Abstract
This study investigates how public officials in Japan interpret and give meaning to design approaches within the context of policy making, with a particular focus on the processes through which these approaches are taken up and translated into practice by public officials themselves. Previous studies have offered valuable insights into the introduction of design in the public sector, often in response to externally driven conditions such as institutional pressures, fiscal constraints, and innovation demands. While such work has advanced understanding of the value of design in public administration, the intrinsic dimension of design practice—central to design activity—has received limited attention. This study explores how officials leading the introduction of design approaches internalize and adapt these ideas, enabling more autonomous, reflective, and con textually grounded practices. Drawing on in- depth interviews with core members of JAPAN+D, a policy making initiative led by officials from Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), the study identifies ten themes illustrating how design approaches are reinterpreted and enacted in everyday administrative work. Eight themes align with stages of policymaking—such as agenda setting, concept development, and implementation—while two reflect broader shifts in how officials conceptualize design itself. The findings show that design approaches are understood not as fixed frameworks but as problem-driven, adaptive practices that help address institutional constraints and foster more inclusive policy making. Rooted in personal and organizational discomfort with existing systems, this process encourages officials to reinterpret design as a flexible orientation grounded in values of empathy, imagination, and co-creation. By revealing how design becomes meaningful within administrative contexts, the study provides insights into sustaining its integration in the public sector through both technical training and collective reflection.
Keywords
Design for Policy Making; Meaning-Making; Service Design in Public Sector
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21606/iasdr.2025.1216
Citation
Miyoshi, H.(2025) The Internal Meaning-Making of 'Design' by a Design Community of government officials in Japan's Central Government, in Chang, C.-Y., and Hsu, Y. (eds.), IASDR 2025: Design Next, 02-05 December, Taiwan. https://doi.org/10.21606/iasdr.2025.1216
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Conference Track
Track 7 - Service Design for Public Services and Policies
The Internal Meaning-Making of 'Design' by a Design Community of government officials in Japan's Central Government
This study investigates how public officials in Japan interpret and give meaning to design approaches within the context of policy making, with a particular focus on the processes through which these approaches are taken up and translated into practice by public officials themselves. Previous studies have offered valuable insights into the introduction of design in the public sector, often in response to externally driven conditions such as institutional pressures, fiscal constraints, and innovation demands. While such work has advanced understanding of the value of design in public administration, the intrinsic dimension of design practice—central to design activity—has received limited attention. This study explores how officials leading the introduction of design approaches internalize and adapt these ideas, enabling more autonomous, reflective, and con textually grounded practices. Drawing on in- depth interviews with core members of JAPAN+D, a policy making initiative led by officials from Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), the study identifies ten themes illustrating how design approaches are reinterpreted and enacted in everyday administrative work. Eight themes align with stages of policymaking—such as agenda setting, concept development, and implementation—while two reflect broader shifts in how officials conceptualize design itself. The findings show that design approaches are understood not as fixed frameworks but as problem-driven, adaptive practices that help address institutional constraints and foster more inclusive policy making. Rooted in personal and organizational discomfort with existing systems, this process encourages officials to reinterpret design as a flexible orientation grounded in values of empathy, imagination, and co-creation. By revealing how design becomes meaningful within administrative contexts, the study provides insights into sustaining its integration in the public sector through both technical training and collective reflection.