Japan's Human-Centric Approach to AI Regulation

Note: This article represents a practitioner’s interpretation of the relevant rules and regulations in place at the time of writing. I am not a lawyer, and readers should consult with their own legal counsel and compliance teams before taking any action based on this information.

Japan has developed a unique approach to AI regulation that reflects its cultural values and technological aspirations. Unlike the more prescriptive frameworks seen in the EU or China, Japan has chosen to emphasize human-centric principles and international collaboration while maintaining flexibility through soft law mechanisms. This distinctive strategy aligns with Japan’s vision of becoming an “AI-ready society” while ensuring ethical and responsible AI development.

While Japan’s soft law framework doesn’t directly impose binding obligations on US-based AI developers without a Japanese presence, the growing influence of initiatives like the Hiroshima Process makes these principles increasingly relevant globally. US companies targeting the Japanese market or seeking to future-proof their compliance posture should consider adopting Japan’s human-centric approach now—focusing on documentation practices, human oversight, bias testing, and privacy by design—rather than scrambling to comply later as international standards continue to converge.

Current Regulatory Landscape

As of now, Japan does not have specific laws or regulations that directly regulate AI. Instead, the country has adopted a “soft law” approach through guidelines and principles. This approach provides flexibility for organizations while still establishing clear expectations for responsible AI development and use.

Key elements of Japan’s current AI regulatory framework include:

  1. AI Guidelines for Business: Developed by the Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI), these guidelines provide principles for AI business actors to incorporate into their products and services.

  2. The Hiroshima Process: Japan has taken a leading role in international AI governance through the Hiroshima Process, which includes the International Code of Conduct for Organizations Developing Advanced AI Systems.

  3. Draft Discussion Points: Japan is considering a more structured approach to AI regulation, potentially including hard law regulations for high-risk AI while maintaining soft law for lower-risk applications.

Human-Centric Principles

The core of Japan’s approach is a set of human-centric principles that guide AI development and deployment. According to the AI Guidelines for Business, these principles include:

  • Human-centric: AI utilization must not infringe upon fundamental human rights guaranteed by the constitution and international standards
  • Safety: AI business actors should avoid damage to lives, bodies, minds, and properties of stakeholders
  • Fairness: Elimination of unfair and harmful bias and discrimination
  • Privacy protection: Respecting and protecting privacy in AI systems
  • Security: Ensuring AI systems are protected from unauthorized manipulations
  • Transparency: Providing stakeholders with necessary information to a reasonable extent
  • Accountability: Ensuring traceability and conforming to guiding principles
  • Education/literacy: Providing education regarding knowledge, literacy, and ethics concerning AI use
  • Fair competition: Maintaining a fair competitive environment for new AI businesses and services
  • Innovation: Promoting innovation and considering interconnectivity and interoperability

These principles reflect Japan’s cultural emphasis on balance, collective responsibility, and harmony between technological advancement and human values.

Implementation Framework

Rather than imposing strict regulatory requirements, Japan’s implementation strategy focuses on practical guidance. Organizations are encouraged to:

  1. Conduct risk assessments: Evaluate both technical and social impacts of AI systems
  2. Implement quality management: Establish robust testing and validation procedures
  3. Maintain documentation: Keep clear records of system development and operation
  4. Protect user interests: Ensure transparency and user control over AI systems

This approach allows organizations to adapt implementation to their specific contexts while still adhering to the core principles.

Risk Categorization Approach

While Japan does not currently classify AI systems according to risk in its guidelines, there are indications that a risk-based approach may be adopted in the future. The Draft Discussion Points suggest a potential classification system that would categorize:

  1. AI developers
  2. AI providers and users

Into “large impact and high risk” and “little impact and low risk” groups, with different regulatory approaches for each category. This would align with global trends toward risk-based AI governance.

Regulatory Oversight

Currently, there is no specific AI regulator in Japan. However, several ministries and agencies are engaged in establishing and promoting guidelines regarding AI:

  • The Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI)
  • The Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications
  • The Agency for Cultural Affairs (particularly for copyright issues)
  • The Personal Information Commission

While guidelines from these ministries are not binding law, they are often closely followed by companies and the public in Japan.

International Leadership and Collaboration

Japan has taken a leading role in promoting international cooperation on AI governance, particularly through the Hiroshima AI Process. This initiative demonstrates Japan’s commitment to developing global standards while maintaining space for cultural and regional variations in implementation.

The Hiroshima Principles identify several significant risks that need to be addressed globally, including disinformation, copyright issues, cybersecurity, risks to health and safety, and societal risks such as harmful bias and discrimination.

Future Developments

Japan’s regulatory framework continues to evolve, with particular attention to emerging technologies like generative AI. There are ongoing discussions about how existing laws (such as the Copyright Act of Japan) should address issues concerning rights and harms that may arise from generative AI.

Additionally, there are reports that Japan is considering implementing a regulatory system that would include fines and penalties for certain violations through a proposed AI Bill, though this has not yet been enacted.

Looking Forward

Success in Japan’s regulatory environment requires understanding both technical requirements and cultural context. Organizations must develop approaches that respect human dignity and autonomy while pursuing technological advancement. This balanced approach offers a model for responsible AI development that could influence global practices.

References

  1. White & Case LLP. (2024). “AI Watch: Global regulatory tracker - Japan.” https://www.whitecase.com/insight-our-thinking/ai-watch-global-regulatory-tracker-japan

  2. Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. (2022). “AI Guidelines for Business Version 1.0.” https://www.meti.go.jp/shingikai/mono_info_service/ai_shakai_jisso/pdf/20240419_9.pdf

  3. G7 Hiroshima. (2023). “Hiroshima Process International Code of Conduct for Organizations Developing Advanced AI Systems.” https://www.mofa.go.jp/files/100573473.pdf

  4. Digital Agency of Japan. (2022). “AI Strategy 2022: Becoming an AI-Ready Society.” https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/ai/aistratagy2022en.pdf