この記事は現在英語でのみご利用いただけます。
AI Governance in Japan by Industry: Finance, Healthcare, Manufacturing, and the Soft Law Approach
Japan's AI governance is characterised by voluntary principles, sector-led guidance, and a deliberately non-prescriptive regulatory approach. This industry guide covers what Japanese companies and international companies operating in Japan actually need to do.
Key Takeaways
Japan's AI governance approach is 'soft law' — voluntary guidelines, industry self-regulation, and ministry guidance rather than binding legislation. This creates more flexibility but less certainty than the EU approach.
The AI Promotion Act (May 2025) establishes basic principles for AI governance but is explicitly non-prescriptive — it creates a framework for voluntary compliance rather than mandatory requirements.
The Financial Services Agency (FSA) has issued specific guidance on AI in financial services — risk management, explainability, and third-party AI vendor oversight are the primary expectations.
The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) AI governance guidelines for business are the primary cross-sector reference for Japanese companies — they align closely with OECD AI Principles.
The Personal Information Protection Commission (PPC) has issued guidance on AI and the Act on the Protection of Personal Information (APPI) — the third amendment to APPI in 2022 created specific obligations relevant to AI.
"情報提供のみを目的としています。この記事は法律、規制、財務または専門的なアドバイスを構成するものではありません。具体的なアドバイスについては、資格を持つ専門家にご相談ください。"
Understanding Japan's soft law AI approach
Japan has deliberately chosen a governance approach that prioritises flexibility and industry innovation over prescriptive regulation. The AI Promotion Act, enacted on 28 May 2025 (in force from 4 June 2025, full enforcement September 1, 2025), is the primary legislative framework — but it is explicitly non-binding on most actors, establishing principles and creating ministerial authority to issue guidance rather than directly mandating compliance. Note: Japan's 'AI Guidelines for Business' were published separately by METI and MIC in April 2024. This approach reflects Japan's industrial policy priority of AI leadership and its concern that prescriptive regulation would disadvantage Japanese companies relative to US competitors who operate under more permissive domestic regulation.
For Japanese companies and international companies operating in Japan, the practical implication is that AI governance compliance is primarily about alignment with voluntary guidelines and sector guidance — with the METI guidelines as the primary cross-sector reference and sector-specific guidance from FSA, MHLW, and other ministries as the relevant standards for regulated industries.
Financial services: FSA guidance
The Financial Services Agency has been the most active Japanese regulator on AI governance. FSA guidance on AI in financial services addresses: model risk management for AI and ML models used in investment, credit, and insurance decisions; explainability requirements for AI used in customer-facing financial services; cybersecurity of AI systems; and third-party AI vendor oversight. Japanese financial institutions should treat FSA guidance as supervisory expectations — while not legally binding in the same way as an FSA rule, failure to align with FSA guidance creates supervisory risk.
Manufacturing: METI AI governance for industrial AI
Japan's manufacturing sector is a major adopter of AI — predictive maintenance, quality control AI, autonomous logistics, and AI-driven production optimisation are widespread in major Japanese manufacturers. METI has published AI governance guidance specifically addressing industrial AI, with emphasis on safety, reliability, and human-AI collaboration in manufacturing environments. The guidance addresses: safety verification for AI in safety-critical manufacturing processes, AI system documentation and audit trails, and AI governance in global supply chains involving Japanese manufacturers.