The year 2024 is the first year past the halfway point toward the target year 2030 of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Now is the time for Japan to review its strategy for the system of global co-innovation, I strongly advocate. The strategy means for what, what to go for, and what not to go for. Japan has been cooperating with the SDGs activities, mainly through the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST). JST had played an important role in the international community in terms of a framework for the development of science, technology, and innovation, which are said to be indispensable for the achievement of SDGs. It can be seen from the acknowledgments of "Guidebook for the Preparation of Science, Technology and Innovation for the SDGs Roadmaps" published in 2021 by United Nations Inter-Agency Task Team on Science, Technology and Innovation for the SDGs (IATT) and European Commission Joint Research Centre (EC-JRC). Europe, won the authorship of the guidebook. The authorship was a great opportunity for Japan to change its position in the innovation and startup ecosystems. For implementation of innovation, the company must overcome uncertainties regarding technology, customer needs, and ELSI (Ethical Legal and Social Issues: ELSI). Platform strategies appear in various phases of innovation-chain. Just like the smile curve in the global supply chain, there is a smile curve relationship in the innovation-chain. In addition, the fact that the benefit structure is part of an ecosystem would indicate the importance of the ecosystem. In both innovation and startup ecosystems, opportunity to be exposed to actual challenges and networking with actors who are trying to solve them are important. For example, in start-ups in developing countries, entrepreneurs seeking to solve problems are seeking technological cooperation, and there are cases where Japan's advanced technological capabilities can contribute. Japan has historically been weak in terms of a system of networking with other countries. There is a lack of a common code that transcends language. SDGs, however, are a global agenda and serve as a common code that outlines a code of conduct for their realization, making the SDGs a tool to compensate for Japan's weakness. At the annual high-level political forum on sustainable development, 204 side events were held in the most recent 2023 edition, 141 of which were face-to-face meetings. There are many people who are able to speak out about actual issues and who are willing to solve them, and they are diverse in nationality or ages. The SDG Summit with quadrennial review cycle was held. At both meetings, it was shared that there was a crisis situation in the achievement of the SDGs, as some targets had been set back, partly due to COVID-19. The rescue plan for this critical situation was also presented. He strongly appealed for urgent action to strengthen　all forms of cooperation, including financial. Developing countries have long been seeking support from developed countries, and support programs for the creation of a roadmap for science, technology, and innovation toward the SDGs. Japan has yet to be named as a supporter. However, with regard to the review framework established as a midway point toward 2030, the EU was the first to present it, followed by 36 countries, and one more country followed, but Japan has not implemented it. In order to change the positioning of Japan in the innovation and start-up ecosystems, it will be important for Japan. It will be effective to use SDGs as common code with the creation of roadmaps for science, technology, and innovation. Roadmapping, which shows the process of creation of roadmaps including revisions, is considered more important than roadmaps. It is not too late to achieve SDGs. It is not too late for Japan to create and implement its own strategy. Let us take action so that Japan will not be left behind before we know it. Leave no one behind.

View full abstract

In order to advance innovation in the field of Industry-Academia-Government Collaboration, it is necessary to strengthen the Design of initiatives related to the System of those collaborative interactions. It is desirable to foster a sense of conviction among members of the organization and third parties based on "Unknown risk management" by placing a duty of care based on the skeleton of the precautionary principle and the prevention principle, with the endorsement of a state of fluctuation in the foreseeability of risks. In Industry-Academia-Government Collaboration, an "information divide" is likely to occur. In order to mitigate this risk, a "Support systems with side-by-side" for information sharing management should be deployed to maintain a "Consensus-building Solution" of findings related to convergence knowledge, while overlooking the ecosystem of activity results. As a " Support systems with side-by-side, " I proposed four system configurations: a resource mix evaluation method, a cycle economy implementation evaluation method, an implementation roadmap outcome indicator evaluation method, and an ELSIs model building on multi-stage consensus method.

View full abstract

　The social system of the Basic Plan for Science and Technology, which progressed smoothly up to Society 4.0, has stagnated in Society 5.0, making it difficult to talk about Society 6.0 in this environment. The reason for this may be that the social design of the information society of Society 5.0 follows the trend of an industrial society based on mass production. 　The gap between the ideal of a super-smart society and the reality of a digital society makes it difficult to gain public acceptance, and we believe that one of the reasons for this is the rigid digital orientation of the aging Japanese population. 　Society 5.0 is said to be an advanced information society, and the social system is built on a data collaboration infrastructure to create the Society 5.0 society. As long as the public does not accept this data-connectivity infrastructure, the social systems of Society 5.0 will not work, and as a result, dissatisfaction with the concept of Society 5.0 will arise.

View full abstract

　In standardization, information disclosure is one of the main outcomes. On the other hand, the content of information disclosure in standardization processes differs from that of standards. In the case of certification/accreditation, where a third party assesses and approves the quality of products/services/organizations, the purpose, scope, and content of information disclosure are different for the certification/accreditation organization, the applicant, and the purchaser who sees the certification/accreditation mark. Standardization to realize innovation and to build competitive advantage requires appropriate control of information disclosure in the standards and standards development processes. The strategic disclosure of standardization processes and their classification from the viewpoint of each stakeholder is stated.

View full abstract

On May 11, 2022, the "Act on the Promotion of Ensuring National Security through Integrated Implementation of Economic Measures" (Act No. 43 of 2022) was enacted and promulgated on May 18. This law established four systems: (1)ensuring the stable supply of critical products,(2)ensuring the stable provision of essential infrastructure services, (3) a system for enhancing development of specified critical technologies,and (4) the closed-door system for patent applications.This paper outlines (4) the closed-door system for patent applications,and then discusses the "blind spots in the system of information secrecy including sensitive information".Hereinafter, the "the closed-door system for patent applications" may be referred to as the "information secrecy system" or the "non-disclosure system.

View full abstract