Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Legal regulations and public policies for next-generation robots in Japan

  • Original Article
  • Published:
AI & SOCIETY Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Faced with a declining birthrate and aging population, the Japanese government has been adopting policies to promote the R&D of next-generation robots (hereinafter “NGRs”) which are seen as key to solving issues of labor shortage and enhance global competitiveness of the Japanese economy. However, the legal environment surrounding NGRs is not developer-friendly, and may hamper their proliferation and use. In order to address this issue, the first section of this paper explains the legal status of NGRs in Japan, followed by a section focusing on the legal regulations in Japan which involve the developers, manufacturers, distributors, and operators of NGRs. The final section outlines the current situation of various policies adopted by the Japanese government to enhance and accelerate the development of NGRs. The aim of this paper was to show how NGRs are regarded under the laws of Japan and what legal barriers the NGR-related parties confront, and provide insight into how the Japanese government is trying to promote the development of NGRs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Notes

  1. English translations of Japanese laws/ordinances can be found at the Japanese Law Translation Database System powered by the Ministry of Justice, http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/. All English translations of Japanese laws/ordinances cited in this paper are, unless otherwise noted, taken from this database. Note that these are unofficial translations. Other Japanese materials are translated into English by the author.

  2. The guidelines provide examples of NGRs, which include robots for cleaning, transportation, guidance for facilities, security services, housework, care giving, construction of buildings, maintenance, farm work, fishery, entertainment, education, welding, painting, assembling, inspection (for quality control), polishing, washing, and communication. The objective of these guidelines is to set forth the basic way of thinking about how to ensure safe application of NGRs in each stage of their design, manufacture, import, installment, maintenance, repair, sale, and use, which are considered to be common among the NGRs. For more information regarding the guidelines and NGR safety, see Weng et al. (2009).

  3. A preliminary definition is provided by the Robotto Seisaku Kenkyūkai, a METI-led study group to propose industrial policies for NGRs. According to its interim report (2005), NGRs are robots which are not “conventional industrial robots isolated from human beings.” In particular, the report describes NGRs to be consisting of (1) “next-generation industrial robots” which act on behalf of or in cooperation with human beings in manufacturing sites for products of vast variety/variable quantity, and (2) “service robots” which serve human beings while sharing space with them in homes and other places for various purposes, such as cleaning, security, welfare, life support, and amusement. For early discussions on NGRs by study groups assembled by METI, see Weng et al. (2007).

  4. The final report by the Robotto Seisaku Kenkyūkai (2006, p. 7) defines robots as “anything that has three essential technologies: sensors, software programs (for control), and drives” or “intelligent mechanical systems.” However, it is worth noting that this definition “may no longer be conclusive in the advent of the new phase in robotics,” “where robots can be driven by independent intelligence/control based on AI enabling access to various people and objects in real world without the help of specific actuation system.” (Headquarters for Japan’s Economic Revitalization 2015, pp. 8–9).

  5. Kagoshima District Court, 22 Jan 2001, in Case No. (gyo-u) 1 of 1995.

  6. Tokyo District Court, 26 Feb 2003, in Case No. (wa) 23454 of 2002.

  7. Yokohama District Court, 31 Mar 2011, in Case No. (wa) 1463 of 2010, 2115 Hanrei jiho 70.

  8. Kagoshima District Court, 2 Nov 2011, in Case No. (wa) 878 of 2011, Westlaw JAPAN Document No. 2011WLJPCA11026001, and Kagoshima District Court, 2 Nov 2011, in Case No. (gyo-u) 6 of 2011, Westlaw JAPAN Document No. 2011WLJPCA11026002.

  9. The Act stipulates that if a person fulfills any of the stipulations below, the person is liable for damage caused by the defect in the product: (1) a person provides his/her name, trade name, trademark, or other indications (hereinafter referred to as “representation of name, etc.”) on the product as the manufacturer of such product; (2) a person provides the representation of name, etc. on the product which misleads others into believing that the person is the manufacturer; or (3) a person provides any representation of name, etc. on the product which, in light of the manner concerning the manufacturing, processing, importation or sales of the product, and other circumstances, creates the basis for making the person responsible as the substantial manufacturer of such product.

  10. In Japan, defects in the context of product liability are generally classified into three types: (1) a defect in the design of the product, (2) a defect in the manufacturing process, and (3) a defect in instructions or warnings for handling the product (Yamamoto 1994; Economic Planning Agency 1994).

  11. Tokyo District Court, 13 Dec 2002, in Case No. (wa) 12677 of 2001, 1109 Hanrei taimuzu 285.

  12. Tokyo District Court, 20 Mar 2003, in Case No. (wa) 27744 of 2001, 1133 Hanrei taimuzu 97.

  13. The Civil Code does not set different standards on liability for animals generally perceived as dangerous and those which are not, although the degree of care required by the possessor of the former will be normally regarded as being higher. It is worth noting that Kelley et al. (2010) propose a framework for liability in human–robot interaction which “distinguish[es] between robots that are dangerous and robots that are considered largely safe.” (p. 1867).

  14. Kagoshima District Court, 20 May 2008, in Case No. (wa) 22 of 2006, 2015 Hanrei jiho 116.

  15. Osaka District Court, 28 Sept 2009, in Case No. (wa) 2167 of 2008.

  16. See the proceedings of the Committee on Commerce and Industry of the House of Representatives of Japan, 129th Diet (No. 7 June 10, 1994, p. 13).

  17. Tokyo District Court, 20 Jun 2001, in case No. (wa) 19478 of 1998, 1074 Hanrei taimuzu 219.

  18. Tokyo District Court, 29 Oct 2003, in Case No. (wa) 25386 of 1999, 1843 Hanrei jiho 8.

  19. Public–Private ITS Initiative/Roadmaps, http://www.kantei.go.jp/jp/singi/it2/kettei/pdf/kanminits_140603.pdf (Accessed 4 Sept 2014).

  20. For discussions on the implication of product liability on self-driving cars’ introduction to the market, see Hirano (2014).

  21. An English translation of the Radio Act is available at http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/joho_tsusin/eng/Resources/laws/090204_3.pdf (Accessed 16 Feb 2015).

  22. See https://www.irobot-jp.com/import/ (in Japanese, Accessed 16 Feb 2015).

  23. See http://wedge.ismedia.jp/articles/-/459?page=3 (Accessed 16 Feb 2015).

  24. The readers should note that, despite of announcements made by the media, Yamaha Motor Co. has been refraining from making comments on the details of this case.

  25. See also, Wall Street Journal, “Police raid Yamaha Motor over suspected illegal exports,” http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB113800658392853451 (Accessed 16 Feb 2015).

  26. Article 3(i)-3 of the Ordinance of the Ministry Specifying Goods and Technologies Pursuant to Provisions of the Appended Table 1 of the Export Control Order and the Appended Table of the Foreign Exchange Order (Ordinance of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry No. 49 of 14 Oct 1991).

  27. See New York Times, “Yamaha Motor accused of illegal export sales.”

  28. It is not realistic for exporters who fear loss of business opportunity to apply for the Minister’s permission “just in case.” A certain amount of time is required from the application to the final judgment by the Minister. Basically, the Minister’s judgment will be made within 90 days of application (METI 2009).

  29. This was possible by using an existing system which experimentally relaxes regulation in a regional basis and subsequently allows deregulation in a national basis.

  30. See the Web site of the council on promotion of the mobility robot experiment tokku in Tsukuba, http://council.rt-tsukuba.jp/outline (Accessed 16 Feb 2015).

  31. See http://www.mlit.go.jp/road/ir/ir-council/autopilot/pdf/torimatome/honbun.pdf (Accessed 16 Feb 2015).

  32. Public–Private ITS Initiative/Roadmaps defines level 3 automation as a state in which acceleration, steering, and braking actions are all controlled by the automobile except in case of emergency, where the human driver is required to take control.

  33. See Prime Minister of Japan and His Cabinet (2014a).

  34. Prime Minister of Japan and His Cabinet (2014b).

References

Judgments

  • Kagoshima District Court, 22 Jan 2001, in Case No. (gyo-u) 1 of 1995. Gyōsei jiken saiban reishū. http://www.courts.go.jp/app/hanrei_jp/detail5?id=15675. Retrieved 16 Feb 2015

  • Kagoshima District Court, 20 May 2008, in Case No. (wa) 22 of 2006, 2015. Hanrei jihō 116

  • Kagoshima District Court, 2 Nov 2011, in Case No. (wa) 878 of 2011, Westlaw JAPAN Document No. 2011WLJPCA11026001

  • Kagoshima District Court, 2 Nov 2011, in Case No. (gyo-u) 6 of 2011, Westlaw JAPAN Document No.2011WLJPCA11026002

  • Osaka District Court, 28 Sept 2009, in Case No. (wa) 2167 of 2008. Kakyū saibansho hanreishū. http://www.courts.go.jp/app/hanrei_jp/detail4?id=38214. Retrieved 16 Feb 2015

  • Tokyo District Court, 20 Jun 2001, in Case No. (wa) 19478 of 1998, 1074. Hanrei taimuzu 219

  • Tokyo District Court, 13 Dec 2002, in Case No. (wa) 12677 of 2001, 1109. Hanrei taimuzu 285

  • Tokyo District Court, 26 Feb 2003, in Case No. (wa) 23454 of 2002. Kakyū saibansho hanreishū. http://www.courts.go.jp/app/hanrei_jp/detail4?id=5706. Retrieved 16 Feb 2015

  • Tokyo District Court, 20 Mar 2003, in Case No. (wa) 27744 of 2001, 1133. Hanrei taimuzu 97

  • Tokyo District Court, 29 Oct 2003, in Case No. (wa) 25386 of 1999, 1843. Hanrei jihō 8

  • Yokohama District Court, 31 Mar 2011, in Case No. (wa) 1463 of 2010, 2115. Hanrei jihō 70

Parliamentary proceeding

  • Committee on Commerce and Industry of the House of Representatives of Japan, 129th Diet (No. 7, 10 June 1994)

Newspaper and magazine articles

  • Associated Press (2004) Segway hashirase bakkin 50 man “seibifuryōnirinsha” nintei [a half million yen fine for riding on Segway, Segway found as “a poorly maintained motorbike”]. http://www.47news.jp/CN/200404/CN2004040901003201.html. Accessed 11 Aug 2014

  • Asahi Shimbun (2007) Yamaha hatsudōki “tōkyoku no handan ni ando” sanshain fukiso, sōsa shūketsu. Heri fuseiyushutsu—Shizuoka ken [Yamaha Motors, “Relieved by the judgment of the authorities.” Case dropped for 3 men, investigation closed. Illegal export of helicopters—Shizuoka Prefecture]. 24 Mar 2007, morning edn.: 29 (print)

  • Fukuda N (2006) “Jiritsu” no kaishaku ni sa. Sōsatōkyoku to Yamaha Hatsudōki. Fuseiyushutsu misui. Shizuoka-ken [Different interpretation of “autonomous” by the investigation authorities and Yamaha Motors. Attempted illegal export—Shizuoka Prefecture]. Asahi Shimbun, 25 Jan 2006, morning edn.:31 (print)

  • Inō A (2007) Yamaha Hatsudōki fuseiyushutsu 3 nin taiho (sono 1) “kashigaihikō” jūshi—Shizuoka [Yamaha Motors, illegal export. 3 men arrested (Part 1). Focusing on “flight exceeding visible range”– Shizuoka]. Mainichi Shimbun, 24 Feb 2007, local issue:27 (print)

  • Kitagawa H, Takeji H (2007) Yamaha hatsudōki fuseiyushutsu. Keisanshō mujinheri nado yushutsukinshishobun [Yamaha Motors, illegal export. METI bans export of unmanned helicopters and accessories]. Mainichi Shimbun, 12 May 2007, morning edn.:26 (print)

  • Koitabashi T et al (2011) “Robotto taikoku Nihon” no kyojitsu. Genpatsu de nihonsei ga katsuyaku shinai wake [Truth and Falsehood of “Robot Kingdom”]. Nikkei Business (16 May 2011):38–49

  • Mochizuki K (2007) Yamaha-hatsudōki fuseiyushutsu: 3 nin taiho (sono 2 tome) “ihōsei” itten shi chinmoku—Shizuoka [Yamaha Motors, illegal export. 3 men were arrested. (Part 2, end)—Shizuoka]. Mainichi Shimbun, 24 Feb 2007, local issue:26 (print)

  • New York Times (2006) Yamaha Motor accused of illegal export sales. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/23/business/worldbusiness/23iht-YAMAHA.html?_r=0. Accessed 16 Feb 2015

  • Shinoda K (2006) Segway: kōdō de unten no dansei ni bakkin 50 man en [Man fined a half million yen for driving Segway on public street]. Mainichi Shimbun, 10 Apr 2006, Tokyo-Kansai, morning edn.:26 (print)

  • Yomiuri Shimbun (2006) Mujinheri fuseiyushutsu sōsahonbu “gunjitenyō ga kanō” Yamahahatsu gawa wa hanron—Shizuoka [Illegal export of unmanned helicopters. Investigation headquarters say, “diversion to military use is possible.” Yamaha Motors objects]. Yomiuri Shimbun, 24 Jan 2006, morning edn.:35 (print)

  • Yomiuri Shimbun (2007a) Yamaha Hatsudōki fuseiyushutsu. Mujinheri seinō, kaishaku tairitsu. 3 nin wa yōgi hinin—Shizuoka [Yamaha Motors, illegal export of unmanned helicopters. Controversy over the interpretation of the functions of the unmanned helicopters. 3 men deny culpability—Shizuoka]. Yomiuri Shimbun, 24 Feb 2007, morning edn.:33 (print)

  • Yomiuri Shimbun (2007b) Yamahahatsu ryakushiki-kiso. Kōbō ichinen amari, kyūtenkai. Kigyō no yushutsukanri ni keishō—Shizuoka [Summary indictment against Yamaha Motors. Rapid developments after battle lasting more than 1 year. A warning to companies’ export management—Shizuoka] Yomiuri Shimbun, 17 Mar 2007, morning edn.:33 (print)

  • Yoshino K (2007) Kenkei “chōshu kasane shinchō ni” tancho wa chūgoku jin no kaisha sōsaku. Yamaha Hatsudōki heri fuseiyushutsu—Shizuoka-ken [Prefectural police says, “Careful investigation aided by repeated interviews.” Clue gained from the investigation of a Chinese-run company. Yamaha Motors, illegal export of unmanned helicopters. Shizuoka Prefecture]. Asahi Shimbun, 24 Feb 2007, morning edn.:28 (print)

  • Wall Street Journal (2006) Police raid Yamaha Motor over suspected illegal exports. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB113800658392853451. Accessed 26 Feb 2015

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author would like to express her sincere appreciation to Joel Tomlinson, Takako Onoki, PD. Dr. Gregor Fitzi, Hironori Matsuzaki, and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive and valuable comments to improve the quality of the paper. The author would also like to thank the members of the River-City Legal Profession Corporation for their help and support during the preparation of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. River-City Legal Profession Corporation, Chiba, Japan

    Tomoko Nambu

Authors
  1. Tomoko Nambu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tomoko Nambu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nambu, T. Legal regulations and public policies for next-generation robots in Japan. AI & Soc 31, 483–500 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-015-0628-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-015-0628-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation