Sorry, when I said 'adjacent to where you're generating waste - eg a konbini' - I meant the konbini bin itself. So, adjacent to _you_ (and your new rubbish) - not adjacent to the store. I could perhaps have used the word proximal.
AIUI the history is a bit murky, and it's mostly fiscal, but with some terrorism response - the sarin gas, and then other cities having attacks, and bins being seen as a safety risk.
Here in AU we had a famous (because they're so rare) bombing in the 1980's (the Hilton bombing, for the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting) - about which much has been written. I think about 20 years ago, give or take quite a few, there's been a move to transparent public rubbish bins, and I'm sure the placement, shape, etc of those has been considered by planners with those risks in mind.
A related domestic anecdote - from the same era - one of our more interesting politicians in Sydney set about removing public bins, on the premise that their presence increased street litter (you see people put rubbish on top of a full bin, and it's blown away a few moments later).
Back to Japan - it seems to have been mostly a response to citizens avoiding rubbish collection fees at home by taking household waste to public bins. I don't know if that can be correlated tidily to higher density ~= higher tourism areas?
In any case, while we travelled there, it was rare that we had a problem with rubbish, but we were prepared -- we either followed the locals' habit (eat/drink where you buy and immediately ditch in their bin) and/or we were invariably carrying daypacks so we could take waste back to our hotel.
> Yes, I expect it skews my trash bin prevalence too high. Because tourist-heavy places should have more, not less.
I understand why you might think that, but I would suggest that it's not a universally agreed argument.