JDR Vol.9 No.sp pp. 619-627
doi: 10.20965/jdr.2014.p0619


Risk Communication in Japan Concerning Future of Nuclear Technology

Masaharu Kitamura

Research Institute for Technology Management Strategy, Ltd., 6-6-40 Aramaki-Aza-Aoba, Aoba-ku, Sendai 980-8579, Japan

February 24, 2014
June 6, 2014
September 1, 2014
Fukushima Nuclear Disaster, risk communication, second stories, Defense-in-Depth, public participation

Investigation reports of Fukushima nuclear disaster have been analyzed with emphasis on deriving deeper understanding of factors contributed to the disaster. Through the present analysis, lack of convincing risk communication to citizens has been identified as the main factor. Some proposals have been made to improve the risk communication concerning nuclear technology.

Cite this article as:
M. Kitamura, “Risk Communication in Japan Concerning Future of Nuclear Technology,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.9, No.sp, pp. 619-627, 2014.
Data files:
  1. [1] R. I. Cook, D. D. Woods, and C. Miller, “A Tale of Two Stories: Contrasting View of Patient Safety,” Report from a Workshop on Assembling the Scientific Basis for Progress on Patient Safety, National Health Care Safety Council of the National Patient Safety Foundation at the American Medical Association, 1998.
  2. [2] D. D. Woods and R. I. Cook, “Nine Steps to Move Forward from Error,” Cognition, Technology and Work, Vol.4, pp. 137-144, 2002.
  3. [3] Y. Hatamura (Chairman), “The Final Report of Investigation Committee on the Accident at Fukushima Nuclear Power Stations of TEPCO,” 2012,
    available at: [accessed February 7, 2014]
  4. [4] K. Kurokawa (Chairman), “The Official Report of The National Diet of Japan by Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent InvestigationCommission,” 2012,
    available at: [accessed February 7, 2014]
  5. [5] K. Kitazawa (Chairman), “The Fukushima Investigation Report by Independent Investigation Commission on the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident,” 2012.
  6. [6] D. Klein and M. Corradini (Co-Chair), “FUKUSHIMA DAIICHI: ANS Committee Report,” 2012,
    available at: report.pdf [accessed April 3, 2013]
  7. [7] S. Dekker, “Just Culture: Balancing Safety and Accountability,” Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2007.
  8. [8] E. Hollnagel, D. D. Woods, and N. Leveson, “Resilience Engineering: Concepts and Precepts,” Aldershot., UK, Ashgate Publishing, 2006.
  9. [9] E. Hollnagel, Epilogue of 8., 2006.
  10. [10] TEPCO, “Summary of Fukushima Nuclear Accident and Nuclear Safety Reform Plan,” 2013 (in Japanese),
    available at: [accessed February, 2014]
  11. [11] S. Torigai, M. Ozawa, N. Kanegae, M. Tani, H. Madarame, and N. Miyakoshi, “Analysis of Misconducts and Inappropriate Practices by Japan’s Nuclear Power Utilities and Assessment of Their Corrective Measures,” Transaction of the Atomic Energy Society of Japanese, Vol.9, No.4, pp. 347-359, 2010 (in Japanese).
  12. [12] E. Yagi, M. Takahashi, and M. Kitamura, “Proposal of new scheme of science communication through repetitive dialogue forums,” Proc. of the 8th Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management (PSAM), New Orleans, USA, May 14-18, 2006.
  13. [13] E. Yagi, M. Takahashi, and M. Kitamura, “Clarification of Nuclear Risk Recognition Scheme Through Dialogue Forum,” Transaction of the Atomic Energy Society of Japanese, Vol.6, No.2, pp. 126-140, 2007 (in Japanese).
  14. [14] International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group, Defense in Depth in Nuclear Safety INSAG-10, IAEA, 1996.
  15. [15] J. G. Kemeny (Chairman), “Report of The President’s Commission on the Accident at the Three Mile Island,” 1979,
    available at: [accessed March 28, 2014]
  16. [16] K. E.Weick, “Organizational culture as a source of high reliability,” California Management Review, Vol.29, pp. 112-127, 1987.
  17. [17] J. Reason, “The Human Contribution; Unsafe Acts, Accidents and Heroic Recoveries,” Aldershot UK, Ashgate, 2008.
  18. [18] T. Kinoshita, “A Serious Accident Caused by Social and Human Factors: The Case of Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant,” Journal of the Japan Institute of Energy, Vo.92, No.5, pp. 448-455, 2013 (in Japanese).
  19. [19] RHWG (Reactor Harmonization Working Group) of WENRA (Western European Nuclear Regulators Association), “Safety of ne NPP designs,” WENRA, 2013.
  20. [20] A. M. Weinberg, “Science and Trans-Science,” Minerva, Vol.10, No.2, pp. 209-222, 1972.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, IE9,10,11, Opera.

Last updated on Jan. 21, 2019