Skip to main content

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

Second meeting of the Study Group on Common Standards for Standardization of Local Government Information Systems

Overview

  • Date: Thursday, June 12, 2025 (2025), from 10:00 to 12:00
  • Location: Online Meeting
  • Agenda:
    1. Opening
    2. Agenda
      1. Proposal for Revision of Standards for Non-functional Requirements for Local Government Information Systems
    3. Closing

Data

Related policy

Minutes of meeting

The proceedings of the Study Group will be disclosed as a summary of the proceedings from the viewpoint of leading to lively discussions by related parties.

Date and time

  • Thursday, June 12, 2025, from 10:00 to 12:00

Location

  • On-line

Attendees (titles omitted)

Member

  • [Chairman] Masahiko Shoji (Professor, Faculty of Sociology, Musashi University)
  • Yoshiro Kakizaki (Associate Professor, Department of Information and Communications, School of Information and Communications, Tokai
  • FUJIMURA Akiko (Senior Researcher, NTT Social Information Research Institute)
  • Mikihito Yoshioka (Director of Digital Strategy Department, Planning and Coordination Bureau, Kobe City)
  • Kiyoshi Takigami (Deputy Manager, Digital Strategies Division, Planning and Finance Department, Tomioka City)
  • Rie Saito (Section Head, ICT Promotion Office, Strategy and Finance Department, Fukaya City) [Attended by a representative]
  • Akio YOSHIDA (Director of Planning and Promotion Division, Kyoto Prefectural Association of Towns and
  • ISHIZUKA Kiyoka (CODE FOR JAPAN)
  • Akihira Yoshimoto (General Manager in charge of Planning Department, National Association for Promotion of Informatization)

Associate member

  • Hiroshi Maeda (RKKCS Corporation)
  • Hitoshi Itaya (Gcom Holdings Co., Ltd.)
  • Daisuke Yokoyama (TKC Corporation)
  • Sayaka Yazawa (NEC Corporation)
  • Anayama Izumi Co., Ltd.
  • Shukyu Omura (Fujitsu Japan Ltd.)

Observer

  • Satoshi Takizawa (Assistant Director, General Affairs Division, Commissioner-General's Secretariat, Children and Families Agency)
  • Yuma Komachi (Section Chief, General Affairs Division, Commissioner-General's Secretariat, Children and Families Agency
  • Sakino Saga (Officer, General Affairs Division, Children and Families Agency Commissioner-General's Secretariat)
  • Daisaku Yamamoto (Assistant Director of Child Allowance Management Office, Child Development and Environmental Affairs Division, Children and Families Agency Regional Development Bureau)
  • Yukie Nishimura (Section Head, Child Allowance Management Office, Child Development and Environmental Affairs Division, Children and Families Agency Development Bureau)
  • Teru Itoh (Section Chief, Family Welfare Division, Children and Families Agency Support Bureau)
  • Akihiko Ueda (Assistant Director, Maternal and Child Health Division, Children and Families Agency Regional Development Bureau)
  • Shoya Taki (Assistant Director, Maternal and Child Health Division, Children and Families Agency Regional Development Bureau)
  • Kimihiro ANDO (Deputy Director, Administration Division, Election Department, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Local Government Administration Bureau)
  • Ryosuke Fukazu (Section Chief of the Administration Division, Election Department, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Local Government Administration Bureau)
  • Kazunori Nishiya (General Affairs Officer, Computerization Promotion Office, Planning Division, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Municipal Tax Bureau)
  • Shiki FURUKAWA (Family Registration Guidance Section, First Civil Affairs Division, Ministry of Justice Civil Affairs Bureau)
  • Takehiro Yauchi (Specialist, Educational Reform Office, Elementary and Secondary Education Planning Division, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Elementary and Secondary Education Bureau)
  • Kunihisa Shimoji (Section Chief, Information Planning Section, cybersecurity and Information Promotion Office, Policy Division, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Minister's Secretariat)
  • OHTSUKA Seiya (Information Planning Section, cybersecurity & ICT Promotion Office, Policy Division, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Minister's Secretariat)
  • Satoyuki SHIMAZOE (Assistant Director, Director Office in charge of Information Technology, Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare Minister's Secretariat)
  • Kazuhiro Iino (Deputy Director of the Director Office in charge of Information Technology, Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare's Secretariat)

Proceedings

  • The Secretariat explained the draft revision of the standards for local government information system non-functional requirements based on the results of the first review meeting and in-depth hearings with local governments and vendors.

Question

Member
At the first meeting of the Study Group, the establishment of the Shochikubai menu was proposed as a grouping method. However, the classification by municipality size is only an example, and municipalities are not necessarily forcibly allocated according to the set menu. It is intended to reduce the administrative burden by allowing municipalities to consider each situation based on the set menu. As a result of the in-depth hearing, opinions were raised on other grouping methods. Therefore, the Government of Japan requests the Government of the United States to continue its consideration.
Secretariat
As vendors have actively proposed grouping methods other than the scale of local governments, we will continue to consider them. In light of the standardization schedule for the mission-critical business system, we will revise the standard in FY 2025 based on the proposal presented today, and continue discussions so that we can present a standard for non-functional requirements more in line with the actual situation in time for the next renewal of the standard compliance system.

Member
If the aim is to achieve significant cost reductions, it is necessary to sort out the extent to which the recommended level items have cost reduction effects. In addition, considering the current situation of cost increases due to system standardization, it may be appropriate to set more drastic review items.
In addition, although it will be a matter for continued consideration after September, when the draft revision will be published, we consider that it is necessary to sort out why standards for non-functional requirements are set for government clouds, not for on-premises, and to communicate the purpose again. We recognize that one of the purposes of system standardization is to give priority to the sustainability of local governments. Under the current situation where it cannot be said that the use of government cloud satisfies non-functional requirements, it may be necessary to communicate to local governments that they will actively adopt a lower selection level for non-functional requirements in order to enhance sustainability.
Secretariat
For the items of recommended levels, we classified mainly those for which a certain level of cost-effectiveness was obtained after hearing about the possibility of cost-effectiveness. For the items of essential levels, we classified mainly those for which a clear answer could not be obtained regarding cost-reduction effects. We recognize that it is necessary to continue to monitor how much cost-effectiveness is generated by the items of recommended levels shown in the revised draft and to determine their effects. We will proceed with the final selection of items based on the results of the nationwide consultation.
For government clouds and public clouds, it is a foundation that can satisfy the contents specified in each item of non-functional requirements at a high level, and it is considered that a higher level can be required compared to non-functional requirements in on-premises. Therefore, it has been established as a standard for non-functional requirements. By setting the recommended level items, the range of choices for local governments will be expanded, which will have a positive impact on resolving constraints such as financial resources and vendor resources, and will be promoted to enhance sustainability.
Member
I agree with the direction of proceeding with the contents shown in this draft revision and gradually improving it. I do not consider the transmission of the purpose as an issue to be considered by September, and I will continue to discuss it.

Member
I agree with the overall plan. The standard for non-functional requirements is shown to be applicable to the standard compliance system constructed in the government cloud or public cloud, but the standard compliance system is allowed to be constructed in the government cloud if there are reasonable grounds such as cost merit. In that case, if the standard for non-functional requirements is not applied, it may not be possible to compare with the same standard at the time of construction in the government cloud, and it may be difficult to clarify reasonable grounds such as cost merit. Therefore, the concept of the scope of application should be carefully explained.
In addition, considering that the mandatory level items are set to ensure the security of the entire government cloud, it is necessary to clarify whether the standards for non-functional requirements should not be applied when non-functional requirements such as a common platform for data linkage and an integrated collection and delinquency system, which are built in an integrated manner with the standard compliance system, are built on the government cloud or not standard compliance system.
Secretariat
As for standards for non-functional requirements, in addition to requirements based on the Standardization Act, discussions have been held on the assumption that they will be applied in public clouds, including government clouds. Therefore, it is difficult to apply the items currently specified to government clouds or non-public clouds. For systems that are not subject to application, such as cases where all local governments are constructed in non-government clouds or non-public clouds, we would like the J-LIS to refer to the "Non-Functional Requirements Grade (standard compliance system Version)" as technical advice before constructing them.
As mentioned above, it is difficult to apply the standards for non-functional requirements to systems other than those in standard compliance system. However, depending on the intention of local governments, it is possible to establish non-functional requirements equivalent to those in standard compliance system for non-standardized systems that are closely linked to standardized services. Please make a decision in consideration of the balance between cost and security.

Member
At the previous review meeting, there were concerns that increasing the number of options would weaken the significance of the unified criteria and that dividing the items into mandatory and recommended items would cause confusion. However, I understand that the review and revision were conducted while observing the level of the items.
It is important to describe the negative conditions for the items that can be selected at the lower level if the negative conditions are satisfied. Currently, the requirements for satisfying the negative conditions are described. However, why there is no problem in selecting the lower level if the negative conditions are satisfied, and the validity from the security point of view should be described. While maintaining the current description in principle, it is necessary to describe each condition in detail so that local governments and vendors do not get lost in their decisions. We would like you to consider it by referring to the opinions of local governments and vendors.
Secretariat
In the past, we have received consultations from local governments using the PMO tool, etc. when selecting negative conditions, and have responded as needed. We have also taken measures such as preparing FAQs for local governments. As more local governments are expected to set non-functional requirements toward the second half of 2025, we will continue to take careful measures in the future. As for non-functional requirements, it is necessary to set them again when vendors switch, and we believe that it is easier to ensure flexibility in migration if you can make flexible choices when resetting them. In addition, the items shown as recommended level items in this revised draft are selected only when the cost for review is low, and although we believe that it is relatively unlikely to cause confusion, we will respond based on the opinions of the field.

Member
In the discussion of the revision of standards for non-functional requirements, we felt that a careful approach is necessary. In some cases, easing requirements that are difficult to adapt does not necessarily lead directly to cost reduction. If it is recognized that cost reduction can always be achieved by selecting a lower level, a discrepancy will arise. Therefore, it may be necessary to proceed while carefully obtaining agreement with local governments.
Secretariat
In order to address the issue of cost reduction, various measures will be taken to address the structural and temporary factors involved in the transition to standardization and gabacra. The revision of standards for non-functional requirements is one of them. Based on the opinions received, we will prepare materials and explain them so that there are no misunderstandings.

Member
It is possible to lower the selection level of the required level items if they meet the negative conditions, but since there are no negative conditions for the recommended level items, it may be difficult for local governments to lower the selection level if they are considered to have to consider the negative conditions themselves. If local governments are to promote the selection of lower levels from the viewpoint of sustainability, it may be necessary to have expressions and communication methods that make it easy for local governments to select lower levels.
Secretariat
In principle, there is no change in the attitude of satisfying the standard 55 items of non-functional requirements. Therefore, if it is informed that all levels can be selected without presenting the recommended level, it may run counter to the purport. I understand that careful explanation is necessary for the point that the selection is possible based on the judgment of the local government, and I would like to explain carefully by holding an explanatory meeting before the national opinion inquiry.
We will continue to consider the use of expressions in the materials, taking into account various opinions and comments received.

Member
From the standpoint of small-scale local governments, it seems that they select the recommended level in the recommended level item. Considering that it is an item with relaxed criteria, I would like you to continue to consider expressions that make it easier for local governments to lower the selection level.
Member
In the same way as the opinions of other members, I think that there is a feeling that the local government will adjust to the recommended level in the recommended level items, and I would like you to convey Digital Agency's intention to adopt a lower selection level.
Secretariat
The wording will be devised based on the opinions. The next review meeting is expected to be held at the end of June. Please let us know the schedule again.

Greater than or