“Japan-style ride-sharing” “Can we call this a failure?”

Hello everyone, welcome to “Taxi College.” Today, we’ll discuss the “Japan-style ride-sharing” that started in April 2024. As a current operations manager and driver, I’ll share my on-the-ground perspective. “Can we call this a failure?” Let’s answer based on data and real voices from the field. First, what is Japan-style ride-sharing? It’s a system where taxi companies handle operations management, and regular drivers use their private cars as a side job to transport passengers. Limited to times and areas with taxi shortages, fares are the same as taxis. It’s not a full Uber model but a compromise designed as a “taxi supplement.” Nearly two years have passed since launch. What’s the result? According to data from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, cumulative rides are only about 0.1% of regular taxis. It plateaued after a few months, with severely insufficient supply. Recruiting drivers is difficult, and matching is poor during nights and peak times. Surveys show only under 20% of people want to use it — a harsh number. Why isn’t it spreading? The biggest reason is the strict limitations. It only operates when app data shows shortages, so the problem of “you still can’t get a ride when you need one” remains. Drivers face high training and procedural hurdles, making it unattractive as a side gig. Taxi companies aren’t eager to expand, leading to criticism as “ride-sharing in name only.” Proponents expected it to “solve transportation deserts,” but it’s especially ineffective in rural areas. Even in cities, it can’t keep up with inbound tourism demand. While there are some success stories in matching rates (e.g., Expo exceptions), nationally it’s far from a real solution to taxi shortages. Experts call it a “compromise that satisfies no one” and an “innovation failure model.” That said, is it a complete failure? Not entirely. It has maintained safety standards and prevented major accidents. Some companies have used it as a stepping stone for hiring drivers. In Japan, with its thick regulatory walls, rapid liberalization was probably difficult. In conclusion, it can be called a “limited failure.” It didn’t deliver the expected mobility revolution and feels half-baked. For passengers wanting true ride-sharing (flexible, general enterprise-led), taxi drivers, and rural residents, it’s not enough. What’s next? Progress in autonomous driving and further deregulation will be key. The taxi industry must evolve on its own to address driver shortages. What do you think? Comment “success” or “failure.” Your voices from the field matter most. Please like, subscribe, and turn on notifications. Next time, more real stories from the taxi world. Thank you!