11:30 AM - 12:00 PM
[HCG20-04] The Space of Dialogue on Nuclear Policy: Collaboration among Science, Politics, and Society
★Invited Papers
Keywords:Nuclear Policy, Space of Dialogue, Trans-Scientific Problems, Wicked Problems, 1F Decommissioning, Deep Geological Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Waste
In 1972, the renowned American nuclear physicist Weinberg published an article entitled "Science and Trans-Science," in which he used the health hazards of low-dose radiation exposure as an example to raise the importance of trans-scientific issues, arguing that such social problems "can be asked of science but cannot be answered by science". He stated that such social issues "can be asked of science, but they cannot be answered by science," and raised the importance of trans-scientific issues.
For trans-scientific issues that cannot be decided by science, and for troublesome problems for which society is not convinced by the optimal solutions provided by conventional expertise, it has been considered effective to formulate "solutions" through deliberation (a place of dialogue) in which science, politics, and society collaborate. In fact, in Europe and the U.S., various deliberative approaches such as consensus conferences, public opinion polls, and citizen climate conferences have been tried as democratic innovations, including those for nuclear power and energy policies.
However, Japan is positioned among the G7 as an outlier in these international trends. Why is it so difficult for Japan to create a forum for policy dialogue on nuclear policy through collaboration among science, politics, and society? The "lost 30 years" of economic, social, and political stagnation in Japan is a major factor, and the governance structure is such that the Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) leads nuclear policy based on the traditional technical bureaucratic model, with other technical agencies implementing and assisting, making it difficult to incorporate a "forum for dialogue" involving the participation of citizens.
In the 1990s, administrators, and experts began to recognize the importance of information dissemination, and attempts were made to engage in dialogue that transcended the positions of opponents and proponents, including the "Roundtable on Nuclear Policy" organized by the AEC (1995). However, after the accident at the fast breeder reactor Monju, nuclear power scandals and troubles have continued to occur, and communication on nuclear power has returned to a situation in which the two poles of opposition and proponents are fixed. The situation of social division and indifference surrounding nuclear power has continued in Japanese society for a long time.
The situation has become even more complicated since the Fukushima (1F) accident in March 2011, when a majority of public opinion was anti-nuclear and pro-nuclear. However, Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and the escalation of climate change issues have demonstrated the importance of energy security and the transition to a decarbonized society, and there has been a marked reevaluation of nuclear power. A clear dichotomy of pro-nuclear and anti-nuclear has once again formed in Japanese society, deepening social divisions and conflicts and making it difficult for diverse stakeholders to interact. Many citizens once again seem to be moving away from the nuclear policy debate.
In this report, we would like to consider the issues of nuclear governance and the possibility of deliberation in Japan, based on the attempts of deliberation in the 1F decommissioning policy and the geological disposal policy.
This study is a part of the outcome of research performed under a Waseda University Grant for Special Research Project (Project number: 2023C-561).
For trans-scientific issues that cannot be decided by science, and for troublesome problems for which society is not convinced by the optimal solutions provided by conventional expertise, it has been considered effective to formulate "solutions" through deliberation (a place of dialogue) in which science, politics, and society collaborate. In fact, in Europe and the U.S., various deliberative approaches such as consensus conferences, public opinion polls, and citizen climate conferences have been tried as democratic innovations, including those for nuclear power and energy policies.
However, Japan is positioned among the G7 as an outlier in these international trends. Why is it so difficult for Japan to create a forum for policy dialogue on nuclear policy through collaboration among science, politics, and society? The "lost 30 years" of economic, social, and political stagnation in Japan is a major factor, and the governance structure is such that the Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) leads nuclear policy based on the traditional technical bureaucratic model, with other technical agencies implementing and assisting, making it difficult to incorporate a "forum for dialogue" involving the participation of citizens.
In the 1990s, administrators, and experts began to recognize the importance of information dissemination, and attempts were made to engage in dialogue that transcended the positions of opponents and proponents, including the "Roundtable on Nuclear Policy" organized by the AEC (1995). However, after the accident at the fast breeder reactor Monju, nuclear power scandals and troubles have continued to occur, and communication on nuclear power has returned to a situation in which the two poles of opposition and proponents are fixed. The situation of social division and indifference surrounding nuclear power has continued in Japanese society for a long time.
The situation has become even more complicated since the Fukushima (1F) accident in March 2011, when a majority of public opinion was anti-nuclear and pro-nuclear. However, Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and the escalation of climate change issues have demonstrated the importance of energy security and the transition to a decarbonized society, and there has been a marked reevaluation of nuclear power. A clear dichotomy of pro-nuclear and anti-nuclear has once again formed in Japanese society, deepening social divisions and conflicts and making it difficult for diverse stakeholders to interact. Many citizens once again seem to be moving away from the nuclear policy debate.
In this report, we would like to consider the issues of nuclear governance and the possibility of deliberation in Japan, based on the attempts of deliberation in the 1F decommissioning policy and the geological disposal policy.
This study is a part of the outcome of research performed under a Waseda University Grant for Special Research Project (Project number: 2023C-561).