B
NARRATIVE VALUE
Certainty
●●○ medium
ABCDEFG
There is no confirmed −; independently verified + decide the position (B). No unreachable strike-through.= non-additive meter
As of: 2026-Q4Status: ActiveCeiling reason: No confirmed −
History2026-Q4BHistory grows each quarter
Code for Japan: Citizens solving public problems alongside government. The letter is B; certainty is medium. Unconfirmed concerns are placed under “Watching.” (As of 2026-Q4; estimate based on public information.)
Main narrative
Founded in 2013, Code for Japan works on the principle of 'thinking together, building together': citizens with technical skills working beside government on local problems. Its pillars are the Code for local communities around the country, placements of engineers inside municipalities, and an annual summit.
The clearest expression of that approach came in March 2020 with the Tokyo Metropolitan Government's COVID-19 information site. At the city's request, about ten engineers and designers from the organization built a prototype in roughly two days; soon after launch the site was passing a million page views a day. What mattered most was that, for the first time for an official Tokyo site, the source code was published on GitHub under the MIT license. Anyone could propose fixes, and many came from outside. Other municipalities reused the same code free of charge, and it spread nationwide. In 2026 the organization held its summit on the theme of 'Public and AI' and began a project to monitor misinformation continuously.
One person’s story (N1)
+ A single story
In March 2020, about ten engineers and designers from the organization built a prototype of the Tokyo Metropolitan Government's COVID-19 information site in roughly two days; soon after launch it passed a million page views a day. For the first time for an official Tokyo site the source code was published under the MIT license, improvements were proposed from outside, and other municipalities reused the same code free of charge, spreading it nationwide. Source type: independent (reporting)
Source nature: T2 industry media. Positive effects are not used to offset negatives.
Positive / negative effects
+ effects
- The positive side of this assessment rests on the single story (N1) above and its source. A per-item ledger of positive effects has not yet been compiled for this organization.T2 industry media
Watching (unconfirmed; not counted in the assessment)- Sustainability of volunteer-dependent work
- outcomes shaped by each government's operating capacity
Looking ahead (not included in the assessment)- Running a misinformation observatory under the 2026 theme 'Public and AI'.
A second look
The effect depends on whether municipalities adopt and then operate what is built, and a large part of the work rests on unpaid contribution. How far goodwill can be turned into something sustainable is the open question.
Sources
How to read this assessment
A Independently verified +, with no confirmed −
B Leans +, with independent backing
C Mixed. A confirmed − sets the ceiling, or much is unverified
D A serious confirmed − sets the ceiling
E A serious − reaches the core of the organization
F Serious and systemic, with little redeeming +
G Only extreme cases
Out of scope An entity whose core purpose is illegal
On hold Independent evidence is scarce on both + and −
- Reachable upper bound (ceiling): a confirmed − sets the ceiling, and independently verified + decide the position within it. + do not cancel out −.
- The weight of evidence is not symmetric: only confirmed − are counted; the volume of disputes or allegations goes under “Watching.” + are counted from independent evidence, while an organization’s own PR is treated as “reference.”
- Size is not value: scale is not used in the assessment. Matters that stay within money or competition—investors, shareholders, sanctions, trade secrets—are also excluded.
- The letter (assessment) and certainty (how reliable the information is) are separate axes.
This is a translation; the Japanese version is authoritative. The assessments here are generated automatically by AI based on published criteria. The operator does not alter individual results. Because they are AI-generated they may contain errors, and they are opinion and commentary, not statements of fact. Where evidence is insufficient, the entry is marked “On hold.” Requests for correction are accepted via the form.
Terms: Narrative Value = an assessment (A–G) of the distance between the narrative an organization tells and its reality / Ceiling meter = a visualization of the reachable upper bound / Watching = unconfirmed matters not counted / Protected stakeholders = people, animals, nature, and future generations. | Generated by: AI | As of: 2026-Q4 | Back to top