Crisis Management and the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear disaster
The influence of the Nuclear Village
Kelly Knapen


The triple meltdown in the Fukushima daiichi nuclear power plant on the 11th of March 2011 has been coined the second worst nuclear disaster since Tsjernobyl. It created a shockwave through the world. Concerns about the safety of this energy source rose to new heights. Voices arose to completely step away from nuclear energy altogether. In Japan this became very apparent. The government experienced massive waves of criticism. Mainly on the way they handled the crisis. This dissertation looked deeper into the crisis management regarding the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster and investigated whether this was effective or not. Secondly this research concentrated on the reasons behind the failures of the crisis management, mainly concentrating on the influence of the Nuclear Village and what effect this had on the crisis management itself.
To achieve this, this dissertation first looked deeper into the legal framework surrounding crisis management in Japan to investigate whether two important aspects of crisis management were covered namely those of preparation and prevention. Secondly it used the reports of the ‘Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission’ of the National Diet of Japan and ‘The Independent Investigation committee on the Fukushima Nuclear Accident’ to look deeper into the immediate crisis respons and looked whether the three important elements of communication, cooperation and leadership were present. Lastly, by using the theory of George Stigler on ‘Regulatory Capture’ and the more concrete studie on the ‘Nuclear Village’ of Kainuma (開沼) and Kingston, this dissertation formed its conclusion on the reason behind the problems regarding crisis management in Japan and its effectiveness.
Out of this research it became apparent that there were serious problems concerning the crisis management of the Fukushima nuclear accident. It became clear that nuclear safety was not ensured. The government did not learn the necessary lessons from the two severe incidents that occurred before the disaster in Fukushima, which should have served as a wake-up call. During the crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, the main players in crisis management distrusted each other, which lead to a general lack of cooperation, communication and leadership. Although this was a period of crisis, where no one acts perfectly according to plan, this research made clear that the influence of TEPCO on the different players was a major factor in the failure of the crisis management concerning the nuclear disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
This crisis eventually led to a structural reform of crisis management in Japan. This can certainly be called a big step forward. However regarding the nature of the Nuclear Village, as a deeply-enrooted system, a reform alone may not be enough. On this part more research is definitely needed.
 

Fukushima, ongeluk of ramp?De invloed van de media op onze beleving van de risico's In theorie zijn risico's perfect wiskundig te berekenen, maar in het dagelijks leven houden we rekening met meer dan enkel cijfers. Zo vinden we risico's die we zelf nemen meer aanvaardbaar dan wanneer anderen net hetzelfde doen, en zullen we angstiger zijn voor risico's die we niet (helemaal) begrijpen.

 Fukushima: Van ‘revival’ naar ‘meltdown’? 11 maart 2011, Fukushima, Japan. De aarde beeft, de zee beeft mee en brengt destructie en chaos naar het vaste land. De aardbeving van 9,0 op de schaal van Richter is een der zwaarste in de geschiedenis van het land. Het land krijgt letterlijk en figuurlijk een stevige dreun, doch kan men verwachten dat Japan zich zal herstellen. Alsof dat niet genoeg komt even later het onheilspellende nieuws dat een kernramp nakend is in de kerncentrale van Fukushima.