Corrections

August 29, 2026

We separated the creation date from the update date for the hands-on support document.

Before

Published by MLIT's Policy Bureau in April 2025

After

Created by MLIT's Policy Bureau in October 2021 and updated in April 2025

Why we got it wrong April 2025 is the update, not the original publication. We matched MLIT's own listing.

August 29, 2026

We separated the creation date from the update date for the regional platform document.

Before

Published by MLIT in January 2020

After

Created by MLIT in August 2019 and updated in January 2020

Why we got it wrong January 2020 is the update, not the original publication. We matched MLIT's own listing.

August 29, 2026

We corrected the publication date of the VFM Simplified Calculation Model Manual. It is April 2017, not May 2026.

Before

In May 2026, MLIT published the VFM Simplified Calculation Model Manual as part of its PPP/PFI guidance series

After

MLIT published the VFM Simplified Calculation Model Manual in April 2017

Why we got it wrong May 2026 is when we downloaded MLIT's guidance documents as a set. It is not the publication month of each document. MLIT's own listing gives April 2017 for this manual, a nine-year gap. The substance of the article (the five calculation steps, the three changes from the older model) matches the source.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The URL we described as our sister site was not ours.

Before

Sister site listed as https://machikarte.com

After

Machikarte, run by ISVD, at https://machikarte.isvd.or.jp

Why we got it wrong Our Machikarte is at machikarte.isvd.or.jp. machikarte.com is an unrelated media site run by someone else. The description in the article was ours; only the URL was wrong, and readers who followed the link were sent to a third party.

August 29, 2026

The URL we described as our sister site was not ours.

Before

Sister site listed as https://machikarte.com

After

Machikarte, run by ISVD, at https://machikarte.isvd.or.jp

Why we got it wrong Our Machikarte is at machikarte.isvd.or.jp. machikarte.com is an unrelated media site run by someone else. The description in the article was ours; only the URL was wrong, and readers who followed the link were sent to a third party.

August 29, 2026

Case 5 was replaced, from Hachioji City to Maebashi City, and the source for Beppu's annual revenue was changed.

Before

Pattern 5 Package Bundling, represented by Takakura Park and five others in Hachioji City (five 0.25ha parks bundled)

After

Pattern 5 Anchored to a Larger Project, represented by Kokorun City Park in Maebashi City (0.19ha, ¥41 million, operated by a nonprofit)

Why we got it wrong The Hachioji case could not be verified against any primary source: not the city's own site, not the seminar programme, not the PPnet case list, and not MLIT's Park-PFI case collection of 17 projects. We replaced it with a case that appears in MLIT's collection, and renamed the pattern to match what that case shows.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

We changed the World Heritage citation from the site's front page to the relevant pages.

Before

Source: front page of the World Heritage official site

After

Source: the site's registration history and overview pages

Why we got it wrong A front page as a citation leaves the reader unable to reach the basis for the statement.

August 29, 2026

We replaced the source for the approx. ¥14 million in annual usage fees. The MLIT document does not contain that figure.

Before

Source: MLIT PPP/PFI Promotion Mayors' Conference, Beppu Mayor's presentation (November 2024)

After

Source: Japan Park Facilities Association small-scale case seminar (July 2024), with a note in the body that the MLIT deck does not carry the figure

Why we got it wrong We extracted all 18 pages of that deck and also inspected the four pages covering Harukigawa Park as images. The figure does not appear. The only monetary figure in the deck is the annual balance for Beppu Park, a different park. Verification of the figure itself is still in progress.

August 29, 2026

The ¥14 million a year is the operator's projected figure, not revenue the city secures. We replaced the source with Beppu City's own record and rewrote the passages.

Before

Beppu City is reported to secure approximately ¥14 million in annual usage fee revenue through the Park-PFI model (source: Japan Park Facilities Association small-scale case seminar)

After

The operator's proposal projects approximately ¥14 million a year in usage fees and related payments to the city (source: Beppu City Harukigawa Park Project Operator Selection Committee, Selection Result and Assessment, December 2021), with a note that we could not find any published record of the amount actually received

Why we got it wrong The committee's assessment states that in the price assessment it valued the projection that payments to the city would come to about ¥14 million a year under the plan. The selection was in December 2021 and the west area opened in December 2024, so the assessment predates opening by three years. We also replaced a passage that speculated the fee combined a sales-linked variable component with a fixed component; the actual calculation is set out in Beppu City's solicitation guidelines (installation permit fee with a minimum of ¥1,440/m² per year, rent derived from an appraised land value for the three-dimensional portion, and profit sharing only above 120% of plan).

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

We changed the Japan Finance Corporation citation from the front page to the business financing page.

Before

Source: Japan Finance Corporation front page

After

Source: the corporation's business financing guide

Why we got it wrong A front page as a citation leaves the reader unable to reach the basis for the statement.

August 29, 2026

We corrected how Yokosuka City's location is described and removed a statistical citation attached to a geographic statement.

Before

Yokosuka City is located at the southern tip of the Miura Peninsula (cited to the city's front page)

After

Yokosuka City is located on the Miura Peninsula (citation removed)

Why we got it wrong The southern tip of the Miura Peninsula is Miura City; Yokosuka spans the central and southern parts. A description of terrain is not a statistic, so attaching a statistical citation to it was wrong. We also removed a reference to the Kanagawa Park Association front page, which did not support any specific statement.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

Case 5 was replaced, from Hachioji City to Maebashi City, and the source for Beppu's annual revenue was changed.

Before

Pattern 5 Package Bundling, represented by Takakura Park and five others in Hachioji City (five 0.25ha parks bundled)

After

Pattern 5 Anchored to a Larger Project, represented by Kokorun City Park in Maebashi City (0.19ha, ¥41 million, operated by a nonprofit)

Why we got it wrong The Hachioji case could not be verified against any primary source: not the city's own site, not the seminar programme, not the PPnet case list, and not MLIT's Park-PFI case collection of 17 projects. We replaced it with a case that appears in MLIT's collection, and renamed the pattern to match what that case shows.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

Case 5 was replaced, from Hachioji City to Maebashi City, and the source for Beppu's annual revenue was changed.

Before

Pattern 5 Package Bundling, represented by Takakura Park and five others in Hachioji City (five 0.25ha parks bundled)

After

Pattern 5 Anchored to a Larger Project, represented by Kokorun City Park in Maebashi City (0.19ha, ¥41 million, operated by a nonprofit)

Why we got it wrong The Hachioji case could not be verified against any primary source: not the city's own site, not the seminar programme, not the PPnet case list, and not MLIT's Park-PFI case collection of 17 projects. We replaced it with a case that appears in MLIT's collection, and renamed the pattern to match what that case shows.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The source for the 84.9% figure was wrong. It comes from a private survey, not a MIC survey, and it is not a national figure.

Before

MIC Designated Manager System Operational Survey (2023) / 84.9% of municipalities with designated manager facilities cite insufficient response to facility deterioration as their greatest challenge

After

Uluru / Nihon MECCS joint survey, Survey on Facility Management Challenges (March 2024 preliminary edition) / 84.9% of municipalities reported insufficient response to facility deterioration, with the note that the survey covered 216 municipalities in the Greater Tokyo area and drew 126 valid responses

Why we got it wrong The MIC document we cited does exist (Survey Results on the Operation of the Designated Manager System, published 18 October 2023), but it is a case collection and contains neither the 84.9% figure nor any statistic on facility deterioration. The figure comes from the Uluru / Nihon MECCS joint survey, covering four prefectures in the Greater Tokyo area with 126 valid responses. We also removed the ranking claim that it was the greatest challenge, which the source does not state.

August 29, 2026

The Park-PFI adoption counts were wrong in both the numbers and the reference date. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

As of the end of FY2022, 131 sites were in active use and 132 additional sites were under consideration (source: MLIT Park-PFI Utilization Status, March 2023)

After

As of the end of FY2024, Park-PFI was in use at 182 sites with a further 165 under consideration (source: MLIT, Overview of the Public Solicitation Management System, Machi-Michi Conference, 2 February 2026)

Why we got it wrong The MLIT document we cited states that Park-PFI was in use at 102 sites as of the end of FY2021, with 130 more under consideration. Our 131, 132 and end-of-FY2022 matched neither the counts nor the date. We also updated to the current published figures for the end of FY2024.

August 29, 2026

We had the Furusato Foundation's legal name wrong. The migration promotion body is a different organisation.

Before

Public Interest Foundation for Migration and Exchange Promotion (Furusato Foundation)

After

Regional Development Foundation (Furusato Foundation)

Why we got it wrong The Furusato Foundation's formal name is the Regional Development Foundation, established in 1988 with contributions from every prefecture and ordinance-designated city. JOIN-FURUSATO, which promotes migration and exchange, is a separate organisation and does not administer Furusato Loans. We also pointed the citation at the loan programme page rather than the organisation's front page.

August 29, 2026

Case 5 was replaced, from Hachioji City to Maebashi City, and the source for Beppu's annual revenue was changed.

Before

Pattern 5 Package Bundling, represented by Takakura Park and five others in Hachioji City (five 0.25ha parks bundled)

After

Pattern 5 Anchored to a Larger Project, represented by Kokorun City Park in Maebashi City (0.19ha, ¥41 million, operated by a nonprofit)

Why we got it wrong The Hachioji case could not be verified against any primary source: not the city's own site, not the seminar programme, not the PPnet case list, and not MLIT's Park-PFI case collection of 17 projects. We replaced it with a case that appears in MLIT's collection, and renamed the pattern to match what that case shows.

August 29, 2026

We changed the Toyoake City citation from the city's front page to the relevant page.

Before

Source: Toyoake City front page

After

Source: Toyoake City, PPP/PFI and Private-Sector Utilisation Projects

Why we got it wrong A front page as a citation leaves the reader unable to reach the basis for the statement.

August 29, 2026

We described the FY2027 grant requirement as under consideration and not finalized. It is settled. We also corrected the level taxonomy and the schedule.

Before

MLIT is considering incorporating Water PPP Level 3.5 adoption as an eligibility condition / not yet a finalized rule / begin basic policy formulation and market sounding between FY2024 and FY2025

After

From FY2027, grants for sewage pipe renewal require that Water PPP adoption already be decided (MLIT Water PPP Guideline ver. 2.0, April 2025). At Level 3.5 that means the tender is open, not merely that an implementation policy is published; at Level 4 the published policy suffices. We added the time remaining and the three routes when the deadline is out of reach.

Why we got it wrong The requirement is stated directly in MLIT's Water PPP Guideline for the Sewerage Sector, ver. 2.0 (April 2025). Three further corrections follow. (1) Water PPP means Levels 4 and 3.5 only; Levels 1-3 are outsourcing and are not Water PPP, whereas the article presented Levels 1-4 as the Water PPP taxonomy. (2) Level 3.5 meets the grant requirement later than Level 4, which runs against intuition. (3) The instruction to begin between FY2024 and FY2025 had already passed at the time of review, August 2026. We also added the separate requirement that pipe records be managed in a GIS database.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

The nationwide Park-PFI adoption count was out of date, and the figures for adoption and consideration had been swapped. We replaced them with the current primary source.

Before

165 parks nationwide had adopted Park-PFI as of March 2025, with 136 more under consideration

After

As of the end of FY2025 (31 March 2026), Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites, with a further 187 considering adoption

Why we got it wrong MLIT's Park-PFI Implementation Status (as of 31 March 2026) states that Park-PFI was in use at 203 sites as of the end of FY2025, with 187 more considering adoption. The 165 we had been using as the adoption count was in fact the number under consideration at the end of FY2024. The same error ran through 45 articles on this site, so we checked and corrected them together.

August 29, 2026

Case 5 was replaced, from Hachioji City to Maebashi City, and the source for Beppu's annual revenue was changed.

Before

Pattern 5 Package Bundling, represented by Takakura Park and five others in Hachioji City (five 0.25ha parks bundled)

After

Pattern 5 Anchored to a Larger Project, represented by Kokorun City Park in Maebashi City (0.19ha, ¥41 million, operated by a nonprofit)

Why we got it wrong The Hachioji case could not be verified against any primary source: not the city's own site, not the seminar programme, not the PPnet case list, and not MLIT's Park-PFI case collection of 17 projects. We replaced it with a case that appears in MLIT's collection, and renamed the pattern to match what that case shows.