Published on Sep. 16, 2015 : The Denki Shimbun (The Electric Daily News)
Shojiro Matsuura
Chairman of JANSI

There may be no disputing the fact that humanity established civilizations by bravely challenging risks. It was in the very earliest stages of human existence that people began to use fire, and it can be said that humanity took greater risks in its pursuit of agriculture and raising livestock.

Currently, the word “risk” is defined as “the possibility and magnitude of occurrence of unfavorable matters,” but it seems that the word originally had the meaning of “the possibility of gaining large benefits in spite of the possible occurrence of damage.” For example, the expression “take a risk” is used to express the latter meaning in the stock market.

Things for which risks need to be assessed—in short the “things that are unfavorable to society”— have undergone dramatic changes in different ages and regions.

The innovative and massive stream of modern civilizations arose from the Renaissance in Europe followed by the development of the foundations for science and technology in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries through the Age of Great Voyages, and eventually opened up the path to the commanding leap of contemporary civilizations in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

The extremely unfavorable things that European peoples sought to challenge all their might were invasions by other races and countries. Extreme natural disasters are much less common in Europe than in the other regions on Earth. When the main disasters are those brought about by human beings, people are able to challenge and overcome those disasters by pooling together human wisdom and might. Europe and the American continent, which is a large extension of Europe, swept across other regions and the rest of the world. In all likelihood, these actions and achievements over the ages caused the people in those regions to believe that there is nothing that cannot be challenged and overcome by human wisdom and might. European peoples will also challenge the risks of nuclear use in the same way and work bravely to tackle them. It seems that society will give credit and consensus to a challenge if it is serious, well-thought-out, and careful.

Turning our attention to Japan and the people created history on this archipelago, the question remains: How did fundamental structure for challenging social risks come to be?

The Japanese islands are located at north-south latitudes that are suitable for human habitation, and are covered with evergreen broad-leaved forest zones that run east to west. The Japanese islands are filled with beautiful landscapes, and form one of the world’s most comfortable regions as a sphere of life in which a considerable number of people live.

However, the Japanese islands are geographically located along what is called the “Ring of Fire,” or the earthquake and volcanic belt circling the Pacific Ocean, and as a result have had to endure major natural disasters. There is no way to resist major natural disasters that occur at intervals of tens and hundreds of years. It is simply impossible for human beings to prevent these disasters by squarely challenging them. Thus, the best thing for human beings to do is to minimize the damage caused by these natural disasters or to try to avoid them altogether. When human beings are struck by major natural disasters, they have no other choice but to accept the fate that has befallen them and rebuild their lives.

Meanwhile, human-caused risks, such as conflicts and disputes, are not as difficult to deal with as natural disasters, even when conflicts actually occur. For the most part, people place great value on the notion of peace, and there is little chance of incidents that lead to all-out carnage occurring. Mutual trust has prevented these conflicts from arising in many cases. This is demonstrated by two long peaceful periods that Japan had between the time the nation was established on these islands and the present: the Heian period (794-1185) and the Edo period (1603-1868).

So our society has given up squarely confronting the risks of major natural disasters and depends on “harmony” and “trust” to address human-caused risks. How does a society like ours face up to nuclear risks?

First, it is essential to identify the relationships between the factors that make up the long and firm trust that has existed in Japanese society by examining actual case studies, and seek to gain wisdom on building long-term trust from these studies. This probably falls within the scope of the social sciences.

Second, it is important to show society the nuclear community’s continued serious, well-thought-out, and careful efforts to reduce risks and improve safety, just as is done in the West. At the same time, it is also important to clearly and fairly show the risks involved in cases of both adopting and abolishing the long-term use of nuclear power. I believe this approach will reveal how society should face up to nuclear risks.

end