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

16th Meeting of Working Team, Liaison Council for Promotion of Digital Common Infrastructure between National and Local Governments

Last Updated:

Outline

  • Date and Time: Thursday, October 1, 2026 from 15:30 to 16:30
  • Venue: Online

Proceedings

  • 1. Opening
  • 2. Proceedings
    • 1. Common Use Candidates (selected in 2026 (= Cycle 3))
    • 2. Future Approach
  • 3) Closing

Data

Reference Documents

Summary of proceedings

(1) Regarding common use candidates (selected in FY 2026 (= Cycle 3))

(2) Future approach

Nagose Working Team members (Director, Director-General, Digital Agency) explained based on Reference 1-1, Reference 1-2, Reference 2, and Reference 3. After exchanging opinions among the working team members, it was decided to proceed as proposed.

<Major comments from the working team members>

  • We are in favor of the candidate proposals, as all of them will lead to a reduction in the workload of the improved services for residents and local governments. They were also arranged after taking into consideration the opinions of local governments.
  • It is said that 175 opinions and questions were received from local governments across the country. We take it that local governments are highly interested in the candidate proposal and have high expectations.
  • While administrative needs are diversifying, the number of local government employees is decreasing. In order to realize the improvement of administrative services while minimizing total costs and reducing the burden on employees, I would like the MIC to continue to positively take in opinions from local governments that are in line with practical needs.
  • Sufficient consideration should be given to the administrative burden on field staff and the cost burden on small-scale local governments.
    • We recognize that the cost is a very important and common issue. We believe that the ministries and agencies in charge of the system are well aware of this, and we, as the secretariat, would like to continue to communicate the importance and advance the discussion.
    • In the course of the follow-up of the 1st and 2nd course, although it is a stage prior to the construction of a system, there are cases where it is realized that it is still necessary to devise and improve the issues that were not initially assumed from the viewpoint of the actual business. The opinions from local governments received this time are the same, and the discussions at the time of formulating the policy for promoting standardization in the future will be the same. I feel that the resolution of the national government side will increase through the accumulation of each of these. I am aware that the local governments are under strain due to their busy schedules, but I feel that organizing the work flow and reviewing the system and work in an integrated manner cannot be realized all at once. On the other hand, I have recognized once again that such steady accumulation, including discussions at the liaison council and working team, will ultimately lead to a reduction in the burden on the people involved in the work on site.

(Disaster Victim Support System)

  • Since some local governments have already introduced their own systems and some cloud-based systems are operated by the J-LIS, sufficient flexibility and expandability should be ensured when developing common specifications. At the same time, systems developed based on the common specifications should be linked together.
  • GOJ requests USG to fully reflect the opinions of local governments, taking into account the viewpoint of reducing the total cost.
  • In particular, many opinions have been received regarding data linkage with other related systems, reduction of the administrative burden on the field, and financial support. The EBC requests the Government of Japan to give due consideration to these points and continue the review.
    • Victim support systems used by local governments include a system developed by Cabinet Office Disaster Preparedness and operated by the J-LIS, systems of major vendors, etc. We recognize that Cabinet Office Disaster Preparedness will proceed with the consideration while fully taking into account the status of such existing systems. Taking into account that there are systems that have already spread to a certain extent, rather than building one system, we are considering developing standard specifications that enable data linkage between existing systems. We recognize that Cabinet Office Disaster Preparedness has such a direction in mind. We will continue to advance consultations while taking this point into account.
  • In addition to concerns about the handling of personal information and running costs, local governments that have already introduced the system have voiced concerns about the increase in system migration costs and new employee burdens that will result from the standardization. We hope that you will proceed with the preparation of a draft policy for promoting the standardization, taking into consideration such opinions.
    • The Cabinet Office understands that the handling of personal data is recognized as an important task for Cabinet Office Disaster Preparedness as well. I believe that some of the issues have already been sorted out to a certain extent, but I have heard that there is a great deal of psychological resistance in the actual field as to the extent to which the personal data of disaster victims may be shared. Therefore, it is necessary to sort out and address the issues not only in terms of systems but also in terms of operations. It is also necessary to comprehensively consider the issues, including those in terms of cost. The Government requests that the opinions received be continued to be shared with Cabinet Office Disaster Preparedness and reflected in future deliberations.

(Certificate Issuing Server of Convenience Store Certificate Issuance Service)

  • We believe that it is necessary to fully examine whether it should be addressed from the viewpoint of standardization as an issue that should be addressed by developing a mechanism such as a converter that is compatible even if the vendors of the standard compliance system and certificate issuance server are different, or whether it should be addressed as an issue of standardization, such as determining uniform interface specifications in the standard specifications and setting the scope of related systems that should be subject to standardization. We would like to ask for consideration based on the current introduction status of local governments, the results of interviews with vendors, and future cost analysis.
  • Regarding the financial burden caused by the direction of future consideration, as I have stated before, there are opinions calling for sufficient financial measures by the government and securing the necessary response period.
  • Local governments that have already taken their own measures have expressed concerns about the duplication of investment and human burden caused by the repeated system renovation. We request that a draft policy for promoting standardization be prepared, taking these points into comprehensive consideration.
    • As you pointed out, there is a method to deal with it on the certificate issuing server side, and there is also a method to deal with it on the standard compliance system side. For this reason, the related ministries and agencies include Digital Agency in addition to Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. I would like both ministries and agencies to consider it from the viewpoint of reducing the burden on local governments as much as possible. I would like to continue to discuss in that direction in the future.

(Local Attack Surface Management (ASM) System)

  • With regard to the estimated system usage fees presented at the recent briefing session for local governments, the costs borne by local governments, especially for the category covering local governments with a population of 200,000 or more, are considerably high, and some have asked whether we are considering a subsidy system. We understand that a certain amount of expenses will be incurred even if economies of scale are utilized, because the original project cost is high. However, if the number of user organizations initially expected cannot be secured, we believe that the running cost will eventually fall into the red, which will also affect the sustainability of the project. For this reason, we request the Government of Japan to consider revising the user fee so that it will become an appropriate calculation standard, taking into account the fact that there are basic fixed costs that are not proportional to the population size.
  • I would appreciate it if you could consider increasing the number of participating organizations, thereby resulting in a reduction in the burden on local governments. I am aware that this is a difficult task, but I would like to ask for sustainable fiscal management.
    • Recently, there have been an extremely large number of opportunities to see news reports on cybersecurity. Even recently, there have been a series of news reports on major companies that have been ransomed, resulting in information leakage and cyberattacks damage. In the context of the ongoing development of AI, cybersecurity is considered to be an urgent task for all local governments. cybersecurity measures should not be handled by only one method, but should be implemented in a multi-layered manner by overlapping various measures. Regarding the local version of attack surface management, it is an initiative that the National Cyber Director-General Office (NCO) is also implementing for various ministries and agencies at the national level. In the hearings, it was explained that when developing it for local governments, we would like to promote cooperation with the National Cyber Director-General Office. For this reason, we believe that it is important for this initiative to be firmly advanced so that local governments can feel the effects, including the cost side. We would like to continue discussions with Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, including such points.

Greater Than