The Puzzle 6: Nuclear Energy in

Nuclear Allergy State

Japanese citizens opposition to owning a
nuclear weapon
Three No-Nuclear Principles: Parliamentary
resolution in 1971 (not a law)
Japan shall neither possess nor manufacture nuclear weapons,
nor shall it permit their introduction into Japanese territory.

Due to traumatic experience with

bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki during
the WWII & Japans strategic reliance on
the U.S. security.

As of June 2010 (before the 3.11. earthquake &

tsunami): NHKs public opinion survey What do you
think about Japans owning & using a nuclear
weapon?
May own it, but
should not use it
May use
it
If
necessar
y

National Sample

Should not
own or use
it.
All
20s-30s
40s
50s
60s
Over 70s

Respondents in
Hiroshima

Respondents in
Nagasaki
Surprisingly, not much
difference from the
national sample.

% of Negative Opinions on Nuclear

Energy30%-40% of citizens
oppose nuclear energy

Source: Atsuko Kitada (2013): p.178.

Opposition to NC Energy is a half of opposition to NC Weapon

Japan Nuclear Facts

1963: Japans first nuclear reactor (imported
from the United States).
1970: First commercial reactor began
operating.
1973: Energy crisis Needed to search for
alternative sources beyond gas.
1974: Kakuei Tanaka (Prime Minister
remember, he was Mr. Pork!) initiated &
successfully legislated Three Power Source
Siting Laws; The idea was to give subsidies to
local governments who agreed to host nuclear
energy plants.
Results: 48 plants before the 3.11., which
provided 30% of Japans total energy.

As of September 15, 2013, the number of active plant has been

zero.

3.11. and Nuclear Power

Accident

Public Health Effects of Radiation

Oyama Primary School

40 miles from Fukushima
Parents, teachers, and
community members
decided to take manners
into their own hands by
removing and burying
topsoil from school
playgrounds
Radiation Readings of
topsoil:
0.04 microsieverts/hour
1.32 microsieverts/hour
0.25 microsieverts/ hour

Public Opinion After 3.11

(2011)

37%
Support the
Use of
Nuclear
Energy
42% Oppose
21%
Others/DK

Public Opinion Survey by Asahi Daily, June 13, 2011.

74%
Support
Abandoning
Nuclear
Energy in
the Future

Citizens
Protest/Demonstration
April 10, 2011.
15,000 people in Tokyo.

September 19, 2011.

60,000 people participated in antinuclear energy demonstration in Tokyo.

Public Protests after

3/2011

To put this in context

Demonstration to support
protectionism for towel industry:
4800 people in 2001.
Demonstration to oppose Japanese
TV programs airing too many South
Korean soap operas: 20,000 people
in Tokyo in August 2011.

How about Germany?

More anti-nuclear energy than Japan to begin with.
1970s: Big anti-nuclear energy movement. Green
party won local-level elections and then went
national.
2002: SPD & Green Party revised the Nuclear Energy
Law to abandon nuclear energy by 2022.
2010: CDU/CSU & FDPrevised the Law again to
prolong the operation 12+ more years.
After 3.11, Green Party increased its popularity.
Responding to the rise of GP, the CDU/CSU and FDP
coalition temporary froze the extension.

Citizens Demonstration in
Germany
March 12, 2011.
60,000 people participated in the anti-nuclear
energy demonstration in Stuttgart. The
demonstration was originally prepared for the
upcoming state-level election.

March 25, 2011.

250,000 people in four major cities
participated in the anti-nuclear energy
demonstration.

Why Public Oppose Nuclear

Weapon but Support Nuclear
Energy?
Electoral System (MMD until 1994) & the LDPs Pork
Argument

Cohen, McCubbins and Rosenbluth (assigned reading)

Nuclear power plant as construction projects,
environmentalists supported the left, Not-in-my-backyard local
residents were farmers & fishermen; bought off by the LDP.
But the electoral system changed in 1994 to single-member
district plus proportional representation systems. Pork
incentives should decline.

Elites mobilized citizens support.

Dusinberre & Aldrich trace various elite-driven campaigns.

Elites were well-aware of citizens nuclear allergy.
Thus made strong effort to convince nuclear energy=peace
Astro Boy (Tetsuwan Atomu), cartoon published since 1952, TV
animation aired between 1963 and 1966, won 30% of viewing rate.
1980 & 2003 remake.

Molding Publics Minds?

1

1952
Atomu (Astro Boy):
PEACE
1954
(Bikini accident)

vs.
Godzilla w/ Atomic Breath

TEPCO vs Regulators
TEPCO
Problems (Nuclear Meltdown)

METIs (former name MITI)

agency NISA oversees nuclear
energy plants. Collusion through
revolving door positions
Future of regulators

Governmental Response
In April of 2011, the government
increased the limit of safe radiation
exposure for children from 1
millisievert a year to 20 millisieverts
a year.
Doctors, scientists and parents
outraged.

Returning to Previous
Measure
Education Ministrys Logic
Schoolyard= 3.8 microsieverts/ hour
Inside a building= 1.52 microsieverts/ hour
Stay within the 20 millisieverts a year limit

However, announced plans to return

exposure limits to 1 millisievert a year
How?
Covering the cost of removing top soil
Expectation that as years pass radiation
levels will decline.

The Trade-Offs that

Politicians Face

Politicians seem to face many trade-offs in choosing how to

respond to disasters. How do they weigh these trade-offs and
make decisions?
Transparency vs. Blame-Avoidance

Japanese government delayed releasing important data to the public, such as

Fukushima nuclear plants waste water leak. The lack of trust.

Safety vs. Compensation

E.g., evacuation zone for Fukushima nuclear meltdown.

Wider the zone, safer the citizens, but more governments budget will be spent on
compensating those who are ordered to move.

Favor organized interests vs. ordinary citizens

E.g., agricultural producesafe or unsafe?

Politicians seemed to align with producers Fukushima produce is safe.

Efficiency vs. Equality

Should the government spend money to reconstruct the communities damaged by

Tsunami, despite the repeated warning by scientists that they were risky locations
to live?
Should the government encourage farmers to go back to farm (a) in radiationcontaminated Fukushima, or, provide income compensation and discourage them
from farming (b), even if (a) costs more than (b)?

What accounts for these decisionsculture, political and economic

incentives, market structure, or, political institutions?

Avoidance
Force against transparency
Politicians: We should not spread harmful rumors
about Fukushima.

Contamination of Fukushima produce

Affect the income of farmers.

Health risks of Fukushima children

Future discrimination for marriage, job hunting etc.

The Problem: difficult to sort out whether these

are rumors or scientific truth. Either way,
these information hurt Fukushima citizens, but
that does not mean media should self-regulate.

Media control & selfregulation

Oishinbo a popular
cartoon about food.
The main character
visited Fukushima and
had a nose breeding.
The mayor (the actual
character) said the
breeding was due to the
exposure to radiation.
Massive criticisms from
politicians and citizens.

In summary
Why no big civil society movement against nuclear energy after
Fukushima disaster?
Remember, actors, preference and power
Businesses and citizens: benefit from cheaper electricity. Not-inmy-backyard but otherwise, some support.
Residents of localities hosting nuclear energy plants: jobs +
subsidies vs. safety. Agonizing choice.
Parents and children: victims, but remember, many parents are
also employed in business sectors that benefit from cheap
electricity or nuclear plants.
How about politicians?
No Green Party, like Germany. Left parties did not transform into
Green Party (See Kohnos reading on socialist party stagnation).
The LDP is pro-business. The DPJ is also divided.
Bureaucrats collude with TEPCO via revolving door positions.
Civil society movement Not big unless organized by political parties.

Domestic Model of PolicyMaking

Actors, Preference, and Power
Policy Outcome
Top-down

e.g., Executive branch, Cabinet,

Prime Minister, Bureaucracy
State
Politicians

Economic interest
groups
Public, Social Groups
Bottom-up

e.g., legislators, parties,

local-level politicians
e.g. firms, farmers, business
owners, labor unions,
industry associations
e.g., public, NGOs,
environmental groups