6th National Trend Survey on Vacant House Owners (2026): Awareness Rises, but Concrete Action Still Lags

Kachitas Co., Ltd. (President and CEO: Kenji Arai, headquarters:桐生 City, Gunma Prefecture), which operates a used home acquisition and regeneration business, conducted the '6th National Trend Survey on Vacant House Owners (2026)' in 2026 to contribute to resolving Japan's worsening vacant house problem.

◆ Introduction

As a basis for the survey, we compared and analyzed the 'Survey on the Actual Conditions of Vacant House Owners' conducted by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism in Reiwa Year 1, and the actual cases of customers selling used homes to our company. As a result, the proportion of vacant houses acquired through inheritance or gifts was similar, and the regional distribution of vacant house locations also closely matched. This led us to recognize a strong correlation between our business domain and the actual nationwide conditions of vacant houses. To further contribute to solving Japan's accelerating vacant house problem, we have been conducting the 'National Trend Survey on Vacant House Owners' since 2021 to understand market conditions and challenges.

◆ Background and Purpose of the 6th Survey

The previous (5th) survey revealed that the first step in vacant house countermeasures is 'family dialogue'—those who had discussions were about 1.5 times more likely to consider countermeasures than those who did not. However, there remains a group that postpones dialogue, thinking 'it’s still far off,' highlighting a reality where increased awareness does not translate into concrete action. This year, we focused on the 'gap between awareness and action' and 'factors hindering action,' continuing our fixed-point survey.

◆ Survey Summary

◆ Key Findings

● Awareness of vacant house countermeasures is rising, but concrete action still lags

Awareness of mandatory inheritance registration (70.0%), awareness of the Special Measures Law for Promoting Measures on Vacant Houses (hereinafter 'Vacant House Special Measures Law') (58.0%), and the rate of family dialogue (72.5%) all reached record highs. Compared to the start of the survey in 2021, awareness of mandatory inheritance registration has nearly tripled, awareness of the Vacant House Special Measures Law has increased by about 1.5 times, and dialogue rates have increased by about 2.2 times—indicating steadily rising awareness of the vacant house issue.

● 'I know it’s important' but can’t act—A 20% gap between awareness and action

However, 25.5% of respondents answered that their future actions within the next three years are 'still unknown,' meaning one in four owners remains inactive. Despite rising awareness, this reveals a disconnect from taking concrete action.

Furthermore, while over 70% of owners consider vacant house countermeasures important, the priority given to taking action has dropped to 50%, indicating a gap of about 20% between awareness and action.

The main reason for low prioritization is 'not yet troubled' or 'no sense of urgency' (39.7%), suggesting that the problem continues to be postponed.

◆ Three barriers prevent concrete action

Why, despite awareness, do people fail to take action? This survey revealed the existence of 'three barriers' that hinder action.

◆ The Age Barrier

There are significant differences in awareness and action toward vacant house countermeasures by age group.

● By Age Group │ Planned vacant house measures within the next 3 years

Owners aged 20–30 show high intentions toward proactive measures such as selling or renting, and the unexamined group is half that of those aged 60 and above. In contrast, owners aged 60 and above have the highest proportion of unexamined cases among all age groups. When examining the reasons for being 'still unsure' by age group, those aged 60 and above, despite having the option to 'use it myself or with family' within the next three years, still choose 'still unsure,' selecting 'might use it myself or with family in the future' as the reason. In other words, they are unable to decide whether to 'use' or 'let go,' halting action.

● By Age Group │ Reasons for not prioritizing action

Additionally, owners aged 60 and above show a strong tendency to delay action, citing 'no sense of urgency' (51.1%). It became clear that the trigger for future action among this group will be the tangible experience of risks or burdens such as 'management, tax, and maintenance costs' or 'deterioration.'

Prescription for the age barrier: [Vacant house owners aged 60+ with stalled countermeasure considerations]

Providing information that helps owners realistically perceive the risks of leaving houses vacant could foster a sense of crisis and potentially transform the uncertain expectation of 'my family might use it' into concrete action.

◆ The Dialogue Barrier

Having discussions with family or relatives about vacant houses appears to enhance understanding of risks and available countermeasure options.

● By Presence of Dialogue │ Planned vacant house measures within the next 3 years

Among those who have discussed the issue with family, only 19.0% remain undecided, whereas 42.5% of those who haven’t discussed it remain undecided.

● By Presence of Dialogue │ Future triggers for taking action

For those who haven’t had discussions, the top reason for future action is 'nothing applies' (29.9%), indicating they cannot even envision a trigger. In contrast, those who have discussed the issue cite 'deterioration and risks,' 'management burden,' and 'learning about utilization benefits' as concrete triggers. The act of discussing within the family appears to increase the clarity of risks and available options.

● Reasons for not discussing and triggers for dialogue

The top reason for not discussing is 'it’s still far off, so it’s not the right timing' (30.2%), revealing that dialogue doesn’t even begin when awareness is low. On the other hand, top events that triggered dialogue include 'inheriting property' (27.2%), 'receiving a fixed asset tax notice' (21.2%), and 'heavy maintenance and tax burdens' (20.5%). This shows that family discussions only begin when burdens or risks become tangible. In other words, the first step of vacant house countermeasures—'dialogue'—must wait until the owner personally experiences some burden or risk.

Prescription for the dialogue barrier: [Owners who do not discuss vacant houses with family]

Without dialogue, options remain invisible and triggers for action do not emerge. Proactively communicating 'burdens and risks' ahead of moments when awareness naturally rises—such as receiving a fixed asset tax notice—could initiate dialogue and promote action.

◆ The Regional Barrier

● By Region │ Reasons for being unable to decide on countermeasures

In urban areas, cities, and suburban areas, the top reason for being 'still unsure' about countermeasures is 'financial reasons.' This may be because urban real estate has high asset value, making it difficult to reach agreement among multiple heirs on how to divide it, or because awareness of demolition and renovation costs is more realistic. In suburban areas, 'might use it myself or with family' is common, indicating owners still don’t feel the need to let go.

● By Region │ Reasons for postponing countermeasures

'Not yet troubled' or 'no sense of urgency' is the top reason across all regions, and 'likely to be costly' ranks second in nearly all regions, showing little regional difference in reasons for delay. However, in urban areas only, 'unable to discuss with family' (29.4%) ranks second, suggesting that agreement among family members may be a barrier in high-value urban properties.

● By Region │ Exposure to vacant house-related information

In urban to suburban areas, over half of respondents hear or see vacant house information 'at least once a week.' In contrast, in depopulated areas, information acquisition frequency is low—while people may 'learn' through TV or newspapers, the number actively 'researching' drops sharply. It is clear that the more remote the area, the less proactive the information gathering.

● By Region │ Future triggers for taking action on vacant houses

In cities and regional cities, the main triggers are tangible experiences of risks and burdens such as 'increased deterioration and disaster risks' and 'management becoming burdensome.' However,