The Potential of the Society 5.0 Strategy to Be a Solution to the Political and Structural Problems of Countries: The Case of Türkiye

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The study investigates if the Society 5.0 strategy can be applied to political, economic, and structural challenges in Turkey, with a focus on key areas like education, public administration, criminal justice, and corruption. The study seeks to apply a model developed in Japan to Turkey.

The authors do a nice job structuring their work around hypotheses linking Society 5.0 to problems in Turkey. But the paper will benefit from a more thorough section in the introduction on how directly comparable Japan and Turkey are in terms of technological infrastructure, societal needs, and political context. This would clarify how transferable the Society 5.0 model is to Turkey, beyond surface similarities.

The methodology uses structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the relationships between Society 5.0 and key variables. This is a good technique for examining complex interactions between multiple variables. SEM is good for hypothesis testing in this situation.

Some things about the methodology can be improved. For example, the sample size of 407 participants has the limitation of using convenience sampling. The authors do acknowledge this limitation, but this weakens the study’s generalizability. Also, the demography of the sample (civil servants and many with a bachelor’s degree) introduces bias. The authors should think about whether these participants represent the population that would be impacted by Society 5.0 reforms in Turkey.

The study does not sufficiently account for control variables that could affect the relationships between Society 5.0 and the outcomes under investigation. Variables like SES, regionalism, and politics could impact attitudes toward political and structural issues. Controlling for these factors would make the analysis more robust.

The authors explore the applicability of Society 5.0 in a general way, but they do not address the ethical and technological constraints that might problematize the implementation of this strategy in a nation like Turkey. Things like data privacy and digital infrastructure, not to mention public resistance to artificial intelligence, need more attention.

The conclusions flow from the analysis, but there are some areas where the findings seem overstated. For example, showing that these things would improve Turkey is one thing but there are lots of assumptions about how these things will be implemented in Turkey’s current complex political climate. The authors assert that Society 5.0 does not have a significant effect on corruption. This is superficially analyzed. Corruption is a critical issue and more should be said about how to thwart it.

The English writing is good, but some sentences are overly complex, which impedes readability. There are lots of long sentences with multiple clauses. Breaking these up would enhance clarity.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English writing is good, but some sentences are overly complex, which impedes readability. There are lots of long sentences with multiple clauses. Breaking these up would enhance clarity.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1

First of all, I would like to express my gratitude for your precious comments and suggestions to improve the article. I took your suggestions into consideration and made the following changes in the article;

Comments 1: The study investigates if the Society 5.0 strategy can be applied to political, economic, and structural challenges in Turkey, with a focus on key areas like education, public administration, criminal justice, and corruption. The study seeks to apply a model developed in Japan to Turkey.

Response 1: There is due diligence. It does not require any action.

Comments 2: The authors do a nice job structuring their work around hypotheses linking Society 5.0 to problems in Turkey. But the paper will benefit from a more thorough section in the introduction on how directly comparable Japan and Turkey are in terms of technological infrastructure, societal needs, and political context. This would clarify how transferable the Society 5.0 model is to Turkey, beyond surface similarities.

Response 2: We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 2, Paragraph 3-5 and Line 62-87. Page 2 Paragraph 3-5 and Line 62-87.

Is it really possible to practice Society 5.0 in Turkiye?

Turkiye has the necessary capacity for Society 5.0 with its developed social struc-ture and universities. It is possible to practice Society 5.0 applications in the form of sensor solutions for companies operating in Turkiye such as Aselsan and Meteksan, which are experts in their fields, in the form of software for companies such as Akınsoft and Havelsan, in the form of robotic solutions for companies such as Akin Robotics and Altınay Robotics, and with examples that can be further multiplied. Nevertheless, in carrying out these activities, political determination and adequate budget allocation are regarded as a necessity [7].

Will Japan provide sufficient support to Turkiye for the implementation of Society 5.0?

Although the concept of Society 5.0 is regarded as a public policy especially in Ja-pan, it seems that the main practitioners and developers are Keidanren (Japan Busi-ness Federation). Briefly, the technologies and infrastructures to be developed specifi-cally for Society 5.0 will find application by the private sector not only in Japan but al-so throughout the world. In this regard, Society 5.0 has a commercial aspect, and the road maps published by Keidanren reveal that cooperation with companies and coun-tries is an important step [8]. It seems possible to carry out joint work with the Japa-nese if sufficient budget is formed. Meanwhile, many contracts signed between Turkiye and Japan provide great convenience. However, when a comprehensive literature re-view is made, the questions regarding in which areas Society 5.0 can be applied and whether it can meet the real needs of Turkiye remain a problem. Thus, the study first aims to identify Turkiye's current problems and test the applicability of Society 5.0 in solving these problems with Structural Equation Modeling, using niche innovation and convergent stakeholder theories.”

Comments 3: The methodology uses structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the relationships between Society 5.0 and key variables. This is a good technique for examining complex interactions between multiple variables. SEM is good for hypothesis testing in this situation.

Response 3: There is due diligence. It does not require any action.

Comments 4: Some things about the methodology can be improved. For example, the sample size of 407 participants has the limitation of using convenience sampling. The authors do acknowledge this limitation, but this weakens the study’s generalizability. Also, the demography of the sample (civil servants and many with a bachelor’s degree) introduces bias. The authors should think about whether these participants represent the population that would be impacted by Society 5.0 reforms in Turkey.

Response 4: We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 6, Paragraph 3 and Line 279-289.

The concept of the Turkiye Century has appeared in all media organizations, bill-boards, official institutions and correspondence, briefly everywhere since October 28, 2022. People may have limited knowledge about its content, but it is not the case that they have not heard of the concept. In the selection of the sample, the participants were first asked whether they knew about both concepts. The survey was continued with those who said they knew, while the survey was ended for those who said they did not know [48]. For this reason, the education level in demographic variables is seen to be predominantly undergraduate and above. In order to reduce regional impacts, data were collected from Samsun, one of Turkiye's northern provinces, Adana and Osmaniye from the southern provinces, Istanbul, one of the western provinces, and Kars and Van from the eastern provinces.

Comments 5: The study does not sufficiently account for control variables that could affect the relationships between Society 5.0 and the outcomes under investigation. Variables like SES, regionalism, and politics could impact attitudes toward political and structural issues. Controlling for these factors would make the analysis more robust.

Response 5: We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 6, Paragraph 3 and Line 279-289.

The concept of the Turkiye Century has appeared in all media organizations, bill-boards, official institutions and correspondence, briefly everywhere since October 28, 2022. People may have limited knowledge about its content, but it is not the case that they have not heard of the concept. In the selection of the sample, the participants were first asked whether they knew about both concepts. The survey was continued with those who said they knew, while the survey was ended for those who said they did not know [48]. For this reason, the education level in demographic variables is seen to be predominantly undergraduate and above. In order to reduce regional impacts, data were collected from Samsun, one of Turkiye's northern provinces, Adana and Osmaniye from the southern provinces, Istanbul, one of the western provinces, and Kars and Van from the eastern provinces.

Comments 6: The authors explore the applicability of Society 5.0 in a general way, but they do not address the ethical and technological constraints that might problematize the implementation of this strategy in a nation like Turkey. Things like data privacy and digital infrastructure, not to mention public resistance to artificial intelligence, need more attention.

Response 6: We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 9, Paragraph 3 and 389-394.

It is known that there is a negative reaction in public opinion towards artificial intelligence in general. The negative reaction results from concerns that people's physical and intellectual freedoms will be restricted and employment concerns [57]. Unfortunately, when Turkiye's weakness in data privacy and security is taken into consideration, a serious problem can be expected to arise. However, it should also be noted that the public remains unresponsive to the digital violations and deficiencies that occur in Turkiye [29].

Comments 7: The conclusions flow from the analysis, but there are some areas where the findings seem overstated. For example, showing that these things would improve Turkey is one thing but there are lots of assumptions about how these things will be implemented in Turkey’s current complex political climate. The authors assert that Society 5.0 does not have a significant effect on corruption. This is superficially analyzed. Corruption is a critical issue and more should be said about how to thwart it.

Response 7:

216. We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 4-5 and 200-216.

It is pointed out that Turkiye has not shown the desired level of progress in terms of bribery and corruption in the public within the scope of the fight against corruption [34]. OECD receives data from the organization's member, the Republic of Turkiye, and there is no hesitation regarding the data. An international index on corruption is published by Transparency International. In the index, countries where corruption is perceived to be low are at the forefront, whereas countries where corruption is felt to be intense are at the bottom. When the 2013 report of the institution is paid attention, it is realized that Turkiye ranks 53rd among 177 countries [35]. According to the Transparency International 2023 Report, Turkiye ranks 115th among 180 countries and is a country where corruption is perceived to be intense. When the differences between the reports are considered, it can be observed that some political practices regarding tenders such as roads, hospitals and airports have increased the perception of corruption in Turkiye in the last decade. It is realized that Transparency International reports are prepared mainly based on the audit reports which have been prepared and announced by the Court of Accounts Institution, which audits public expenditures in Turkiye [36]. Based on this, it is possible to claim that there is an increasing perception of corruption in Turkiye. In order to combat against corruption, it is possible to identify risky areas with Society 5.0 applications and to help prevent corruption by digitizing the applications and making use of smart contracts and artificial intelligence technologies.

366. We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 9, , Paragraph 3 and 359-366.

There are so many examples of corruption in Turkiye that it is realized that most of the time no action is taken even though the situation is reflected in the Court of Accounts Reports and takes the form of a criminal complaint. The issue stems entirely from po-litical reasons and the fact that the justice system is incapable. However, the fight against corruption is not hopeless. Niche innovation theory can enable weak demands from the public to grow and become a main idea by applying them in niche areas, re-peating them and attracting more participants. In this regard, it is expected that Soci-ety 5.0 will emerge as a main idea by affecting policies and be a hope for the fight against corruption [54].

Comments 8: The English writing is good, but some sentences are overly complex, which impedes readability. There are lots of long sentences with multiple clauses. Breaking these up would enhance clarity.

Response 8: The article was checked again by professional proffreading service.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I find the topic interesting, particularly the novel application of the structural equation model. The construction of latent variables and their relationships with both observable and other latent variables allows for greater flexibility when exploring the hierarchy and meaning of the relationships within the phenomenon being studied. I also emphasize the significance of having built their own database, which always represents an additional effort and is important to consider.

 

However, I believe that the document has significant gaps that must be addressed before it can be considered for publication.

 

One major issue is the almost complete lack of theoretical-conceptual development throughout the document, starting with the central variable of the analysis, "Society 5.0." Hypotheses are constructed by quoting only a single line from an international report, which is insufficient. Strengthening this area will not only help new readers understand the novelty of the subject but also clarify the subsequent empirical results.

 

While citing convergent stakeholder theory makes sense for determining relationships in the private sector, I find it insufficient for guiding public policies for an entire country. Other theories, such as the theory of social change or Niche Innovation Theory, might better frame the relationship between public policies and the concept of "Society 5.0."

 

Regarding the results, I believe more clarity is needed in explaining how the 407 individuals were sampled. It is essential to be more explicit about why this is a convenience sample and how these biases might impact the results. Are these people familiar with "Turkey's Century," "Society 5.0," or both?

 

The model fits well for most latent variables, but for the "Policy" variable, it would be useful to review whether the relationships in the model are well defined or if more variables are needed to enhance its explanatory and predictive power.

 

As for the SEM results, I recommend performing a confirmatory factor analysis, especially given the limited theoretical basis for the relationships between the analyzed variables. RMSEA, CFI, and TLI are not presented.

 

Considering the above, the conclusions should be reconsidered.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2

First of all, I would like to express my gratitude for your precious comments and suggestions to improve the article. I took your suggestions into consideration and made the following changes in the article;

Comments 1: I find the topic interesting, particularly the novel application of the structural equation model. The construction of latent variables and their relationships with both observable and other latent variables allows for greater flexibility when exploring the hierarchy and meaning of the relationships within the phenomenon being studied. I also emphasize the significance of having built their own database, which always represents an additional effort and is important to consider.

However, I believe that the document has significant gaps that must be addressed before it can be considered for publication.

Response 1: There is due diligence. It does not require any action.

Comments 2: One major issue is the almost complete lack of theoretical-conceptual development throughout the document, starting with the central variable of the analysis, "Society 5.0." Hypotheses are constructed by quoting only a single line from an international report, which is insufficient. Strengthening this area will not only help new readers understand the novelty of the subject but also clarify the subsequent empirical results.

Response 2:

172. We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 4, Paragraph 3 and Line 170-172.

Turkiye ranks 120 out of 214 countries in the 2022 World Bank Government Effectiveness Ranking [27].

179. We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 4, Paragraph 3 and Line 175-179.

Performing citizen services digitally will increase citizen service satisfaction and also reduce public service costs. There are electronic government applications in Turkiye, but the latest developments indicate that the data in the application is stolen by hackers [29]. Society 5.0 applications ensure keeping such data safe and stored with block chain and artificial intelligence.

188. We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 4, Paragraph 3 and Line 184-188.

According to the Rule of Law Index prepared annually by the World Justice Pro-ject, Turkiye ranks 117th out of 142. Crime rates in Turkiye are increasing day by day due to the lack of deterrent punishments [30]. Whereas the chief public prosecutor's offices received approximately 7 million files in 2015, this number increased by 54.6% and exceeded 11 million files in 2023 [31]. A similar situation exists in the international arena, as well.

216. We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 4-5 and Line 200-216.

OECD receives data from the organization's member, the Republic of Turkiye, and there is no hesitation regarding the data. An international index on corruption is pub-lished by Transparency International. In the index, countries where corruption is per-ceived to be low are at the forefront, whereas countries where corruption is felt to be intense are at the bottom. When the 2013 report of the institution is paid attention, it is realized that Turkiye ranks 53rd among 177 countries [35]. According to the Trans-parency International 2023 Report, Turkiye ranks 115th among 180 countries and is a country where corruption is perceived to be intense. When the differences between the reports are considered, it can be observed that some political practices regarding ten-ders such as roads, hospitals and airports have increased the perception of corruption in Turkiye in the last decade. It is realized that Transparency International reports are prepared mainly based on the audit reports which have been prepared and announced by the Court of Accounts Institution, which audits public expenditures in Turkiye [36]. Based on this, it is possible to claim that there is an increasing perception of corruption in Turkiye. In order to combat against corruption, it is possible to identify risky areas with Society 5.0 applications and to help prevent corruption by digitizing the applica-tions and making use of smart contracts and artificial intelligence technologies.

Comments 3: While citing convergent stakeholder theory makes sense for determining relationships in the private sector, I find it insufficient for guiding public policies for an entire country. Other theories, such as the theory of social change or Niche Innovation Theory, might better frame the relationship between public policies and the concept of "Society 5.0."

Response 3:

265. We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 5-6 and Line 259-265.

Niche Innovation Theory [41] is helpful in terms of resolving disagreements about which areas institutional reforms should be directed at. In this respect, it brings to the fore the view of whether global or local preferences will be effective; or whether it will cover a general or a local area. At this point, niche innovation theory offers an analysis structure in which political understandings come to the fore, which states that the structure in question will be useful in solving sophisticated problems [47].

366. We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 9, Paragraph 2 and Line 359-366.

There are so many examples of corruption in Turkiye that it is realized that most of the time no action is taken even though the situation is reflected in the Court of Accounts Reports and takes the form of a criminal complaint. The issue stems entirely from po-litical reasons and the fact that the justice system is incapable. However, the fight against corruption is not hopeless. Niche innovation theory can enable weak demands from the public to grow and become a main idea by applying them in niche areas, re-peating them and attracting more participants. In this regard, it is expected that Soci-ety 5.0 will emerge as a main idea by affecting policies and be a hope for the fight against corruption [54].

 

Comments 4: Regarding the results, I believe more clarity is needed in explaining how the 407 individuals were sampled. It is essential to be more explicit about why this is a convenience sample and how these biases might impact the results. Are these people familiar with "Turkey's Century," "Society 5.0," or both?

Response 4:  We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 9, Paragraph 2 and Line 279-289.

The concept of the Turkiye Century has appeared in all media organizations, billboards, official institutions and correspondence, briefly everywhere since October 28, 2022. People may have limited knowledge about its content, but it is not the case that they have not heard of the concept. In the selection of the sample, the participants were first asked whether they knew about both concepts. The survey was continued with those who said they knew, while the survey was ended for those who said they did not know [48]. For this reason, the education level in demographic variables is seen to be predominantly undergraduate and above. In order to reduce regional impacts, data were collected from Samsun, one of Turkiye's northern provinces, Adana and Osmaniye from the southern provinces, Istanbul, one of the western provinces, and Kars and Van from the eastern provinces.

Comments 5: The model fits well for most latent variables, but for the "Policy" variable, it would be useful to review whether the relationships in the model are well defined or if more variables are needed to enhance its explanatory and predictive power.

Response 5:  We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 5, Paragraph 2 and Line 221-231.

This influence can be felt positively or negatively. The effectiveness of the policy vari-able on other variables is based on real-life applications. Politics can simply be defined as the path and method followed by states to achieve their goals. Many factors such as the opening new universities, the closure of existing ones or the duration of compulso-ry education are elements of government policies in the field of education [40]. Many issues such as incentives and tax practices for economic development are an integral part of policies. The change in corruption rates in Turkiye has also taken place as a re-sult of a policy. To put it briefly, Turkiye is a country where the niche innovation theo-ry, in which the decisions taken by a small group influence the whole country, is expe-rienced positively or negatively. In this respect, unfortunately, politics have an impacts on the fate of a whole country [41].

 

Comments 6: As for the SEM results, I recommend performing a confirmatory factor analysis, especially given the limited theoretical basis for the relationships between the analyzed variables. RMSEA, CFI, and TLI are not presented.

Response 6: We agree with this comment. This change can be found Page 7, Paragraph 1 and Line 310-314.

As a result of the confirmatory factor analysis applied on the model with the AMOS   program, the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) value was found to be 0.079 while the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) value was 0.919. Addi-tionally, the Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) value was 0.907 and the Root Mean Square Re-sidual (RMR) value was 0.052. All these values indicate suitability for the analysis [49].

Comments 7: Considering the above, the conclusions should be reconsidered.

Response 7: In accordance with the reviewer's suggestion, the changes are marked in red on the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

My comments and suggestions were addressed appropriately.