boil down the discussion, it would be good if I could take that philosophy into consideration a little, so I said this as a personal opinion rather than a summary.
That's all.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is .
This will be the second meeting, and there will be three more meetings. I sincerely hope that the discussions will expand and deepen in this way, and that the relationship with various parties will be clarified.
Not only that, but it will also connect to the mobility Working Group.

Director-General: We will continue to be directly connected.

Chairman Ishida: Since it is , in the sense that it will expand further, I am glad that I was able to speak very actively to Mr. Murakami and Mr. Izumi today. I would like to value such an atmosphere.
That's all for today.
Finally, we would like to ask for an administrative communication from the office.

Mr. Suzuki, Planning Officer: Thank you very much for your time today.
Next time is Wednesday, June 28th, two weeks later, at the same time, I would like to ask for a hybrid of this place and online.
In addition, as with this time, I would like to proceed with the presentation and discussion. Thank you.
Thank you for your time today.