Mobility Working Group (10th)

Overview

Date: Monday, May 19, 2025 (2025), from 10:00 to 12:00
Location: Online
Proceedings
1. Opening
2. Proceedings
  1. Status of Efforts on "Social Rules for Autonomous Vehicles (SWG)"
  2. Selection of areas for advanced commercialization
  3. Summary of Mobility Roadmap 2025
  4. Exchange of views
3. Closing

Data

Minutes

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much for taking the time out of your busy schedule to attend the working group meeting today. I am Asayama from the secretariat, and I will serve as the MC today. First of all, I would like to hear greetings from Mr. Chief Mori on the occasion of the working group meeting. Nice to meet you, Mr. Chief Mori.

Mori Chief:
Today, the Secretariat will present a draft of the Mobility Roadmap 2025, which will be discussed.

There are two main points in today's roadmap. The first is a discussion on the function of a transportation trading company. The function of a transportation trading company itself, which has been discussed several times, is to provide services that integrate demand and supply. There is no doubt that this will be a major function in actually expanding various mobility services in the region, so I would like to have a discussion on this. I believe that there are various forms and needs depending on the region, so I think the key points are how to respond to them and what is the basis for the overall expansion, so I would like to have your opinions.

The second is the selection of areas for advanced commercialization. In particular, the commercialization of autonomous driving for passenger cars is taking shape mainly in large urban areas. However, we are still in the middle of the road for projects in rural areas, which the working group originally focused on this time. In order to actually materialize these projects, we have been talking about 10 areas for application for some time. I would like everyone to discuss how to select and what kind of support will be applied.

Other than that, I would also like to report on the progress of what was created in Roadmap 2024. I would like to position this Roadmap 2025 proposal in Meeting for the Promotion of a Digital Society by next month. I would like to receive your frank opinions, firmly create the Roadmap, and put it into practice. Thank you for your cooperation.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much.
Today's meeting will be held online. Members are requested to keep the camera on at all times during the meeting and to unmute the microphone when speaking. Members are requested to mute the microphone when others are speaking. Members are requested to turn off both the camera and the microphone.

Next, I would like to confirm the materials. As stated in the agenda that I sent to you, the agenda includes Materials 1 to 4 and the list of attendees.

If there are any missing materials, please contact the Chat function of Teams or the office by e-mail. Regarding the introduction of today's attendees, due to time constraints, we would like to distribute the list of attendees in your hand instead. In addition, the affiliation of member Suda has been changed to Tokyo Institute of Technology since April. We would like to ask for continued advice from member Suda.

Now, let's move on to the agenda. Mr. Deputy Director-General Hasui will explain the status of the study of the working group for examining the ideal social rules for self-driving cars in the AI era. See Appendix 2.

Hasui Deputy Director-General:
(Based on Appendix 2, explain the status of initiatives related to "Social Rules for Automated Driving (SWG)".)

Hasui Deputy Director-General:
If there are any supplementary explanations from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism or National Police Agency, I would like to ask them. What do you think?

Takamoto Director (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport
Regarding the items that have been assigned to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism for consideration, the Working Group on Automated Driving was held as the final meeting the other day. As for the interim summary of this summary, I would like to announce it after it is firmly in shape by the end of this month.

In addition, as Mr. Digital Agency explained, we will firmly consider various items that require institutional measures. In addition, although the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism is included in the purpose of the section, I would like to ask for further cooperation from the relevant ministries and agencies for the specific realization of it, so I look forward to your cooperation.

Deputy Director-General (National Police Agency):
It is the Traffic Bureau of National Police Agency. It is not supplementary, but as I explained earlier, the traffic rules of National Police Agency were examined in the research study last year, and the details are on page 23 of the reference material.

With regard to traffic rules, the bottom part of page 23 is the conclusion. The concept of competent and attentive human drivers (CCD), which I mentioned earlier, has become an international standard. The concept that autonomous driving is required to have safety equivalent to or higher than that has been agreed or summarized. We shared the recognition that it is desirable to develop something that satisfies such a concept.

On top of that, as stated on page 24, in this fiscal year, based on the CCD concept, I would like to continue to communicate with the people concerned about the required safety standards.

In addition, as stated in (ii) and (iii), we would like to consider how and what information should be provided by operators in the event of accidents, and measures for the police to obtain such information. And (iii), we would like to continue to conduct research on the ideal form of cooperation between the police and related operators when operators get stuck on public roads.

That's all from National Police Agency.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. Now, I will go on to explain the outline of the pilot project areas and the draft of the Mobility Roadmap 2025.

Director, Asayama:
(Based on References 3 and 4, explanation will be given on the selection of pilot business areas and the compilation of the Mobility Roadmap 2025.)

Director, Asayama:
That's all for the explanation, but after this, I would like to have an exchange of opinions. First, before the exchange of opinions, I would like to introduce the opinions of Wakana members who are absent today.

Regarding the road map that I explained earlier, on the left side of the figure, only services provided by transportation companies are listed in the supply-side frame. In fact, public transportation is owned not only by transportation companies but also by various organizations such as school buses and day services. Therefore, it is not that these services are provided separately, but the function of efficiently deploying and dispatching vehicles should also be covered by transportation companies. That is the opinion of the respondents.

That's all for your opinion.

Next, I would like to hear your opinions. When you speak, please let me know with the show of hands button or chat function in Teams, and when you speak, please cancel the microphone mute.

Then, I would like to hear the opinions of the members and each ministry and agency, so please do so.

Mr. Kawabata, you seem to be raising your hand. Could you please?

Kawabata Members:
Thank you for your explanation. My name is Kawabata.

This time, you mentioned that the application areas of autonomous driving are expanding, and at the same time, you explained the difficulty of its commercialization.

To be sure, it is important to find areas where there is demand, but I think it is also necessary to look at "stimulating demand." In particular, in rural areas, there are many cases where demand has not materialized in the first place. In such areas, for example, it will be necessary to gather a certain number of people up to the transportation node, and then cover the trunk line with buses and other means, and supplement the end points with individual means of transportation. I think that distributed transportation design will be necessary.

In this sense, I think it is realistic to first establish mobility services such as ride-sharing services and MaaS in local areas and consolidate demand to some extent, and then introduce advanced technologies such as autonomous driving. In fact, in some parts of Europe where public transportation services are required to be enhanced, such an approach is being taken.

In addition, many mobility services are already being developed in Japan under the leadership of the private sector, but there is a problem in that there is almost no incentive design for users to participate in these services. It is necessary to consider the entire mobility service as an ecosystem and design participation incentives for the entire society, rather than working on individual services.

In some cases, start-ups are making moves, but the Japanese market has yet to reach a full-scale development stage. In these fields, if nothing is done, global platforms such as GAFA will take the lead, and as in the software industry, there is a risk of a repeat of a structure in which domestic profits will flow overseas. There are concerns about the so-called "digital deficit."

To prevent this from happening, it is important to support the development of Japanese startups and to develop strategic support measures by the government. Beyond these efforts, I believe that when an environment with demand is in place and autonomous driving is introduced, there will be a situation where people actually get on board -- in other words, a situation where commercialization is established.

It may sound confusing, but I feel that two steps are essential for the commercialization of autonomous driving: the development of mobility services and incentive design.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. Anything else? Dr. Suda, please.

Suda Members:
Yes, I'd like to make three comments. I retired from the University of Tokyo at the end of March and transferred to Tokyo Institute of Technology. Thank you.

First of all, I think it is a very good idea to do it in the preceding areas. I have been saying for a long time that this is important, but rather than increasing the number of places, I think it is very important to increase the number of vehicles in a really proper way.

In response to this, I have one question. I believe that the 10 locations will be different depending on whether they are regional areas or major cities as models. Could you please tell us your thoughts on these? That is my first question.

Regarding your second question, I really feel that the phase of self-driving has changed. In particular, Chinese companies are very active in robotaxis, services, and self-driving technology is being worked on end-to-end, so I think this is a technology that should be considered.

As a result, we can see that robotaxis can run quite a lot, but on the other hand, service cars do not run freely like robotaxis, and I think the movement of buses is a little different.

With regard to such service cars, there are discussions such as PTPS (Public Transport Priority System) and priority traffic lights, and I believe that how to make service cars run well is a very important issue. In this regard, I believe that infrastructure coordination should be carried out by all means.

In addition to the passive aim of responding to the shortage of drivers by adopting autonomous driving, which is unmanned with no drivers, I believe that we should definitely consider the perspective of adding new value by providing better services through autonomous driving.

From that point of view, we are creating and using infrastructure coordination technology from the perspective of improving safety and smoothness, expanding ODD, and making autonomous driving of public transportation even more accessible.

Currently, the United States and China are only focusing on the use of robotaxis, but in fact, the United States and China are also separately engaged in infrastructure coordination technology, and I believe that Japan should also work on this.

That's all I have to say. I said three points, but including the fact that China is developing, there are three points. That's all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. I would like to answer your question about the advanced commercialization area.

You asked about the differences between large cities and rural areas. I can't say for sure, but in large cities, there are reports that overseas self-driving vehicles will provide services in a few years at the earliest, and I think this will probably be an advanced technology that will take root in areas where there is demand.

However, in other areas, from the perspective of profitability and whether services such as Robo-Tak will become familiar, it is necessary to use on-demand bus types to some extent, and even if it is not that far in terms of self-driving technology, I think that it is precisely in rural areas that we need to use such technology to find out.

I think it's more likely to happen in rural areas than in big cities. Even if we don't introduce such advanced self-driving, if we carefully remove each issue, we can operate in rural areas with the current service. This is the difference between rural areas and big cities.

If there are any points that are not explained enough, I would like you to ask additional questions. What do you think?

Suda Members:
Thank you. My question is about using the characteristics of the three patterns well. Is that right?

Director, Asayama:
Yes, that's right. Looking at the balance, I would like to select not to be biased to one place though it is a handout of each local government.

Suda Members:
Yes, thank you. Also, I think the weather and such are very important. That's all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. I'm sorry to ask Dr. Suda the other way around, but in your second question, regarding the case of service cars, I think you said in the tone that cooperation with road-vehicle cooperation is necessary. I would appreciate it if you could give me a little additional explanation as to why road-vehicle cooperation is necessary in the case of service cars. What do you think?

Suda Members:
Ordinary passenger cars and service cars, for example, medium-sized and large-sized buses, have different movement characteristics. Passenger cars are becoming able to do everything autonomously, but service cars are not necessarily able to move quickly, and in some cases, there are standing passengers, so smooth movement is required.

In that case, we need information on traffic lights in advance. We should prioritize service cars and drive well. We should also brush up the functions of self-driving cars. Rather, when a service car comes, we should change the traffic lights and let it pass without stopping. That is what we should do.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. Then, next, Hidaka's member seems to raise his hand, so please go ahead.

Hidaka Members:
There are three points. Basically, I think both the initiatives and the talks in the preceding areas are wonderful.

Based on this premise, as Mr. Wakana mentioned, MaaS (Mobility-as-a-Service), which is the linkage and integration of mobility resources for autonomous driving with other mobility, is listed in the functions of a transportation trading company. I believe that METI previously used the terms MaaS in a narrow sense and MaaS in a broad sense. I think it is appropriate to call it MaaS in a narrow sense to integrate mobility needs and match them by mobilizing all regional mobility. As a MaaS company, and as a director of JCoMaaS, I would like to make a request. In addition, the Mobility Services Promotion Section is actively implementing MaaS in society, so I think it is good to collaborate with those efforts.

The second point is regarding standardization. As mentioned in the working materials, I think there are various technical viewpoints on so-called running, turning, and stopping. In particular, when considering the accumulation of data for practical application, starting or entering, I think that a mechanism of "open knowledge (knowledge, know-how)", "open sourcing", and "data sharing" is necessary.

Without that, it is possible that they will run out of strength and run out of power. At that time, if standardization is promoted, or if the main operators are two or three companies using the same products, I don't think there is any need to go to the trouble of standardization. However, after confirming that point, implementation is what you talked about, and in particular, business feasibility. I think it is important to consider the merit of scale when mass-produced, rather than conducting it individually.

This time, there are quite a lot of factors just to run self-driving cars as a transportation company, and when you consider the scope of collaboration with other industries and businesses, I think there is also the inefficiency of having them individually. Therefore, I think it is necessary to create a system that facilitates open collaboration.

I believe there is a judgment that Japan, including Europe, is lagging behind as well as the United States and China, which I mentioned earlier. If that is the case, I believe it is important to build a system in which foreign players can come to Japan and then cooperate with them.

The third point. From that point of view, I would like you to proceed with the demonstration in the selected areas. However, if I think about it, I think that there are a lot of things to be done because of the motivation to just run it. Some of the people in the areas where the demonstration was conducted last year are still asking for the feasibility of the project. However, they were not able to budget for it. Therefore, they gave us the opportunity to run it, but we could not do it on our own. Therefore, I think that support is necessary.

At the same time, I believe that such initiatives can be advanced by assuming to some extent the initiatives of regional retailers, convenience stores, car dealers, and transportation companies in addition to the initiatives to eliminate the transportation vacuum.

That's all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. As for the third point, I would like to have the opinion of the secretariat. As for the first point, MaaS, and the incentives for participation in MaaS and ride-sharing mentioned by Mr. Kawabata, I think it is related to the administration of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism. If you don't mind, I would like to have a little comment from Mr. Tsuchida, the section chief. What do you think?

Manager Tsuchida (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure
Thank you very much. This is Tsuchida, Manager of the Mobility Service Promotion Section. Thank you for your comments on MaaS from Committee Members Hidaka and Kawabata, respectively.

As we promote mobility services, including MaaS, we will continue to work on improving convenience by connecting various transportation services with the power of data. We also believe that this will lay the foundation for future changes to autonomous driving, so we will work together with Mr. Digital Agency. That's all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. Next, member Muramatsu, please raise your hand.

Muramatsu Members:
My name is Muramatsu from Robot-Friendly Society Promotion Organization. Thank you very much for your explanation today. I would like to tell you two things.

The first point. In terms of the difference from the robotics industry, I would like to make a comment. Robots are being introduced in facilities, but compared to cars that run on public roads and are subject to regulations under the Road Traffic Law, there is not much legally binding force. Robots are small and there are not many legal restrictions, so it is quite difficult to collect public information that should be shared, such as accident information.

In this context, in the area of autonomous driving, as a result of such legal restrictions to some extent, it is easy to accumulate such public data, which is quite advantageous for other industries. Therefore, I think it would be great if such strengths are utilized to utilize public knowledge.

Second, regarding the priority regions, I thought it would be good if there is an output that the business model should be more specifically examined and illustrated before submission.

To be more specific, I would like you to specify the stakeholders, the flow of money, and the volume of money. I would like you to submit the final output, including how the business model makes the business run, and how the business runs. Based on the deliverables, I would like you to visualize whether it can be deployed horizontally and how realistic it is. That's all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. As for the first question, I would like to hear your opinion. As for the second question, there are still 10 areas that are still under discussion with various ministries and agencies. We will work out the details based on your opinion. Thank you very much.

Next, I would like to ask for Member Suzuki.

Suzuki Member:
I am the representative of the Japan Unmanned Aircraft Operation Management Consortium (JUTM). I am Professor Emeritus and Specially Appointed Professor Suzuki of the University of Tokyo. I would like to talk about drones from that perspective.

Drones are at Level 4, which means non-visual verification test in manned areas, and various efforts are being made to advance this. Firstly, various systems have been established under the Civil Aeronautics Act, such as aircraft certification, remote operator qualifications, and operation manuals, and flights are being conducted in various areas. However, there are some areas that are difficult to spread, and as part of the Digital Lifeline Initiative, a drone route will be established first. Although it is not at Level 4, the route will be set in areas where drones are relatively easy to fly, such as first class rivers and along power transmission lines, and system development and business model consideration and implementation will be conducted. The route was opened in the Chichibu and Hamamatsu areas in March. Such infrastructure development will be conducted by NEDO Pro, and certification of service providers is also planned. There is a movement to develop such systems and infrastructure mainly by the government and use them by everyone.

In addition, at Level 4, there are special zones, currently called Kizuna Special Zone in Nagasaki and Fukushima, and various policies are starting to be implemented to allow drones to fly in these areas, rather than determining their routes in these areas.

In that case, what is particularly important is the risk assessment method and management method. By sharing these properly between the public and private sectors, we are trying to lower the hurdle of introduction by enabling discussions on how to skip, what kind of risk is there, and if the risk is high, how to reduce the risk. I think these efforts are important for the social implementation of new technologies.

Since autonomous driving and aircraft are moving in different areas, it may not be possible to discuss in the same way, but I would like to convey the progress of such things in the world of drones. Thank you.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. Next, member Yamamoto, please.

Yamamoto Member:
I am Mr. Yamamoto of Toyota Motor Corporation, and I have been asked to serve as Chairman of ITS Japan. Thank you very much for compiling this report in a very in-depth manner. I believe that the members have deepened their understanding of the report.

The key point of this Mobility Roadmap is how to realize a self-driving society. I understand it again. In that sense, I would like to express my expectations for the activities of the 10 leading model cases from three perspectives.

First of all, there have been a lot of self-driving verification test, but this time, I think we are going to implement them. What we need to focus on is to really eliminate safety drivers. There are various verification test, but in all of them, safety drivers or safety inspectors are on board, and they can step on the brake in emergencies. They are carrying such safety drivers. In this model case, it is important to consider various measures to eliminate this as a result.

The second point is that there are various discussions from everyone, but regarding how to use the 10 model cases, I think there are many methods and means for automated driving. As you mentioned earlier, the nature of automated driving varies depending on whether it is done by robot-taxi or shuttle bus, how fast it is driven, which road it is driven on, and what kind of mobility it is used. Therefore, I think it is important to try various forms of automated driving in 10 model cases and derive what kind of automated driving is typical of Japan. This is the second point.

On top of that, the third point is how to develop a transportation trading company. It is also related to how to develop the ITS infrastructure and communication infrastructure as a country. I think it is important to materialize the form of the infrastructure that supports the self-driving society and the new mobility society, or the form of a trading company.

It goes without saying that AI is driving the development of autonomous driving. In this regard, the United States and the People's Republic of China are leading the way, and I think the Japanese situation is lagging behind. However, the People's Republic of China and the United States, which are leading the way, feel that there are considerable limitations in completing autonomous driving on their own. As Professor Suda mentioned earlier, infrastructure coordination is becoming a key point. What I would like to say at that time is, in addition to applying AI technology to autonomous on-board systems, I think that the development of AI technology for the so-called trinity of pedestrians, roads, and cars is also important in drawing the image of ITS infrastructure and communication infrastructure as a transportation trading company. I would be very grateful if you could prepare this point and translate it into concrete programs for 10 model cases.

We in the industry will support this, so I would like to do it together. That's all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. I would like to ask you a question. You said that self-driving cars are limited. But when I asked overseas manufacturers of self-driving cars, they said that they have end-to-end systems. Some said that self-driving cars are sufficient. I would appreciate it if you could give me a concrete image of when self-driving cars are limited. What do you think?

Yamamoto Member:
Thank you very much. The current trend of data-driven technological development is to make autonomous autonomous driving learn various scenes with AI to improve its reasoning capability. However, I don't know what I haven't experienced, and I can't see what I can't see. I think this will not change no matter how much technological development has progressed.

As Professor Suda mentioned earlier, in areas where the climate changes at a dizzying pace, or in situations where people have to drive in bad weather, various unpredictable situations can occur in the transportation AI. Mobility itself, which is used in the automotive society, is not limited to passenger cars and commercial vehicles. There are also bicycles, small electric skateboards, and so on. The transportation society is becoming increasingly diverse, and the environments in which people are learning in various environments are changing rapidly, so there is an element of a game of cat and mouse in which people have to keep learning.

To make up for this, there is a trinity of roadside, vehicle, and pedestrian cooperation. Communication technology is very important for this. There are various discussions on whether the computing environment, which integrates the three elements to make decisions, is edge, cloud, or distributed. However, I believe that computing resources and the evolution of autonomous driving are combined. I think there are some people who say that energetic people can do it independently. However, it depends greatly on the sensitivity to accidents and social acceptance. Cooperative autonomous driving, as Dr. Suda said, is one of the goals that Japan should aim for. That's all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. I would like to hear opinions from various ministries and agencies. Firstly, I think you are right about the idea that safety drivers should be eliminated. At present, driverless driving can be realized if permission is given for specified automated driving. On the other hand, drivers can drive if permission is given. In the future, National Police Agency and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, which have jurisdiction over specified automated driving systems, will be able to flexibly implement this. I would like to hear opinions on how to smoothly implement what is permitted in the future.

In addition, as for the road-vehicle cooperation, there are also car technologies, so if possible, I would like to hear a few comments from the Manufacturing Industry Bureau in Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. From the infrastructure perspective, I would like to hear brief comments from the Road Bureau and the Communications Infrastructure Bureau in Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, but would you first like to hear brief comments from Mr. National Police Agency?

Deputy Director-General (National Police Agency):
It is National Police Agency. In 2022, the Road Traffic Law also established a system in the form of the Specified Automated Driving Permit System. Under such circumstances, it has become legally possible to operate vehicles without safety drivers. We would like you to aim for truly unmanned driving, and we would like to support you to realize it.

As for the permission for specific automated driving, we are working with the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism to grant permission as quickly as possible, aiming for two months instead of the previous 11 months. In this regard, we will hold direct discussions and respond to consultations prior to granting permission. We would like to support the spread of unmanned automated driving as quickly as possible. That is all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. First of all, how is the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism regarding the permission for specified automated driving?

Director General Iebe (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure
This is Yabe from the Automobile Bureau of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism. As National Police Agency explained earlier, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), in cooperation with National Police Agency, has been developing systems to enable specified automated driving.

With regard to safety drivers, many of the Level 4 safety drivers are currently bus types, but bus drivers are engaged in duties other than driving. For example, I believe that there is a need for human involvement in terms of treating passengers, collecting fares, and responding to accidents.

The Bureau of Logistics and Motor Vehicles and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism believe that with the self-driving system in place, it is necessary to promote the spread of self-driving cars that can run at Level 4 to the end without a driver. That's all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. In any case, it is expected that there will be an increase in the use of Robo-Taxi and other all-around driving methods. The question is how to secure permission without a safety driver. Although this can be done under the current system, I would like to ask you to make efforts to ensure smooth progress.

The Manufacturing Industry Bureau talked about technology related to autonomous driving, so if you have any comments, please do so.

Deputy Director-General TANAKA (Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry):
As Member Suda and Member Yamamoto pointed out, in METI's projects, for example, in Kashiwanoha, we are receiving information from the infrastructure and various traffic signal information to support smooth operations, and what kind of information should be received to make the situation a little smoother.

If possible, what kind of information would be more useful, and in some cases, whether we can expand it to other regions besides Kashiwanoha, we are trying to do that, so I hope you will continue to support us. That's all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. In relation to the road infrastructure, do you have any comments from the Road Bureau and Mr. Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications?

Deputy Director-General (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism):
Yes, this is the Road Bureau. Even now, road-to-vehicle cooperation is being carried out on highways and ordinary roads. I believe that we will raise the level of cooperation while carefully hearing from the automobile side what needs there are and how safety can be improved. Therefore, we will continue to hold thorough discussions with the automobile side and lead to the creation of standards through verification test and other verification test. That is all.

Director-General of the Radio Department Ogiwara (Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications):
This is Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. With regard to self-driving, I believe it is important that technologies and infrastructure, such as autonomous functions, vehicle-to-vehicle communications, and roadside-to-vehicle communications, comprehensively function properly, and Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications will continue to work on the development of stable communication technologies, the construction of highly reliable infrastructure, and the development of communication environments in close cooperation with relevant ministries and agencies. That is all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you. May I speak to Dr. Ishida?

Ishida Members:
This is Ishida. Roadmap 2025. Compared to last year, I think it is good that you wrote a lot of specific things and took the plunge.

I have a few requests, and I would like to ask you to write more boldly. One is the first one. As has been discussed, there are countries around the world that are moving from demonstration to implementation of robotaxis, small buses, for example, large trucks, and the number is increasing at a tremendous pace.

In view of the current situation, I would be grateful if you could write about the ideal state of verification test in Japan and suggest that we should do our best in this area.

I am sorry to be a personal comment, but in various proposals, it is written that they consider the needs of the verification test and focus on well-being and sustainability. However, when I see the actual operation, I feel that there are still many regions that focus on the safe operation of self-driving vehicles. Therefore, I would like to ask you to consider more seriously the needs of the regions, well-being and sustainability. I have been working as an evaluation committee member and judging committee member here and there, so I would like to say that I have a sense of crisis.

In relation to this, I think the diagram of various risks on page 17 is very good, and I think it would be better to seriously discuss how to consider the issue of foreign technology, which has been discussed so far.

There are various technological risks, but they have been established to a certain extent, and the risks of economic investment are relatively low. There are major issues such as security and technological development, but I think it is important to comprehensively and properly discuss these issues. I would like to say that there are more and more rural areas that are becoming unsustainable, and we are in a race against time, so I would like to ask what we should think about this.

The third one is the transportation company. I think this is a very important concept. We are discussing the regional living area in the National Spatial Plan. Since it will be finalized around the same time, we cannot quote each other. However, I would appreciate it if you could communicate with each other in a business-like manner and devise a way of writing that works well.

In addition, I appreciate the fact that we will focus on a small number of priority commercialization areas, but I would like to ask you to declare in the application guidelines which parts of the roadmap you will seriously consider, and to conduct screening. I hope you will consider this.

Lastly, I would like to say that it will take some time to get on board with the L4 certification of the CCD decided by National Police Agency, but I was wondering if it is possible to link the evaluation of things that are being demonstrated here and there with the evaluation of how many points the CCD's concept is. Thank you very much.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. I would like to talk to Dr. Ishida separately about the text on page 3 and page 16.

In addition, you mentioned that it is necessary to enhance the sustainability of the demonstration of autonomous driving, including trucks, so I would like to ask for any comments from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, which has conducted numerous demonstrations, from the perspective of enhancing sustainability. What do you think?

Takamoto Director (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport
With regard to the sustainability of autonomous driving, we will conduct thorough consideration from the perspective of institutional support in addition to the budgetary perspective.

In addition, as you pointed out, we will conduct hearings on the perspectives and viewpoints of what the local governments are actually looking for, and we will proceed with our consideration.

Director, Asayama:
In relation to CCD, I would like to ask you from National Police Agency. What do you think?

Deputy Director-General (National Police Agency):
Yes, this is National Police Agency. As I said earlier, in last year's survey, we compiled a report that we would like you to promote the development of autonomous driving based on the CCD concept.

As Professor Ishida mentioned earlier, the police will closely monitor and understand how the CCD's views are reflected in future projects. That is all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. Regarding the local living area, related departments have joined us as observers, so I would like to communicate properly with the secretariat. Thank you very much.

Member Hatano Please.

Hatano Members:
Thank you for your appointment. This is Hatano of the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association. In addition to reflecting the contents of the discussions in the 9th meeting, I would like to thank you very much for deepening your consideration on the selection of the areas for advanced commercialization. I feel that you have responded to the update and update of the schedule that JAMA pointed out last time, and that the content is becoming better toward the issuance of the roadmap in June.

On top of that, I would like to comment on three points this time. First, regarding the outline of the roadmap for the 2025 edition. As I mentioned earlier, the update of the schedule made it possible to confirm the differences from the 2024 edition. On the other hand, I feel that it is a little difficult to confirm how the contents of the 2024 edition, which were largely organized on page 3 of the outline in the form of basic ideas and phased and intensive implementation of measures, have been updated in the 2025 edition as the roadmap, and how they have been inherited. If possible, I feel that it would be better to make it possible to feel the correlation between the 2024 edition and the 2025 edition by sharing terms and explanations. This is my first point.

Second, in the same outline of the roadmap for 2025, in the middle of the issues section, you mentioned the issue of eliminating the technological gap between the United States and China. Unfortunately, I feel that the content of the latest revision does not show specific technical solutions or measures and policies to eliminate the gap.

The industry takes very seriously the fact that the technical competitiveness of not only Japanese autonomous driving but also other technologies is under threat due to the recent technological progress including AI. I am very grateful for the fact that you have indicated that this is an issue, but I would like you to discuss what measures will be taken to eliminate this technological gap in the 2026 edition or later.

As for the third point, I would like you to take a more in-depth look at the activities of the pilot project regions. The idea of providing pilot support to businesses that are evaluated as being able to contribute to public welfare is understandable in terms of early implementation in society. However, after the support to the pilot project regions, it is difficult to see how the results of this support will affect Japan as a whole and what effect it will have on the spread and expansion. The impression remains that the support will be limited to individual businesses.

I would like to ask you to continue to consider supporting measures that are fair and sustainable toward the true maintenance and expansion of regional mobile services using autonomous driving. That is all from me.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. Excuse me. First of all, I am sorry that the difference from last year's roadmap has become difficult to understand. However, regarding the concentrated injection of measures, since last year's description was made in the category of priority commercialization areas, the phased approach is more of a phased approach from Level 2 to Level 4.

I would like to consider whether it would be a little easier to understand. Regarding the last area for the advanced commercialization, I naturally believe that we should not leave it as it is. We will properly grasp the issues at the local level by ordering a survey of the Digital Agency, and we will follow up as appropriate on what measures are necessary for the areas that are lacking.

With regard to the second issue, the technological gap between the United States and China, I believe that the two countries should consider ways to resolve the issue, which is quite difficult. I intend to thoroughly consider this issue. At this point, I would like to ask for any comments from the Manufacturing Industry Bureau of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. What do you think?

Deputy Director-General TANAKA (Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry):
Yes. For example, we are challenging various technological innovations such as high-precision three dimensional maps and safety evaluation methods using simulations. If there is a space for such technological innovations, I believe it is possible to include not only what we are doing but also what each ministry is doing. Please allow us to continue our discussions.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. Excuse me, Mr. Hatano. If you have an image of the elimination of the technological gap between the United States and China, I would like to ask you to make an additional statement. Could you tell us if the target is narrowed down or if you are talking about the overall situation? What do you think?

Hatano Members:
Yes. Thank you for your question. In particular, I think the industry has a sense of crisis about the process of introducing AI technologies into self-driving and driving support products. The United States and China, especially China, have introduced new technologies at a very high speed and have actually succeeded in putting them into practical use. Japan needs some kind of solution to be able to firmly follow this.

In particular, in the area of how to put AI technology to practical use, the cost burden and human resource burden in the preparation process are very important. If we do not make any adjustments in these areas, the time is moving very quickly. If we just wait with our fingers in our mouths, we will completely fall behind. Therefore, the industry feels that it is necessary to take immediate measures.

JAMA has also started to consider the possibility of industry-wide collaboration and shared activities, and I would like to ask for your continued consideration and consultation. That's all.

Director, Asayama:
Yes, thank you very much. We would like to deepen our consideration in cooperation with the relevant ministries and agencies. However, there are some areas that we are not sure about where we should focus on, so I would appreciate it if you could continue to tell us. Thank you very much.

Mr. Tanaka on behalf of Tokyo Electric Power Company, please.

Member of the Okamoto group (Mr. Tanaka):
Thank you very much. Today, Mr. Okamoto, a member of the committee, was absent due to business, so I will make a brief comment on behalf of him.

Looking at the actual situation, it seems that the United States and China are using self-driving technology and providing some services. However, I have a strong impression that the technology is more advanced than the challenges. On the other hand, in Japan, in response to the challenges of the transportation vacuum caused by the declining birthrate and aging population, there are discussions on necessary and sufficient self-driving. I think that we should not stick too much to the cutting-edge technology and think about establishing it as soon as possible.

In the world of energy, the distributed allocation of computing resources is becoming an extremely serious issue in the future, and it is possible that demand for energy will suddenly increase in rural areas as well. Therefore, there is a possibility that regional energy businesses will suddenly change, even in advanced regions. In that case, I hope that the project will be implemented after securing low-cost and stable electricity by appropriately combining distributed power sources.

If we take a broader view of mobility, I believe that there are some that are almost in fixed use, some that are already in operation, and some that are semi-fixed. It is expected that the functions of a transportation company will be operated and business will be established by properly utilizing sharing by selectively using these according to the issues of the region. However, I believe that there is room for innovation in energy supply and data transmission according to the issues of those that are always in operation and semi-fixed mobility.

For example, I have heard that accidents often occur near some intersections or at crosswalks in rural areas where there are no traffic lights. As a safety measure for automated driving in such places, it is assumed that when a vulnerable road user is recognized, a new route is instantly instructed to mobility by AI. For the existence of such vulnerable road users, it is possible to recognize that they are vulnerable road users by life-related data, including household electricity usage data, and transmit it on a daily basis.

In addition, if the data and assets of the existing public infrastructure can be used for base stations for roadside-to-vehicle communication, for example, by installing them on utility poles, we believe that it would be easier to choose them from the viewpoint of cost and CO2 reduction.

In addition, from the viewpoint of efficiently maintaining an autonomous driving environment, there may be an idea of improving reliability by integrating the inspection of roads and electric power and communication facilities.

Regarding the logic tree in Figure 9 on pages 13 to 16 of the handout, if the fifth level on the right side is designed reasonably by taking into account the characteristics of local areas and is operated at low cost, and if the regional value as the fourth level on the left increases, the management of the fifth level becomes very important.

For example, when establishing a business entity in a local area, it may be necessary to accompany the business by inviting business management personnel from outside.

When investigating and examining the success pattern of the fifth level of logic tree in the future, I would appreciate it if you pay attention to the amount of infrastructure required and the form of provision, such as electric power and telecommunications data, in the sense that the supply side matches the demand side. That is all for my comments.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. Then, member Saito, please.

Saito Member:
Thank you all for your hard work. I think we've put together a lot of good specifications. I'd like to comment on two main points.

When I actually worked in infrastructure and IT at Hitachi, Ltd., I had the experience that when I created various things in the areas of demonstration and advanced commercialization, the Architecture itself became fragmented, and the IT systems of Japanese companies became fragmented by department or by company.

Under such circumstances, if we do not assume standardization from the perspective of system regions, it will result in that what is created in each Architecture will not be connected, so I think it would be good to give some thought to that.

In particular, there are two areas. First, the area of road infrastructure is the ITS system. In the U.S., the Department of Transportation has established the Architecture Reference for Cooperative and Intelligent Transportation (Architecture Reference for Cooperative and Intelligent Transportation). In the so-called ITS, as you mentioned earlier, the Ministry of Transportation is working on the standardization of communication and road infrastructure, assuming the time when cars run across the state, while considering the Architecture. I think it would be better to include some of these topics in this report.

One more thing, the system which is said to be a function of a trading company is, I think, more of a mobility service area. If we prepare a common operating system for these regions, we can create a model that can be gradually expanded through the operation of various things in each region. I think it would be good if we could move a little toward activities such as preparing operating systems for each element in the preceding regions. Standardization of these two systems is the first point.

In addition, in this world of autonomous driving using AI, including various public services, in a sense, competition with global companies starts not only in Japan but also when they expand overseas. At that time, I think that the concept of system Architecture when aiming for global needs must be aligned.

In this Architecture, including the discussion on the system mentioned earlier, the so-called Secure by Design or Safety by Design as a system will be embedded, or in other words, it will be verified, and it will be developed in a form that can be globally deployed in a form that is easy for each country to understand, which is probably an extension of the so-called mobility services in Digital Agency.

In many ways, it is difficult to expand overseas, but when such companies actually attack from overseas, they attack with the so-called standard service model, and on the other hand, they develop similar software, develop similar infrastructure, and provide the same foundation, "× N" (multiply N), and the world can be expanded globally. (Then, the cost of development investment will be 1 / N, and it is highly likely to become a profitable business.)

After all, the world that we are creating needs to be developed globally in a "× N" manner, and we need to talk about so-called system design and Architecture design. I think it is better to make the system, including the system, a standard model so that it can be transmitted overseas. I think it is better to think in a way that we can expand the talks on actual buses, autonomous driving of various cars, and infrastructure coordination, which we are working on to commercialize ahead of time, to global business.

I hope you will add these things in the future. That's all.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. I believe that the opinions of each member were answered by the Ministries and Agencies each time, but if there is anything that has not been answered by the Ministries and Agencies, I would like the members to ask questions again. Are there any omissions?

I would like to ask for any other opinions from the members of the Council or from the Ministries and Agencies. Are there any?

We've received a lot of feedback, so if you have any comments from Director-General, please let us know.

MURAKAMI Director-General:
Thank you very much for your active discussions over the past six months. There may still be many points to be improved, but the road map is to be improved every year, so I will continue to do my best. On top of that, at the moment, I think the following are the issues.

The first is the evaluation of the spread of Robotaku-type autonomous driving. According to media reports, it started in Tokyo in 2027, and it may start in Osaka in the latter half of the same year. As more people start to experience Robotaku, it is expected that the debate over whether Robotaku-type autonomous driving should be expanded nationwide quickly will accelerate.

It's true that robot-taxi technology today is quite sophisticated, and there is evidence that it is safer than driving by humans. However, the number of people who use taxis themselves is in the minority in the first place. Even if robot-taxis spread successfully to rural areas, it is necessary to discuss whether robot-taxis alone can really become an alternative option to existing public transportation in terms of price and usability.

Another concern is the level of maturity of these Robotaks. This is because there is no guarantee that they will be able to run even in rural areas with different geographical conditions if they have acquired a certain level of proficiency in urban areas. If a considerable amount of learning investment is required only in rural areas, there is a possibility that they will not spread to rural areas as a result. I think it is necessary to demonstrate and clarify whether Robotaks that have learned Japanese roads in urban areas can really run in rural areas with a little learning.

The second point is the future of autonomous driving, which has been proven in Japan, other than the Robo-Tak type. What about non-passenger cars or Green Slow Mobility? I think there are many people who have used various expressions to say what Japanese-style autonomous driving and infrastructure design are, and I think we will consider these.

Among the 10 regions, I would like to make a selection that will highlight Japan's edge-to-edge autonomous driving and infrastructure design. I think the key to this may be how well it is linked to traffic demand in advance.

As you know, it is said that more than 90% of bus routes are in the red. Therefore, I think that the goal of self-driving is not only to improve economic efficiency, but also to make it safer and easier to use than the current means of transportation. Therefore, I would like to exert our wisdom with each ministry so that we can demonstrate in the region that it is safer and easier to use than analog, and that we can understand the issues and solutions aimed at that.

I'll say two more briefly.

I believe that the establishment of a response system in the event of an accident is a major premise for such efforts. Building on that, the establishment of open standards and data is important. I believe that this will also be considered through implementation in 10 regions.
In addition, President Saito mentioned two things about Architecture. I thought that the development of open standard data linked to the response at the time of the incident would directly lead to the standardization of Architecture in terms of systems. That is what renewed my determination.

Lastly, in 10 regions, I would like to support initiatives based on the function of a transportation trading company. If we can pursue Japanese-style autonomous driving and infrastructure design linked to the function of a transportation trading company, the standard service model and the Architecture that supports it, as Mr. Saito mentioned at the end, can ideally develop. In some cases, I expect that we will have the foundation to expand globally as it is.

We will firmly work on both Robo-Tak and bringing forward the self-driving system based on service cars that Japan has built up to date. We will continue to receive the wisdom of the members as needed and cooperate well with each ministry and agency to carefully consider what is the implementation of self-driving system that is unique to Japan, including the process of selecting 10 regions. We would also appreciate your opinions and advice as needed. That is all from me.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. It will be the scheduled time. I would like to ask Chief Mori of this working group to summarize it. Thank you very much.

Mori Chief:
Thank you very much. Thank you for discussing it for a long time. I will tell you my impression.

It was pointed out earlier that the gap in self-driving technology between the United States and China needs to be resolved, and I mentioned that we need to work on this. This is very similar to drone development. Drones in Japan have been developed as an extension of remote-controlled helicopters, and as a result, almost useless drones have been created. This has been criticized.

For example, Japanese drones do not have such a system to control drones at drone shows. Each drone has extremely high performance, and drones with operability have been developed. However, I have heard that the system to control various systems as a whole is a very weak field. I think this is similar to the field of autonomous driving this time.

The Japanese government is very good at creating highly sophisticated technologies one by one, but the system to comprehensively manage all of them is actually very poor. In that sense, I heard that there is a difference between Japan and the United States. However, that does not mean that we can give up. If that is the case, although our ideas are different, there is still some time until mass production of vehicles to promote self-driving. There is still some time to discuss how far to develop vehicles that can be used as platforms and how far to consider the perforation to make them touch the AI. I believe that we can still get along with the United States and China if you summarize these points in the next one or two years.

If we do not determine exactly what parts of the vehicle are exposed to AI, we will not be able to discuss how far a vehicle manufacturer should build a vehicle or how far a AI can be exposed. Therefore, I believe it would be appreciated if you could advance the discussion on these parts. I believe that we still have at least one year to go.

Also, I chaired the meeting, and I listened to the opinions of people who are engaged in autonomous driving. I was told by the field side, and when I listened to the discussions by the leaders of the ministries and agencies, it sounds like they are almost ready for autonomous driving. However, when I went to the field level, it seems that there are quite a few cases where things get stuck or stuck at various trivial points.

They are conducting autonomous driving experiments in hilly and mountainous areas, but they are saying that no intersections should be built for practical use in the future. In other words, if they say that no intersections should be built, they can't do it. The local police, road-related people, and transportation-related people are talking about it.

There are some areas that seem to have stopped as if they were discussing at the entrance. Therefore, in the future, along with the selection of the preceding commercialization areas of these 10 areas, we would like you to go through the special zone application procedure, and if you do not solve the problems and issues at the Tokyo level, there are many examples of local businesses and local governments conducting actual experiments while groaning.

Even if we actually try to move the robot taxi or drive it unmanned, for example, as is well known, there are places where it does not work well at the local level, such as the grass fluttering in the strong wind, the swinging branches, the puddles, or the behavior of the traffic control uncle. Even if the traffic division or the road division cooperates even a little, it will be possible to carry out autonomous driving, but these things are not working well in reality.

China is probably providing support at the national level, while the United States is probably solving the problem with funds. However, Japan should not leave the issue to local governments too much. Rather, I would like the national government to do more than a little. I would like the national government to do everything in its power so that the system can be put into practice. Therefore, I would like you to consider creating this system.

It is meaningless if the local people are saying that intersections are absolutely not allowed. In fact, there is no point in selecting as many as 10 regions. Since there are such cases, I would like you to stay close to them, including the places where experiments have been conducted.

Also, in terms of supporting transportation companies, there are quite a few local governments that are actually operating on-demand buses. Even in hilly and mountainous areas, there are quite a few places that are operating on-demand taxis and buses, so if it is true that self-driving without a safety driver will become an extension of that, naturally, I thought that the selection of areas for advanced commercialization would be filtered first for areas where redesigns are being discussed, areas where public ride-sharing is being discussed, and areas where on-demand transportation is available, and I myself have been thinking about it. I hope that each ministry and agency will also discuss this in selecting advanced areas, and I look forward to your support.

This is my impression, but on the whole, as I stated earlier, I would like to express my gratitude for the long discussions. In the end, I would like to make revisions based on the opinions that the Secretariat received today, which will lead to a decision in Meeting for the Promotion of a Digital Society.

Going forward, based on the opinions you gave us today, I would like the secretariat to coordinate with you. In addition, while monitoring the progress of the initiatives in 2025, I would like you to continue to discuss and consider the issues arising from them in this working session. Thank you for your cooperation.

Last but not least, I would like to express my gratitude to all of you for your efforts in compiling this 2025 report. I would also like to ask for your cooperation and support in following the progress and follow-up support. This is my final summary. Thank you very much.

Director, Asayama:
Thank you very much. Today, or rather, the working group was held once a month. With your cooperation, we have come close to finalizing the roadmap. Thank you very much.

Regarding the Mobility Roadmap, as Mr. Mori Chief has just mentioned, we will finalize it. If you have any additional comments, please let the secretariat know by the end of this week and we will make the necessary revisions.

After consulting with Mori Chief, I would like to finalize the plan by leaving it up to Mori Chief.

As I mentioned earlier, the decision will be made by Meeting for the Promotion of a Digital Society in June, and before that, there will be a meeting of the Promotion Council, which will be held around the end of May. We will make preparations for that.

In principle, the handling of the materials will be announced on the website immediately, but the revised version will be announced on Digital Agency's website at a later date. Therefore, at this stage, I would like you to pay close attention to the handling of the materials.

In addition, as Mr. Murakami Director-General mentioned, the roadmap has not been completed yet. It is important to continue to brush up the content of the roadmap. There are still discussions on the preliminary commercialization area and the special zone application from Mr. Mori Chief. We will continue to coordinate with each ministry and agency. I would like to ask for the cooperation of each ministry and agency.

This concludes our tenth meeting. Thank you very much.

Related Information

Mobility