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 ".

2025 (2025) Fourth Expert Meeting for Policy Evaluation and Public Administration Project Review

Overview

  • Date and time: Monday, August 4, 2025 (2025) from 10:30 to 12:00
  • Location: Hybrid event (face-to-face and online)
  • Agenda:
    1. Opening
    2. Agenda
      • (1) Report on the discussions to date
      • (2) Direction of improvement in each business
        • (1) Supervisory support system
        • ② Electronic approval system (EASY)
    3. Other:
    4. Adjournment

Material

Summary of the Proceedings

After an opening statement from the secretariat and opening remarks from Mr. Taira, Minister for Digital Transformation,, the meeting proceeded under the chairmanship of the secretariat.
First, the Chairman of the Advisory Council explained the recommendations for project improvement based on the report compiled at the Second Advisory Council for Policy Evaluation and Public Administration Project Review and the discussion at the Third Advisory Council for Policy Evaluation and Public Administration Project Review (open process). Then, each person in charge of the project reported on the direction of project improvement based on the report and the open process. The experts expressed their thoughts on the report from each person in charge of the project. Finally, Mr. Kishi, Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Digital Transformation, expressed his thoughts on the whole project. Deputy Director-General Takeo Morita, Head of the Advisory Council, gave closing remarks.

Date and

Monday, August 4, 2025, from 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. (Japan time) 2025

US>

Hybrid hosting (face-to-face and online)

Attendees

Member of the

Chair, Satou, Mr. Iwasaki, Mr. Uemura, Mr. Kanbayashi, Mr. Kobayashi, Permanent Representative, Mr. Mito
*Committee Member Sasajima reviews in writing

Agenda

Secretariat: It is now time for the Fourth Policy Evaluation and Public Administration Project Review Expert Meeting to be held.

Today, we are using a web conference system.

First of all, I would like to open the meeting with a greeting from Mr. Taira, Minister for Digital Transformation,.

Mr. Taira, Minister for Digital Transformation,: Good morning, . Thank you very much for taking time out of your busy schedule to gather here.

I am TAIRA Masaaki of Minister for Digital Transformation. As I am also the Minister of State for Administrative Reform, I hold positions of both sides. However, I have been a member of the Administrative Project Review since 2008, when the Liberal Democratic Party was in power and Mr. KONO Taro was in charge of the Wastefulness Eradication Project Team in Chief, so I am deeply attached to this project. I look forward to working with you on this.

I would like to express my gratitude to the distinguished experts for their participation in the discussions held on three occasions and for taking the time out of their busy schedules to attend today's meeting.

The purpose of this meeting is to review the projects implemented by Digital Agency to make them more efficient and effective, and to realize high-quality administration, by having experts discuss the projects from the perspectives of necessity, efficiency and effectiveness.

In the course of our discussions to date, we have received proposals for improvement in the two businesses of supervisory support systems and electronic approval systems (EASY).

Today, we will receive a report summarizing the contents of the discussions so far, and the person in charge will report on the direction of the improvement of the project based on the suggestions from the experts.

We will develop efficient and effective digital policies and aim to improve the productivity of the government and society as a whole by reviewing and improving our entire business based on your feedback.

In Digital Agency, we are also working to promote the use of AI by the government and other organizations, which we believe will improve the efficiency of projects and ensure their effective implementation.

I look forward to a lively discussion with you today.

Secretariat: , for the day.

(Leaving Mr. Taira, Minister for Digital Transformation,)

Secretariat: Now, let me explain the flow of today's meeting.

First, the report compiled by the experts will be reported by the chairman on behalf of the experts. Next, each project manager will report on the status of measures and considerations for project improvement. Based on this report, I would like to hear the views of the expert panel members, and lastly, I would like to hear the views of Parliamentary Vice-Minister Kishi.

I would like to make a few supplementary explanations. With regard to the report to be presented after this, we have selected two projects from among Digital Agency's initiatives, the Governance and Management Support System and the Electronic Approval System (EASY), and had them discuss the direction of project improvement with experts. As of May, a provisional version of the report was prepared. Subsequently, on July 4 last month, we held a public process for the Governance and Management Support System, and the final version of the report was made by adding opinions from the expert committee members.

Regarding the reports from the people in charge of each project, since the preliminary version of the report was compiled, that is, since May, they have been considering how to improve each project in response to the issues that were pointed out. In that sense, this is a report on the current status of measures and consideration for the direction of project improvement. I would like you to be aware of this.

Now, the chairman will give us an overview of the report.

1. Report on discussions to date

Chair of the Advisory Panel: This fiscal year, two projects were targeted. These were the supervision and management support system and the electronic approval system (EASY). Regarding the disclosure process, the supervision and management support system was targeted.

Management and supervision support system

Chair of the Advisory Panel: is in a position to individually review the system development of each government agency in Digital Agency. At the same time, we are asking this government agency to input the information because it is necessary to centrally manage the system.

In addition, as a Digital Agency, we are providing a system for that.

Based on our discussion this time, we have several suggestions for improvement. First of all, we would like to set a target. In this case, KPI is important, but the KPI currently envisioned is "the number of accesses to each view." This means the number of times each ministry and agency accesses the information collected by Digital Agency. However, the effect of the review does not necessarily correspond to the number of accesses. In this case of Digital Agency, what each ministry and agency can see in the system collected by Digital Agency is only within the scope of the ministry and agency. Therefore, even if it is effective for the ministry and agency that does not control the system within the ministry and agency, there is not much merit in the ministry and agency that strictly controls what kind of system exists within the ministry and agency. In that sense, my first comment is that I would like you to set a target in the outcome of the review.

As for the means of policy and the details of its implementation, the ministries and agencies register the system for centralized system management once a year. This depends on what the ministries and agencies are doing, but from the perspective of detailed review, once a year is quite long. It was pointed out in the previous meeting that it should be a little shorter, and that it should be a little more up-to-date information. On the other hand, input into this system is mostly done by the officials of the ministries and agencies, and as the number of updates increases, the burden on the ministries and agencies will naturally increase. Therefore, we think carefully about this and as I wrote at the end of page 5, it is our opinion that increasing the number of updates will increase the burden on the ministries and agencies, and we should balance it with the effects of the updates so as not to make it too complicated.

As for policy measures and ways of doing things, Digital Agency takes the position that it reviews each of the ministries and agencies individually, and there is a burden in gathering information. In addition, as for ways of gathering information, the current situation is paper-based and e-mails are used, so I have written that it would be good if the latest IT technology and AI could be included and improved. However, as also written at the end, the premise is that it should be to the extent that it does not burden the ministries and agencies.

This is the third policy measure. At the back of page 6, the question of whether it is better to collect them in an integrated manner from a security perspective often comes up in discussions on security. It is true that there is an idea that security will be stronger if it is done in one place rather than separately, but on the other hand, if the security is breached by some enemy, the damage will be greater. Therefore, it is necessary to take a proper before-and-after approach and look at how it has been improved. At the same time, we must also look at the security perspective. As I have written here, security, usability, and cost often conflict with each other. In general, if security is tightened, usability will decline and it will cost more, so I hope that this will be well balanced.

It is about the budget and system. As you can see on page 7, the system currently used for this project is a kind of database, but it uses a relatively simple database. Therefore, if the ministries and agencies update the database not once a year but whenever there is a change, they will probably not be able to respond. In that case, the extension of the current database will not work, and the database will have to be renewed, so I would like you to consider that as well. However, related to the issue of the frequency of updates I mentioned earlier, there is also a burden on the ministries and agencies, and the database must be updated accordingly. The database cannot be updated without a little more budgetary support, and as a result, I think it will be difficult to update the information.

As for the stakeholders, as I have already mentioned, the person in charge of the system at each ministry and agency must enter the information, and if anything, each ministry and agency is independent and creates its own system, and the information must be entered in accordance with the format prepared by Digital Agency. Unless we collect the information in a way that will naturally be understood by the stakeholders and users, it will be difficult to gain the understanding of the ministries and agencies.

Electronic approval system (EASY)

Chair of the Advisory Panel: This will be in the form of updating EASY, the document management system that is already in operation. With regard to the management of public documents, Cabinet Office is the institutional authority, and from Digital Agency's standpoint, it will be the development of a system related to the management of public documents. Therefore, when it comes to institutional changes, it will be Cabinet Office, not Digital Agency, and I conducted a review while thinking about whether Digital Agency has much to do.

The first policy measure is that this system is used by almost all ministries and agencies. Therefore, if this system is not easy to use, it will interfere with other duties. I would like you to think about this and create a system that is easy to use. To that end, before each ministry and agency uses it, I would like Cabinet Office, which manages official documents, and Digital Agency, which is in charge of system development, to introduce the new document management system in advance. I am sorry to say this, but I would like you to deploy it to the ministries and agencies while fixing various malfunctions and inconvenient parts.

Regarding Approach 2 and Policy Measure 2, this is also closely related to usability. UI (User Interface) and UX (User Experience) are areas in which the private sector has accumulated a relatively large amount of know-how, but the government does not necessarily have this kind of expertise. Digital Agency is taking the lead in this field. The second policy measure I would like to see is the use of Digital Agency's expertise to create a more user-friendly system.

Regarding the budget and system, as I have written a little here, there are some areas where the budget is not necessarily sufficient. In particular, various system costs have been increasing recently, and among them, there are various functions, new functions, and convenient functions planned for the new system, but we have been pointed out by the original division that it may not be possible to create all of them with the current budget. It is certainly possible, and since the system is related to the efficiency of the work of the entire government ministries and agencies, I think it would be good if you could consider various aspects of the budget.

As for the last part of the second question, even if the budget is limited, I would like you to devise ways so that the convenience for users is not lost as much as possible. That means narrowing down the functions to be implemented, but I think it would be good if you could proceed with the consideration while increasing the convenience by using the latest technology such as AI as much as possible.

That's all for my report.

Secretariat: Then, the person in charge of the project will report on the measures to improve the project based on the report and the status of consideration.

2. Direction of improvement in each business

Management and supervision support system

Person in charge of the business operator: Then, I would like to explain the direction of improvement based on the points of the supervision and management support system. There are six major points.

First, I would like to ask your first question. Regarding the cost-effectiveness of the system, as you pointed out, currently only the number of accesses is included. However, we would like to set a new cost-effectiveness indicator based on the assumption of the input cost of each ministry and agency and the effectiveness of the system in improving the efficiency of administrative work.

The second question is about the frequency of entering information into various information systems. You pointed out that the frequency should be increased to once a year, and at the same time, it is important to strike a balance between reducing the burden on each ministry and agency. In this regard, the PMO and PJMO of each ministry and agency will also be stakeholders, so the frequency and method of updating information is not something that Digital Agency will decide unilaterally, and we will design our operations and systems while properly listening to the opinions of each ministry and agency.

My third question is about the so-called review of budget requests, which involves not only the supervisory and support system but also various emails and other communications with the ministries and agencies as needed. As a result, there is a need to design a system that can be completed within the system in a centralized manner so that such communication does not occur. As you pointed out, we are aware that the burden on the ministries and agencies is increasing due to the frequent communication. Therefore, in order to eliminate such cases as much as possible, we would like to renovate the system by reviewing the centralized design of the database and utilizing some AI so that information can be properly updated in the system.

With regard to the fourth point, security, the next-generation system is expected to be operated on the Government Cloud, so with that in mind, we will take all possible measures to maintain the same level of strict access rights management as at present, but as you pointed out, we will also keep in mind the balance between usability and cost.

My fifth question is about the budget. As you pointed out, there is no point in creating a half-baked system that would increase the burden on the ministries and agencies. Therefore, in regard to the budget, we will strive to secure the necessary budget while further communicating with Digital Agency budget officials and others.

Lastly, regarding your sixth question, as you have pointed out many times, this system is a system with communication with each ministry and agency, and it is a system with this burden, so you pointed out that we should pay attention to the cost of each ministry and agency so that there is no excessive burden, which is exactly correct. As I said at the beginning, we would like to develop the system not simply by measuring the number of accesses, but by properly considering the balance between the effect of improving the efficiency of administrative affairs and the burden on each ministry and agency resulting from the introduction and utilization of this system, while being aware of the cost effectiveness.

Electronic approval system (EASY)

Person in charge of the business operator: We received four improvement proposals this time.
The first point is that a wide range of measures should be considered and implemented to promote the steady use of the new document management system in each office and ministry. On this point, we would like to consider a wide range of measures necessary to promote the steady use of the new document management system, such as prior knowledge of the operation method of the new document management system and training. First of all, in the project of designing and developing the new document management system, which has been implemented since this fiscal year, we have started considering an implementation plan for training on this operation method, etc., and we would like to promote the steady use of the system in the future.

As for the second point, the development of the new document management system, especially related to UI/UX, Digital Agency should take the lead. We need to reach an agreement with Cabinet Office, which is in charge of the public document management system, on the system screens and the wording of the forms, etc., and we would like to coordinate appropriately. However, regarding the UI/UX part, so-called usability, there is a specialized team with UI/UX knowledge called the Service Design Unit in Digital Agency. We believe that we can leverage Digital Agency's strengths by cooperating with them, and we will aim to realize better UI/UX in cooperation with the Service Design Unit.

With regard to the third point that we should strive to secure the budget necessary to build a system that can achieve the purpose of the project, based on the fact that the new document management system is an important system that enables all document management operations to be processed electronically, we would like to work closely with the person in charge of the budget in Digital Agency.

On the other hand, as you pointed out in the fourth point, if we cannot avoid this budget constraint, we should proceed with the development in stages. We also recognize that the budget situation is quite severe. Based on this current situation, we will prioritize the creation of a retention period table, publication on e-Gov, metadata management of administrative documents, etc., which are the core functions of this new document management system, and other functions. We will formulate a plan to proceed with the development in stages, aiming to implement the former by the end of fiscal 2026, and we will be able to respond in consideration of the budget constraint.

Secretariat: Next, I would like to hear the views of the experts on the explanation by the person in charge of the project. Before that, I would like to briefly introduce the written views of the committee members who were absent today.

I have three comments. The first is that although it is important to set and measure evaluation indicators, it is more important to start the projects themselves. The second is that it is important to implement each project and at the same time enhance the staff system to support it. The third comment is that although it may not be directly related to this year's target projects, I feel that the roles of digital infrastructure are becoming increasingly important, and I would like you to consider expanding the implementation system and budget. These are my three comments.

Then, I would like you to speak in order, and at the end, I would like to hear the chairman's comments.

Member of the Advisory Council: It is as Chairman This time, as two projects, we aimed to integrate and manage the system of the entire government, and conducted an evaluation and review of a very important system, which is a management system to make appropriate administrative documents and the management and storage of public documents efficient. Since it is essential to measure cost-effectiveness for administrative and fiscal reform, evaluation items are required for that purpose. I would like to see efforts made to eliminate the sense of duplication in the investment system among the various ministries and agencies.

In addition, while aiming for efficient and effective development and operation, based on the improvements reported today, please do not forget to implement them according to the roadmap from the user's perspective.

In addition, as Minister Taira stated in his comments at the beginning of today's meeting, the utilization of AI is currently being promoted in Digital Agency, so I would like you to continue to work in cooperation with each ministry and agency in order to reduce the burden on the employees of each ministry and agency.

Member of the Advisory Council: It is as Chairman I would like to comment mainly from the perspective of administrative reform. First of all, regarding the supervisory and management system, it is necessary to set indicators for efficiency, so I think information on cost effectiveness is important. Since strengthening functions inevitably increases costs, I think it is important to monitor costs. Due to the design of the review sheet, basically only annual indicators can be posted, but I think it is important to update information to the extent possible for management. I have no particular comment on the electronic approval system.

Next, regarding the management of this review, I felt that the review of Digital Agency is quite unique compared to the reviews of other ministries and agencies, although I think that there is also the uniqueness of Digital Agency that spans across all ministries and agencies. According to the report, in order to aim for a win-win situation between the evaluated side and the evaluating side, materials for the evaluation are not prepared as much as possible. This is understandable to a certain extent, but seven perspectives for the evaluation were presented in the course of the evaluation. As these materials were not organized according to the seven perspectives, the burden on the evaluating side seems to be somewhat heavy because the contents of the evaluation must be searched for each perspective.

Also, I did a documentary review, but I was surprised to receive a large amount of documents for a large number of projects. There were 53 projects, but it is difficult even for experts who are used to reviewing such a large number of projects with documents, and even if they do it, I think the review will be coarse. The purpose is to improve the project, not to review the documents. The system states that a review by experts is required once every five years. I think it is necessary to make a rotation to reduce the number of projects so that there is no burden. I have informed the secretariat of this point by e-mail, and I thought that the management of the review needs to improve.

Member of the Advisory Council: It is as Chairman I would like to comment on two points. The first point is about the control and supervision support system. This is redundant, but I think how to create the UI will be the key to efficiency. I would like you to proceed with the design while paying attention to this.

Regarding the electronic approval system, it's the content of the training on the user side. Compared to the supervisory system, I think there will be a wider range of users. Therefore, the training content will be as simple and easy to understand as possible, something like a training video will be created, and I think it would be good if the training is based on that premise so that it can be transferred widely and quickly.

Member of the Advisory Council: It is as Chairman I would like to ask two questions. One is about the supervisory and management system, and this may be a question because I do not know how it is operated in the field, but I think communication is very important this time. I would like to ask about Approach 2. On the other hand, if the means of communication are double-tracked, it will cost more. For example, if you are using a system that you do not usually use, it will take time and effort to go to see it. In that sense, I think there are advantages and disadvantages of increasing the frequency of communication this time. At the same time, I think there are also advantages and disadvantages of incorporating communication tools into it. Therefore, I would like to ask you to promote the development of communication tools with a constant awareness of costs and effects. That is my first question.

Another question is about EASY. In Approach 1, it is a measure to promote the steady use of the new document management system, and I think this report actually includes training and prior notification. First of all, I think it would be good to consider what kind of form is good for this notification, and whether it is good as a method to make people understand the meaning of your behavior, which is easy to change. I think it would be good to consider better methods than just training and prior notification.

Member of the Advisory Council: It is as Chairman I understand that this is an extremely difficult task because it is a cross-ministerial task, and it involves issues such as the difficulty of establishing cost, usability, and security, as well as the temporary burden of responding to the speed of technological progress.

Under such circumstances, I believe that in order to ensure the legitimacy of such projects, although there were various discussions, it would be about the cost effectiveness. I believe that if it is clearly indicated how much is spent on what can be done and how much is saved, the evaluation and support for such projects will become very strong. I hope that the projects will proceed with this in mind.

Member of the Advisory Council: It is as Chairman summarized, and I also thank you for your answer on the direction of improvement. I believe it was meaningful.

I would like to say a few words about the Governance and Management Support System. In the course of participating in this project several times, I have renewed my understanding of where Digital Agency's roles should be found based on the system that has already been managed and operated by each ministry and agency. Of course, it is important to consider the issue of waste and KPI in the first place, but I would also like to say that I thought that the roles of Digital Agency as a premise for this would be determined by brushing up on the policy evaluation aspect and the administrative project review aspect, which were the two aspects mentioned at the beginning by the chairman.

Overall, I agree with you that you need to balance usability, security, and cost.

Chair of the Advisory Panel: As I mentioned earlier, at this meeting, from the two perspectives of policy evaluation and administrative project review, the various reports and responses received were confusing at the point of what they were seeking in the first place. In that sense, I would like to once again express my gratitude to everyone in the Original Division. Thank you very much.

Based on that, I would like to make some comments as the chairman, or to say something like a kind of impression, first of all, it is the integrated management support system. In fact, we were confused as we heard a lot. After thinking about it, I think that the keyword that always comes up here, "centralized project management," was a misconception. The relationship between Digital Agency and the government ministries and agencies, in this case, Digital Agency is in the position of reviewing the system development of each ministry and agency individually. In the position of reviewing individually, it is not necessary to do project management in an integrated manner, in fact, it is enough to do it individually. As I said earlier, the government ministries and agencies that are relatively closely managing the system, as the committee member mentioned earlier, are quite a burden for them. Therefore, I wonder what kind of integrated system management is.

However, even if there is a burden, I think that this project is not unnecessary at all, and I think it is important, leaving aside whether I call it centralized system management or not. The reason is that I think that the government should firmly grasp what kind of systems each government office and ministry has developed and what kind of process they developed.

Therefore, although it is called centralized system management, it is better to separate the understanding of centralized systems and system management. For understanding, for example, the Project for Survey of Government-Owned Information Systems can be used. First, information should be collected. Regarding the management of system management, since there are differences among the ministries and agencies, priority should be given to individual reviews. When individual reviews are conducted, Digital Agency should look at the information collected by the systems of the ministries and agencies and use it to determine that there is a lot of waste in terms of budget. Therefore, I think it is better to review the purpose and names used in the system.

If things go on as they are now, the ministries and agencies, especially the ones that are doing it relatively properly, will have doubts about why this is being done. So, I think it would be easier to proceed if it were reviewed and the information collected is, in a sense, a kind of census of the national government's information system. It is a system that the ministries and agencies have, so it is a necessary project.

This is another electronic approval system (EASY). At present, Cabinet Office is the regulatory authority, and the system is created based on it, so Digital Agency does not have much freedom and I think it is difficult.

However, Digital Agency has a lot of knowledge about digital compared to Cabinet Office. From that point of view, for better or worse, current official document management is premised on paper, and paper cannot be disposed of or tampered with. However, the word processors and spreadsheets that you are using now are not necessarily running on the computers that you are using, and the information is stored in the cloud. For example, every time you edit or input something, or every time another person makes a correction, almost all the information can be recorded in detail. Unlike the time of paper, the range of information that can be stored has expanded greatly with the use of the cloud. It is possible to record everything, including who wrote when, what they wrote, and who deleted it. Therefore, Digital Agency would like to see official documents created in a way that matches the current IT, and including documents before they became official documents, how to retain them. If we can accurately store documents before they became official documents, this would be quite revolutionary, and there is no other country in the world that has done so. I think it would be better if Cabinet Office could make a proposal to the Japanese side or the entire government on official documents utilizing the new current IT.

Secretariat: Mr. Kishi, Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs, please give us your thoughts on the report compiled by the Advisory Panel, as well as the explanation of measures and the status of consideration toward project improvement by each project manager.

Mr. Kishi, Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Digital Transformation,: Since Minister Taira is not in, I would like to say a few words on his behalf.

First of all, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to all of you, the experts, for compiling this report on Digital Agency's initiatives and for your discussions. Thank you very much.

By next September, Digital Agency will enter its fifth year since its inauguration. We are truly grateful for the evaluation and review at this milestone. We also believe that it is meaningful for each ministry and agency to firmly use the system, as in the case of the two projects covered this time, and we will firmly work toward that goal.

On this occasion, I recognized that it was important for the improvement of the system to discuss processes and security based on the legal system, and to firmly incorporate the perspective of the EBPM and verify its effects.

In addition, each person in charge of these two projects is steadily aware of their significance, and I believe there is a limit to what we can do within the Digital Agency. Therefore, I am truly grateful to receive objective suggestions from experts at this juncture, and I would appreciate your continued guidance.

I would like to conclude my remarks by asking for your continued guidance and encouragement.

Secretariat: That's all for today's agenda.

Lastly, Mr. Deputy Director-General Morita, General Manager, will give closing remarks.

MORITA Managing Deputy Director-General: My name is Morita. I have been appointed as Managing Deputy Director-General as of July 1.

As the Director of the Secretariat for Policy Evaluation and Administrative Project Review, I would like to express my appreciation for the lively discussions that took place on four occasions, including today's meeting.

As Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs mentioned earlier, I believe it is important to receive guidance from experts and incorporate their knowledge on the challenges facing Digital Agency's initiatives.

Digital Agency, for its part, will continue to work to realize EBPM through policy evaluation and administrative project reviews, and will make further efforts to improve the review process itself, including constant improvement of projects and administrative improvements through the PDCA cycle.

Secretariat: This concludes the Fourth Expert Meeting for Policy Evaluation and Public Administration Review.