Structural Ignorance of Expertise in Nuclear Safety Controversies: Case Analysis of Post-Fukushima Japan

References

• “Interim Report,” Investigation Committee on the Accident at the Fukushima Nuclear Power Stations (Dec. 2011).
   Google Scholar
• “International Fact-Finding Expert Mission of the Fukushima Daiichi NPP Accident Following the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami,” May 24–June 2, 2011, International Atomic Energy Agency (2011).
   Google Scholar
• “Basic Policy on the Reform of an Organization in Charge of Nuclear Safety Regulation (Cabinet Decision),” Japanese Cabinet (Aug. 15, 2011).
   Google Scholar
• J. E. C. HYMANS, “Veto Players, Nuclear Energy, and Nonproliferation: Domestic Institutional Barriers to Japanese Bomb,” Int. Secur., 36, 2, 154 (2011); https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00059.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. J. SAMUELS, 3.11: Disaster and Change in Japan, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York (2013).
   Google Scholar
• H. KAINUMA, Justice of Fukushima, Battle Against the Changelessness of Japan, Gentosha, Tokyo, Japan (2012) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• T. TANIGUCHI, “Risk Governance Deficits in Japanese Nuclear Fraternity,” J. Sci. Technol. Stud., 12, 242 (2016).
   Google Scholar
• K. JURAKU, “Unfulfilled Promises: Why Structural Disasters Make It Difficult to ‘Learn from Disasters,’” Legacies of 3.11: Fukushima in Perspective, S. KNOWLES, K. CLEVELAND, and R. SHINEHA, Eds., University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (2021).
   Google Scholar
• S. SUGAWARA and T. INAMURA, “Development and Application of Nuclear Safety Goals in Japan: Lessons Learnt from the Case of 2003 Draft Safety Goals,” Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry Report, Y15016 (2016) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• S. SUGAWARA and K. JURAKU, “Post-Fukushima Controversy on SPEEDI System: Contested Imaginary of Real-Time Simulation Technology for Emergency Radiation Protection,” The Sociotechnical Constitution of Resilience: A New Perspective on Governing Risk and Disaster, S. AMIR, Ed., Chap. 9, p. 197, Palgrave Macmillan (2018).
   Google Scholar
• “Report of Japanese Government to the IAEA Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Safety—The Accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima Nuclear Power Stations,” Nuclear Emergency Response Headquarters, Government of Japan (June 2011).
   Google Scholar
• “Final Report of the AESJ Investigation Committee of the Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident,” Atomic Energy Society of Japan, Maruzen, Tokyo, Japan (2014).
   Google Scholar
• “Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Methods in Nuclear Regulatory Activities; Final Policy Statement,” 60 FR 42622, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Aug. 1995).
   Google Scholar
• “An Approach for Using Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Risk-Informed Decisions on Plant-Specific Changes to the Licensing Basis,” Regulatory Guide 1.174, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (July 1998).
   Google Scholar
• J. L. CHAMBON and J. M. LANORE, “Use of PSA for Improving the Safety of French PWRs,” Report DES/182, Institut de Protection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (June 1994).
   Google Scholar
• “Development and Utilisation of Probabilistic Safety Assessments,” Basic Safety Rule 2002-01, Autorite de Surete Nucleaire (Dec. 2002).
   Google Scholar
• K. SAITO, “Why Risk-Informed Approach Had Yet Been Introduced?” Opinion, International Environment and Economy Institute, Oct. 28, 2015; http://ieei.or.jp/2015/10/opinion151028/ (current as of Mar. 31, 2020) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• “To Ensure a Severe Accident Never Happens Again,” Expert Committee on Prevention of Severe Accident of Nuclear Power Plants (Apr. 2013); http://www.jates.or.jp/dcms_media/other/douyuukai_teigenn_kakokujiko2.pdf ( current as of Mar. 31, 2020) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• “Recommendations for Voluntary Improvement of Nuclear Safety,” Working Group on Voluntary Efforts and Continuous Improvement of Nuclear Safety, Ministry of Economy (May 27, 2015); https://www.meti.go.jp/shingikai/enecho/denryoku_gas/genshiryoku/jishuteki_anzensei/pdf/report01_01_00.pdf (current as of Mar. 31, 2020) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• “JANSI Brochure,” Japan Nuclear Safety Institute (Mar. 2020); http://www.genanshin.jp/english/association/data/guide_en.pdf (current as of Mar. 31, 2020).
   Google Scholar
• “A Framework for an Integrated Risk Informed Decision Making Process,” INSAG-25, International Nuclear Safety Group (2011).
   Google Scholar
• “Press Conference by the Chairman of Nuclear Regulation Authority,” Nuclear Regulation Authority (July 2, 2014); https://warp.da.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/11036037/www.nsr.go.jp/data/000068790.pdf (current as of July 29, 2020) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• A. YAMAGUCHI, S. TAKEUCHI, and S. SUGAWARA, “Rethinking Safety Goals: Why Do We Need Safety Goals?” University of Tokyo Nuclear-R-497 (2018) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• “Outline of New Regulatory Requirements for Light Water Nuclear Power Plants (Severe Accident Measures),” Nuclear Regulation Authority (Apr. 2013).
   Google Scholar
• S. SUGAWARA, “What Constitutes Risk-Informed Decision Making (RIDM)?: Analysis of the U.S. Cases from the Governance Viewpoint,” Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry Report, Y17007 (2018).
   Google Scholar
• J. DOWNER, “Disowning Fukushima: Managing the Credibility of Nuclear Reliability Assessment in the Wake of Disaster,” Regul. Gov., 8, 287 (2014).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. DOWNER, “On Ignorance and Apocalypse: A Brief Introduction to ‘Epistemic Accidents,’” Safety Science Research: Evolution, Challenges and New Directions, J. C. LECOZE, Ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida (2019).
   Google Scholar
• “「聴取結果書」 (原子力安全・保安院原子力安全技術基盤課原子力安全基準統括審議官 山形浩史)” (“Minutes of Hearing from Hiroshi Yamagata, Director-General for Nuclear Safety Standard, Nuclear Safety Regulatory Standard Division, Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency”), Cabinet Secretariat of Japan (Mar. 15, 2012); https://www8.cao.go.jp/genshiryoku_bousai/fu_koukai/pdf_2/638.pdf (current as of Mar. 31, 2020) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• P. SLOVIC, “The Perception Gap: Radiation and Risk,” Bull. At. Sci., 68, 3, 67 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1177/0096340212444870.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• “Safety Goals for the Operations of Nuclear Power Plants; Policy Statement,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Aug. 4, 1986).
   Google Scholar
• “TMI-2 Lessons Learned Task Force Final Report,” NUREG-0585, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Oct. 1979).
   Google Scholar
• “Reducing Risks, Protecting People: HSE’s Decision-Making Process,” United Kingdom Health and Safety Executive (2001).
   Google Scholar
• B. ALE, “Tolerable or Acceptable: A Comparison of Risk Regulation in the United Kingdom and in the Netherlands,” Risk Anal., 25, 2, 231 (2005); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00585.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• “Toward a Safety Goal: Discussion of Preliminary Policy Considerations,” NUREG-0764, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Mar. 1981).
   Google Scholar
• “Safety Goals for Nuclear Power Plant Operation,” NUREG-0880 Revision 1 for Comment, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (May 1983).
   Google Scholar
• “Panel Discussion on Utilization of Probabilistic Safety Assessment,” IAE-Rev., 11, 1, 13 (1988) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• “The Interim Report of Consideration on Safety Goals,” Special Committee on the Safety Goals, The Nuclear Safety Commission of Japan (Dec. 2003) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• “The Report on Performance Objectives of Commercial Light-Water Nuclear Facilities,” Special Committee on the Safety Goals, The Nuclear Safety Commission of Japan (Mar. 2006) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• “Discussion to Be Made Regarding the Safety Goals Before the Previous Meeting (April 3, 2013),” Secretariat of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (Apr. 2013) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• “「伊方発電所環境安全管理委員会原子力安全専門部会議事録」” (”Minutes of Nuclear Safety Special Committee, Environmental Safety Management Committee of Ikata Power Plant, Ehime Prefecture”), Safety Special Committee, Environmental Safety Management Committee of Ikata Power Plant (Aug. 19, 2015); http://www.ensc.jp/pc/user/HOUDOU/h27/o270819/gengiji.pdf ( current as of Nov. 30, 2019) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• S. SUGAWARA, “‘Scientisizing’ How Safe Is Safe Enough: A Critical Analysis of Nuclear Safety Goals in Japan,” presented at the Int. Conf. on Uncertainty in Risk Analysis, Berlin, Germany, February 22, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• R. OLSON, Science and Scientism in Nineteenth-Century Europe, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois (2008).
   Google Scholar
• “The Official Report of Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission,” The National Diet of Japan, Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (July 5, 2012).
   Google Scholar
• “NRA’s Core Values and Principles,” Nuclear Regulation Authority (Jan. 9, 2013).
   Google Scholar
• S. FUNTOWICZ and J. RAVETZ, “Science for the Post-Normal Age,” Futures, 25, 7, 739 (1993); https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(93)90022-L.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• “Emergency Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Guideline,” Nuclear Safety Commission of Japan (Mar. 2008).
   Google Scholar
• M. MASTSUMOTO, “‘Structural Disaster’ Long Before Fukushima: A Hidden Accident,” Dev. Soc., 42, 2, 165 (2013); https://doi.org/10.21588/dns.2013.42.2.002.
   Google Scholar
• “「原子力災害発生時の防護措置の考え方」” (“Principles on Protective Actions in a Nuclear Disaster Event”), Nuclear Regulation Authority (Mar. 16, 2016); https://www.nsr.go.jp/activity/bousai/measure/00000217.html (current as of Mar. 31, 2020) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• C. PERROW, Normal Accidents: Living with High Risk Technologies, Basic Books, New York (1984).
   Google Scholar
• “「原子力関係閣僚会議決定:原子力災害対策充実に向けた考え方」” (“Decision of the Ministerial Council for Nuclear Power Utilization: Strategy for Improvement of Anti-Nuclear Disaster Measures”), Cabinet Secretariat of Japan (Mar. 11, 2016); https://www.cas.go.jp/jp/seisaku/genshiryoku_kakuryo_kaigi/pdf/h280311_siryou.pdf (current as of Mar. 31, 2020) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• T. AVEN, “Risk Assessment and Risk Management: Review of Recent Advances on Their Foundation,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., 253, 1, 1 (2016); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. POLLERI, “Post-Political Uncertainties: Governing Nuclear Controversies in Post-Fukushima Japan,” Soc. Stud. Sci., 50, 4, 567 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312719889405.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• B. RUSSELL, Mysticism and Logic and Other Essays, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform ([1917], 2018).
   Google Scholar
• M. HEIDEGGER, Sein und Zeit, Chap. 6, Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tübingen, Germany ([1926], 1967).
   Google Scholar
• S. SUGAWARA and K. JURAKU, “Bridging the Gap Between Risk Assessment and Management: Japanese Experience of PRA and SPEEDI,” Proc. Asian Symp. on Risk Assessment and Management 2017, November 14, 2017, Yokohama, Japan (2017).
   Google Scholar
• T. FUKETA, “New Safety Regulation in Japan and Probabilistic Risk Assessment,” presented at the U.S.-Japan Probabilistic Risk Assessment Roundtable, February 20–21, 2014, Tokyo, Japan.
   Google Scholar
• A. STIRLING, “Risk, Precaution and Science: Towards a More Constructive Policy Debate,” EMBO Rep., 8, 4, 309 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor.7400953.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. SIMON, Models of Man, John Wiley, New York (1957).
   Google Scholar
• C. S. HOLLING, Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, United Kingdom (1978).
   Google Scholar
• R. E. KASPERSON, “Coping with Deep Uncertainty: Challenges for Environmental Assessment and Decision Making,” Uncertainty and Risk: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, A. M. SMITHSON and G. BAMMER, Eds., Earthscan, London (2008).
   Google Scholar
• M. HIRANO, “History of Severe Accident Management and Residual Risks,” ATOMOΣ, 53, 11, 748 (2011) (in Japanese); https://doi.org/10.3327/jaesjb.53.11_748.
   Google Scholar
• S. RAYNER, “Uncomfortable Knowledge: The Social Construction of Ignorance in Science and Environmental Policy Discourses,” Econ. Soc., 41, 1, 107 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2011.637335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• “Strategic Energy Plan,” Japanese Cabinet (Apr. 11, 2014).
   Google Scholar
• H. NARIAI, “Safety Goals: Risk, Safety and Societal Relief,” The SCJ Forum, 14, 9, 20 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• “Promotion of Research Activities on Prevention Against and Recovery from Environmental Contamination by Radioactive Materials,” Science Council of Japan (Mar. 23, 2005) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• “「聴取結果書」 (内閣府原子力委員会委員長近藤駿介)” (“Minutes of Hearing from Shunsuke Kondo, Chairperson of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission”), Cabinet Secretariat of Japan (Feb. 1, 2012); https://www8.cao.go.jp/genshiryoku_bousai/fu_koukai/pdf_2/526.pdf (current as of Mar. 31, 2020) (in Japanese).
   Google Scholar
• R. KATZ and T. J. ALLEN, “Investigating the Not Invented Here (NIH) Syndrome: A Look at the Performance, Tenure and Communication Patterns of 50 R&D Project Groups,” R&D Manage., 12, 1, 7 (1982); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.1982.tb00478.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. W. LEWIS et al., “Report to the American Physical Society by the Study Group on Light-Water Reactor Safety,” Rev. Mod. Phys., 47, S1 (1975); https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.47.S1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. APOSTOLAKIS, “How Useful Is Quantitative Risk Assessment,” Risk Anal., 24, 3, 515 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00455.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• “Commission Voting Record,” SECY-15-0168, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Mar. 9, 2016).
   Google Scholar
• O. RENN, Risk Governance: Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World, Earthscan, New York (2008).
   Google Scholar
• R. N. PROCTOR, “Agnotology: A Missing Term to Describe the Cultural Production of Ignorance (And Its Study),” Agnotology: The Making and Unmaking of Ignorance, R. N. PROCTOR and L. SCHIEBINGER, Eds., Stanford University Press, Stanford, California (2008).
   Google Scholar
• D. MICHAELS, “Manufactured Uncertainty: Protecting Public Health in the Age of Contested Science and Product Define,” Ann. N Y Acad. Sci., 1076, 1, 149 (2006); https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1371.058.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• W. DAVIES and L. McGOEY, “Rationalities of Ignorance: On Financial Crisis and the Ambivalence of Neo-Liberal Epistemology,” Econ. Soc., 41, 1, 64 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2011.637331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. M. ACTON and M. HIBBS, “Why Fukushima Was Preventable,” The Carnegie Papers (Mar. 2012).
   Google Scholar
• D. L. KLEINMAN and S. SURYANARAYANAN, “Dying Bees and the Social Production of Ignorance,” Sci. Technol. Human Values, 38, 4, 492 (2012); https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243912442575.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. FRICKEL and M. B. VINCENT, “Katrina, Contamination, and the Unintended Organization of Ignorance,” Technol. Soc., 29, 2, 181 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2007.01.007.
   Google Scholar
• S. SCHEEL and F. USTEK-SPLIDA, “The Politics of Expertise and Ignorance in the Field of Migration Management,” EPD: Soc. Space, 37, 4, 663 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1177/0263775819843677.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order, S. JASANOFF, Ed., Routledge, New York (2004).
   Google Scholar
• S. JASANOFF, Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey (2005).
   Google Scholar
• S. JASANOFF, Science and Public Reason, Routledge, New York (2012).
   Google Scholar
• V. ARNHOLD, “Normalisation of Nuclear Accidents After the Cold War,” Cold War History, 1, (2020);
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. TOPÇU, “Confronting Nuclear Risks: Counter-Expertise as Politics Within the French Nuclear Energy Debate,” Nat. Cult., 3, 2, 225 (2008); https://doi.org/10.3167/nc.2008.030205.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. GEERTZ, “Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture,” The Interpretation of Culture: Selected Essays, Basic Books, New York (1973).
   Google Scholar
• T. WELLOCK, “A Figure of Merit: Quantifying the Probability of a Nuclear Reactor Accident,” Technol. Cult., 58, 3, 678 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2017.0078.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar