Amid a fast-evolving AI landscape, policymakers around the world face mounting pressure to modernise public services, ensure responsible governance and capture economic value — all while avoiding the pitfalls of opaque, biased, or overly centralised systems. Japan offers a distinctive model that is often overlooked: a focus on human-centric design, strategic state direction and embedded use of AI in service delivery. These features hold valuable lessons for countries like the UK which are seeking to unlock AI’s potential in public services.
Japan has emerged as a world leader in robotics, particularly in industrial automation. As of 2022, nearly 45 per cent of global industrial robots came from Japanese firms such as FANUC and Yaskawa Electric. This technical leadership is backed by a clear state-led vision called Society 5.0, which aims to use AI to solve structural social challenges, particularly those related to demographic change.
The UK, by contrast, is a recognised leader in AI research and development, home to firms like DeepMind and Arm. Yet while private-sector innovation is strong, the UK’s public services lag behind — constrained by legacy systems, limited coordination and sluggish deployment. AI is seen as critical to reforming overstretched institutions, from health care to local government, but a coherent implementation strategy remains elusive.
One of Japan’s clearest strengths is its emphasis on “explainability” and public legitimacy. For instance, local governments use AI to allocate school places — a process that once took weeks — while maintaining transparent oversight and guardrails on bias. Where risks are high, such as in the National Tax Agency, Japan has chosen not to implement AI systems due to concerns over fairness. This differentiated, risk-calibrated approach could serve as a model for other democracies grappling with ethical deployment.
Japan also leverages a culture of experimentation across its decentralised system. While this has led to uneven uptake — from advanced use cases in Yokohama to limited adoption in rural areas — it has fostered pockets of innovation and embedded institutional learning. In the UK, by contrast, progress has been hampered by the absence of a long-term implementation model and a central government reticent to devolve responsibility.
Concrete examples of AI improving services already exist in both countries. In Japan, municipal services have used AI to streamline casework and improve productivity. In the UK, Faculty AI worked with Cera, a digital care provider, to predict hospitalisations up to a week in advance, cutting admissions by half. These isolated gains suggest significant latent potential — but without consistent system-wide uptake, they remain exceptions rather than the rule.
The strategic contrast between Japan’s Society 5.0 and the UK’s AI Opportunities Action Plan is also instructive. Where Japan articulates a long-term social and economic vision, the UK’s technocratic framing has struggled to win public support or galvanise institutional change. There is an opportunity for the UK to develop a more integrated national strategy, rooted in social impact and public confidence — not just innovation and economic growth.
To be clear, Japan’s approach is not without limitations. Its fragmented digital infrastructure and demographic pressures constrain national-scale deployment. Yet its emphasis on long-termism, public legitimacy and targeted innovation offers a credible template — one that prioritises purpose over hype, and governance over speed.
Key takeaways for the UK and other countries:
Adopt strategic visioning
Move beyond piecemeal plans to articulate a long-term, public-facing agenda for AI in the public sector.
Focus on explainability
Ensure systems deployed in sensitive areas (health, justice, tax) are transparent and publicly accountable.
Encourage local experimentation
Enable pilots and decentralised innovation through flexible funding and governance models.
Prioritise service integration
Use AI not just for efficiency, but to enhance accessibility and user experience in critical services.
The UK and Japan continue to share challenges — notably ageing populations and constrained resources — and they can draw practical insights from each other’s trajectories. Japan’s experience shows that AI in public services isn’t just a technical challenge — it’s a political and institutional one. Getting it right will require a whole-of-government approach rooted in legitimacy, capability and public value.
Editor’s note: This commentary draws on insights shared during a panel event held at Japan House London in February 2025, which explored how liberal democracies such as the UK and Japan can govern effectively in the age of AI. The analysis and conclusions presented are solely those of TBI, in line with our intellectual independence policy.