Book: Chernobyl, Fukushima, and Korea 『체르노빌 후쿠시마 한국』

Eun-Joo Kang, Chernobyl, Fukushima, and Korea (Seoul: Archive, 2012)

강은주, 『체르노빌 후쿠시마 한국』(아카이브, 2012)chernobyl fukushima korea

The author of Chernobyl, Fukushima, and Korea is a Korean activist devoted to environment and energy issues. Published in March 2012, the book attempts to draw connections among the three nuclear sites, Chernobyl, Fukushima, and Korea (the last of which is understood as a collection of nuclear power plant sites). As this arrangement clearly reveals, the book argues that Korea should not become another Chernobyl or Fukushima.

Each of the three parts of the book, simply titled “Chernobyl,” “Fukushima,” and “Korea,” respectively, includes narrative descriptions of what happened during and after the nuclear accidents in 1986 and 2011, and in the case of Korea, several major conflicts over the siting of nuclear power plants and waste facilities. Each narrative description is followed by an interview with Mr. Heon-Seok Lee, also a Korean anti-nuclear activist who recently visited both Chernobyl and Fukushima. In the three interviews with the author, Mr. Lee offers what he observed and felt during his visits to the two nuclear accident sites—devastation, fear, and anger.

The first two parts on Chernobyl and Fukushima do not provide readers with entirely new information or revelation, though the first-hand observation by a Korean visitor adds some vividness for Korean readers. The book is not a piece of investigative reporting on nuclear accidents, but rather a synthesis of what have been reported on them. Still, the book may serve as a good information source for Korean readers, given that there are only a handful of books on Fukushima by Korean authors. (Several Fukushima- or nuclear-themed books by Japanese authors have been translated into Korean since 2011.)

The third part of the book on the nuclear conflicts in Korea since the 1970s will be useful for Korean and international readers. It describes how each plan to build a nuclear power plant or a waste storage facility has generated intensive debates and even violent clashes in the designated area. The nuclear plants have left deep social divisions between local communities, or even between parents and children, on the opposite sides of the debate. This last part gives a good overview of the impact of the nuclear power on Korean people—social and political, rather than health, effects on individuals and communities.

This book reminds us of the need for more reports and publications on the 2011 disasters in Japan from the Korean perspective, which would help draw more serious attention from Korean readers on the issue.

- Chihyung Jeon, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)

Book: 「フクシマ」論: 原子力ムラはなぜ生まれたのか (Fukushima-ism: The Birth of the Nuclear Village)

開沼博(2011)『「フクシマ」論:原子力ムラはなぜ生まれたのか』東京:青土社.

(Kainuma, Hiroshi. 2011. Fukushima-ron: Genshiryoku mura wa naze umareta no ka, Tokyo: Seidosha.)

By focusing its analysis on nuclear power in Japan, this academic volume considers the historical process by which regional locales came to voluntarily subjugate themselves to the use of nuclear power during Japan’s postwar development. Kainuma proposes the concept of “nuclear villages” comprised of “locales” that support the implementation of nuclear power and a “center” that wishes to introduce nuclear power to those areas, and analyzes nuclear power in postwar Japan from an economic perspective in terms of the “basis for postwar development,” from a political perspective in terms of “local governmental infrastructure,” and from a cultural perspective in terms of a “media fantasy.” There are two types of “nuclear village” in Japan: 1) the “exclusive and conservative nuclear infrastructure at the center” (referred to as <the nuclear village> in angle brackets), including the state, the energy industry, politicians, scholars, the mass media, and anti-nuclear groups, and 2) the “local areas saddled with nuclear power and its related institutions at the periphery” (referred to as “the nuclear village” in quotation marks). According to Kainuma, Japan’s postwar economic development is attributable to the fact that nuclear power acted as an intermediary between these two sides of a structural dichotomy: a central <nuclear village> striving to obtain domestic energy resources through the introduction of nuclear power, and local “nuclear villages” that hoped implementation of nuclear power would ensure the long-term development of their hometowns. In addition, the author argues that amidst postwar economic development, these local “nuclear villages” voluntarily accepted nuclear power out of regional pride in order to compensate for their perception of a “lack” on their part instilled by the mass media. However, the ironic effect of this local acceptance of nuclear power was the immobilization of the “nuclear villages” as localized entities.

This book is based on Kainuma’s M.A. thesis at Tokyo University’s Graduate School of Interdisciplinary Information Studies, and received the 65th Mainichi Publishing Cultural Prize in the Culture/Society category. Its contents are as follows:

Preface—A Premise for Thinking of the Nuclear Village: The Energy Behind Postwar Development

Chapter 1—Ways of Approaching the Nuclear Village

Chapter 2—The Current State of the Nuclear Village

Chapter 3—The Prehistory of the Nuclear Village: Wartime to Mid-1950s

Chapter 4—The Formation of the Nuclear Village: Mid-1950s to Mid-1990s

Chapter 5—How was Wartime Development Achieved?: The Sophisticated Mechanism of Subjugation

Chapter 6—The Prerequisite for Postwar Development: Exclusion and Immobilization through Subjugation

Epilogue—Conclusion: The Energy Behind Postwar Development

Addendum—From Fukushima to “Fukushima”

The addendum was added following the nuclear disaster at Fukushima, and in it the author identifies the following problem with the post-Fukushima antinuclear movement: “The aspiration to continue creating nuclear power is an act of violence, but purely shouting for its cessation is another possible act of violence insofar as it threatens the basis of their [the antinuclear movement’s] subsistence. That this overwhelming dilemma of the nuclear village—this reality—is being overlooked by the ‘intellectual’ and ‘well-meaning’ actors both for and against the ‘center’ is a huge problem” (pp. 372-3). The book details  both the role of nuclear power in postwar Japan and the reasons for the Fukushima nuclear disaster. As a work formulated originally as a thesis, it seems most suited for the college level and above.

—Yasuhito Abe, University of Southern California
Original annotation translated from Japanese by Jennifer Lillie

Judul: The Energy of a Bright Tomorrow’: The Rise of Nuclear Power in Japan (Energy Terang Masa Depan: Bangkitnya Tenaga Nuklir di Jepang)

Judul asli: Nelson, Craig. 2011. “‘The Energy of a Bright Tomorrow’: The Rise of Nuclear Power in Japan.” Origins 4 (9) (June). http://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/origins/article.cfm?articleid=57.

Origins, jurnal Universitas Negeri Ohio yang diterbitkan secara online (dengan slogan “Kejadian-kejadian Kontemporer Dalam Perspektif Sejarah) menerbitkan satu artikel menarik dari Craig Nelson, sejarawan nuklir Jepang. Nelson menulis sejarah singkat tenaga nuklir di Jepang dengan menelusuri kisah bagaimana suatu bangsa yang pernah hancur karena bom atom dan sangat menentang senjata pamungkas tersebut dapat menjadi bangsa yang sangat bergantung pada tenaga nuklir. Artikel ini cocok untuk dibaca oleh pelajar SMU ke atas dan akan sangat berguna bagi guru-guru dan murid-murid yang ingin belajar lebih mendalam mengenai sejarah nuklir di Jepang dalam periode yang mencakup tiga nama yang sekarang dikenal banyak orang: Hiroshima, Nagasaki, dan Fukushima.

Berikut adalah cuplikan artikel:

Walau Jepang dihantui oleh sejarah nuklir yang kelam, sangat mencengangkan melihat bagaimana Jepang berhasil mengembangkan program nuklir sipil ketiga terbesar di dunia setelah Amerika Serikat dan Perancis.

Pemboman Hiroshima dan Nagasaki, bertebarnya partikel-partikel radioaktif setelah percobaan senjata nuklir Soviet, dan kejadian Lucky Dragon di tahun 1954 telah membuat bangsa Jepang, seperti yang dikatakan sebagian pengamat, menjadi “alergi nuklir”. Dalam sejarahnya, aktivis-aktivis anti-nuklir Jepang termasuk di antara yang paling keras menentang nuklir.

Tetapi keperluan energi yang mendesak untuk memasok perkembangan ekonomi yang pesat dan hubungan internasional yang kompleks setelah Perang Dunia II telah membuat Jepang memutuskan untuk mengembangkan tenaga nuklir.

Mengambil kebijakan nuklir adalah satu hal. Membujuk publik yang sungkan adalah hal yang lain. Pemerintah dan perusahaan-perusahaan listrik Jepang gencar mempromosikan tenaga nuklir. Mereka juga memulai kampanye mereka dengan menciptakan gambaran yang positif mengenai tenaga nuklir di masyakarat di pertengahan tahun 1950an.

Di Futaba, sebuah papan reklame dengan moto “tenaga nuklir adalah energi terang masa depan” menjadi pengingat kampanye tentang Jepang yang bertenaga nuklir di masa depan.

 Tenaga nuklir tetap menjadi isu yang sensitif di Jepang dan masyarakat Jepang cenderung bersikap ambigu sekaligus bertambah khawatir terhadap energi nuklir. Pemerintah Jepang, di lain pihak, tetap mendukung energi nuklir, lepas dari kejadian-kejadian kecelakaan yang mempertanyakan tingkat keselamatan energi nuklir, seperti yang terjadi di Chernobyl dan Three Mile Island.

Apapun akibat dari musibah Fukushima Daiichi, isu nuklir berperan penting dalam politik, masyakarat, dan budaya bangsa Jepang dalam tujuh puluh tahun belakangan—satu hal yang tidak akan surut untuk beberapa waktu ke depan.

Baca artikel lengkapnya di Origins.
Dengar wawancara NPR dengan Craig Nelson mengenai sejarah tenaga nuklir di Jepang.

Ulasan artikel oleh Tyson Vaughan. Diterjemahkan oleh Anto Mohsin.

本:The Nuclear Age in Popular Media: A Transnational History, 1945-1965

van Lente, Dick. (Ed). (2012). The Nuclear Age in Popular Media: A Transnational History, 1945-1965. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

本書は大衆メディアに描かれた原子力をめぐる言説を比較研究的かつ越境史的観点から分析した専門書である。編者であるディック・ファン・レンテ(エラスムス・ロッテルダム大学教授)によると、これまでの大衆文化における原子力イメージの研究の多くは、一国内における原子力イメージの分析にとどまり、その越境的側面にはあまり注目してこなかった。従来の大衆メディアにおける原子力イメージの研究に、比較研究的かつ越境史的アプローチを加えることを通して、各国に共通する原子力をめぐる言説、または特定の国にのみに当てはまる言説を体系的に明らかにすることが本書の目的である。

本書は8か国(旧ソビエト連邦・米国・東西ドイツ・英国・オランダ・日本・インド)の代表的な写真週刊誌を主な分析対象としつつ、新聞、テレビ番組、漫画などにおける原子力イメージも適宜参考にしながら、1945年から1965年に至るまでの大衆文化における原子力をめぐる言説を分析している。本書の構成は以下の通り。

Chapter 1: Introduction: “A Transnational History of Popular Images and Narratives of Nuclear Technologies in the First Two Postwar Decades” by Dick van Lente

Chapter 2: “Shaping the Soviet Experience of the Atomic Age: Nuclear Topics in Ogonyok, 1945-1965” by Sonja D. Schmid

Chapter 3: “To See … Things Dangerous to Come to”: Life Magazine and the Atomic Age in the United States, 1945-1965” by Scott C. Zeman

Chapter 4: “Learning from War: Media Coverage of the Nuclear Age in the Two Germanies” by Dolores L. Augustine

Chapter 5: “Dawn—Or Dusk?”: Britain’s Picture Post Confronts Nuclear Energy” by Christoph Laucht

Chapter 6: “Nuclear Power, World Politics, and a Small Nation: Narratives and Counternarratives in the Netherlands” by Dick van Lente

Chapter 7: “Nuclear Power Plants in ‘The Only A-bombed Country’: Images of Nuclear Power and the Nation’s Changing Self-Portrait in Postwar Japan” by Hirofumi Utsumi

Chapter 8: “Promises of Indian Modernity: Representations of Nuclear Technology in the Illustrated Weekly of India” by Hans-Joachim Bieber

Chapter 9: “Conclusion: One World, Two Worlds, Many Worlds?” by Dolores Augustine and Dick van Lente

Appendix I: Picture Essay: Images of Nuclear Power in Illustrated Magazines

Appendix II: Nuclear Issues in Eight Countries, 1945-1965

本書に掲載された論文のうち、311を理解するうえでとくに参考になるものとして第7章の内海博文(追手門学院大学)による論文が挙げられる。内海は日本の写真週刊誌『アサヒグラフ』における原子力のイメージを文化的・社会的・歴史的文脈に位置付けながら分析し、『アサヒグラフ』が占領期において連合国最高司令官総司令部(GHQ)に設置された民間情報教育局や米紙「ニューヨーク・タイムズ」、さらには米大手通信社AP通信から記事の提供を受けていたこと、また占領期が終わったのちも英国大使館から写真の提供を受けていたと指摘する。加えて、内海は『アサヒグラフ』に描かれた原子力のイメージを、日本人の原子力観をコントロールするためのイメージとしてのみ理解するのではなく、当時の日本人の原子力に対する世論の反映としても理解すべきだと主張している。

本書は専門家に向けて書かれているものの、各国の歴史的背景、各写真週刊誌の編集方針、各写真週刊誌の読者層など各章で丁寧に説明されている。大学生以上のテキストとしてのぞましい。

Yasuhito Abe, University of Southern California

本:夢の原子力 Atoms for Dream (2012)

Yume no genshiryoku cover cropped吉見俊哉.2012.夢の原子力 Atoms for Dream.東京:筑摩書房

福島第一原発事故以降、ドワイト・アイゼンハワー元米大統領による「アトムズ・フォー・ピース」(平和のための原子力)政策が日本の原子力政策に与えた影響について様々な研究が行われてきた。著者の吉見俊哉(東京大学大学院情報学環教授)は、本書でこの「アトムズ・フォー・ピース」という米国の世界戦略を日本に暮らす人々が受容していくプロセスを描いている。

本書の問いは次の通り。「アメリカの世界戦略としてみれば「アトムズ・フォー・ピース」として語られ、表現されたことは、同時代の日本の諸地域、諸階層、諸世代、異なるジェンダーの人々からみたときに、いかなる夢、すなわち「アトムズ・フォー・ドリーム」として経験されたのか。アイゼンハワーのしたたかな作戦の言語は、同時代の東アジアの旧帝国主義国、そしてまた敗戦国でもある列島に住まう人々のいかなる欲望の言語に変換されていったのか」(39頁)。

著者によると、日本による「夢」としての原子力の受容には、3つないしは4つのタイプの言説の操作が伴われていたという(288-291頁)。第一が「救済」という言説を伴った原子力の受容。「日本は広島と長崎の被爆により、原子力の軍事利用の悲惨さを身をもって経験した。まさにそうであるが故に、日本人はこの原子力の軍事利用に反対し、平和利用を推進しなければならないのだという主張」(288頁)である。第二が「成長」という言説を伴った原子力の受容。資源が乏しい上に敗戦国である島国日本が、経済を成長させるためには原子力のような「夢」のエネルギーが必要不可欠だという「生産力主義の主張」(289頁)である。第三に「幸福」という言説を伴った原子力の受容。原子力は便利で豊かな生活をもたらすというイメージの中で、「何らかの論理によって「夢」の受容が正当化されるのではなく、「夢」そのものの圧倒的な魅力によって過去を忘れ去り、原子力的な「暖かさ」のなかに自分たちの生活を浸からせていくことが正当化される」(290頁)というもの。最後に、70年代半ば以降になると「原子力が「クリーン」で自然と「調和」したエネルギー」(291頁)であるという言説が登場したという。本書の構成は以下の通り。

序章 放射能の雨 アメリカの傘

第I章 電力という夢―革命と資本のあいだ
一 革命としての電気
二 電力を飼いならす
三 総力戦と発電国家

第II章 原爆から原子力博へ
一 人類永遠の平和と繁栄へ
二 列島をめぐる原子力博
三 ヒロシマと原子力博
四 冷戦体制と「原子力の夢」

第III章 ゴジラの戦後 アトムの未来
一 原水爆と大衆的想像力
二 記憶としてのゴジラ
三 ゴジラの変貌とアトムの予言

終章 原子力という冷戦の夢

あとがき

参考文献

本書は一般の読者向けに書かれているものの、福島第一原発事故の原因について様々な見地から詳細に説明している。高校生以上のテキストとしてのぞましい。

-Yasuhito Abe, University of Southern California

FILM: Nuclear Nation (2012)

Funahashi, Atsushi. 2012. Nuclear Nation. Documentary film.
http://nuclearnation.jp/en/

“Atomic energy makes our town and society prosperous,” reads a sign over a
prominent archway in the small town of Futaba, Fukushima. The camera pans over a
grey landscape of rubble, empty public buildings, and dozens of cows lying deceased and
mummified in barn stalls. Such scenes in Nuclear Nation render the declared
benevolence of atomic energy painfully ironic. They also make clear director Atsushi
Funahashi’s intent: to situate Japan’s present nuclear disaster within the context of
Japan’s promising nuclear past.

Funahashi explores Japan’s changing relationship with nuclear energy solely
through the eyes of Futaba residents. As the mayor of the town shows the camera old
photographs, we learn that Futaba welcomed Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO)
and its nuclear energy plans in the 1960s. With a nuclear plant, explains the mayor, came
generous government subsidies, and Futaba quickly morphed from a small farming
village to a modern city supported by a major industry. However, the value of the plants
quickly depreciated and Futaba was on the verge of bankruptcy. In the 1990s the town
accepted two new plants and TEPCO’s promises of payment—the latter of which never
materialized—in an effort to pull itself out of debt. This narrative of the past, which
brings us up to the 2011 disaster, sheds light on the complicated but intricate relationship
that Futaba’s people and local government, like other small nuclear towns, have had with
the nuclear energy industry and its leading power companies.

Funahashi documents a radically changed attitude toward nuclear energy in a
post-3/11 world by following the people of Futaba for a year, beginning in the immediate
aftermath of the disaster. His focus on one town’s experience is a strength of the film, for
it allows Funahashi to explore the effects of the Fukushima Daiichi disaster on both a
community and an individual level. He highlights a handful of residents, weaving their
individual stories together as they experience a year of unfamiliarity, grief, anger, and,
surprisingly, optimism and acceptance. Forced to evacuate their town and seek refuge in
a high school, more than a thousand residents must sleep in the school’s gymnasium and
eat nothing but bento. The television seems to always be on and tuned into a station
playing national news about the disaster, none of which mentions Futaba. The residents
later stage a protest against the Liberal Democratic Party and TEPCO for their general
negligence. Throughout all of this Funahashi records incredible interviews; the residents
candidly express their past reliance on nuclear power and present frustration with the
industry, government, and options for the future—none of which fulfill the residents’
desire to return to their “homeland.”

This narrative allows Nuclear Nation to address many questions, but perhaps most
significant is the question of when disaster begins and ends. By taking us back in time,
Funahashi places a potential starting point for Fukushima at the arrival of nuclear power
in the region forty years ago. His view of an ending point is a little less clear; he
documents the disaster for a year but leaves the residents’ stories open-ended and their
new lives in new places unsettled. Nevertheless, by the end of the film it becomes clear
that Nuclear Nation is not a story about triumphing over disaster—that is, not a story with
a happy ending; rather, it is a story about the break-up of a community and the making of
an environmental ghost town. For educators and students who wish to learn about the
aftermath of Fukushima, about Japan’s forty-year history with nuclear energy, and about
the nature of disaster more generally, Nuclear Nation is an excellent choice.

-Ashanti Shih, Yale University

Post-Fukushima Nuclear Politics in Japan

Aldrich, Daniel, James Platte, and Jennifer Jennifer. “Post-Fukushima Nuclear Politics in Japan, Part I.” Blog. The Monkey Cage, April 1, 2013. http://themonkeycage.org/2013/04/01/post-fukushima-nuclear-politics-in-japan-part-i/.

In this three-part blog post, Daniel Aldrich, James Platte, and Jennifer Sklarew summarize development in Japanese politics, bureaucratic organization, and the anti-nuclear protest movement since March 2011. The authors outline the tensions caused by the plummet in popular support for nuclear power and the technological momentum created by heavy investments in nuclear power by utilities and business, which necessitate their continued support. The political parties are caught between these rival concerns, further complicating an already complex policy debate. The authors provide a clear discussion of the bureaucratic reorganization resulting in the newly independent Nuclear Regulatory Authority, which has to balance pressure from politicians and the business community to restart the now idle reactors and the need to reform nuclear regulation that has long been lax and has repeatedly lost credibility since the 90s.

These blog posts are relatively short, about 1,000 words each, and should be fairly accessible to people without much background in Japanese politics. Since these posts provide multiple viewpoints, they should provide a catalyst for classroom debate and discussion, as well as provide an excellent overview of a set of complicated issues. The focus of these posts is on the national debate over the future of nuclear power in Japan, so supplementary materials related to the direct impact of nuclear disaster on the people and environment of Fukushima might be a useful supplement for classroom work.

-Craig Nelson, Ohio State University

FILM: Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Promotional Documentary (1985) [Japanese]

Editor’s note: This week, we are pleased to feature contributions from Sofia University graduate students enrolled in Tak Watanabe’s 2011 spring semester classes in Tokyo, Japan. We begin with a film translation and subtitling project of a Japanese documentary that details the construction of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.*

Nichiei Kagaku Eiga Seisakujo. 日映科学映画製作所 [Nichiei Science Film Production]. 1985. Fukushima no Genshiryoku. 福島の原子力 [Nuclear Power of Fukushima]. YouTube video, 27:00, posted originally by “habingo2,” April 02, 2011, part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sspp6D8giHc, part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTshYXmN1AY (Japanese). English subtitled version by Kudakwashe Mutenda and Keiko Nishimura, posted by “collabo311.” 13 September 2011. 
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFkkRr-gMww, Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E90DeDzpus.

前代未聞の福島原子力事故の実情が徐々に明らかになるにつれて、「福島原子力発電所はどのくらい安全だったのか?」という疑問が今日最も聞かれるようになった。この1987年に東京電力によって製作された27分に及ぶ福島原子力発電所の宣伝映画は、少なくとも東京電力の立場から、その質問に答える以上の内容となっている。一般市民に向け、平易かつ分かりやすい言葉で、原子力技術の複雑な仕組みが説明されている。

この宣伝映画は雄弁に福島原子力発電所の歴史を語っていく。建設場所の選択から建設過程、諸系統の試験、燃料装荷と起動試験、保守点検、労働者と周辺地域のための安全基準、放射能や放射性廃棄物の処理などについてが説明される。映画全体を通して、原子力発電所とその環境の調和を表現するために様々なBGMが使われており、原子力発電所の建設過程や営業運転、そして福島での人々の生活を撮影した写真・実写映像やアニメーションが効果的に組み合わされ、視聴者の理解を助けるようになっている。

本映画全体を通して、安全性というものは決して軽視されてはいない。「用心深く」「徹底的に」「注意深く」「ひとつひとつを」「厳しく監視」などの言葉の使われ方からもそれは明らかだ。1966年の建設当時、福島原子力発電所は疑い無く世界で最も技術を結集した、安全性の権化のような驚くべき建設物であった。

一般向けに作られていることからも分かるように、この宣伝映画は分かりやすく親しみやすい内容となっている。本作は当時劇場で公開され、多くの日本人が見に訪れたと言われている。

クダ∙ムテンダ & 西村恵子

*This documentary was translated and subtitled as a part of a course assignment in the Graduate Program in Global Studies at Sophia University. The resulting subtitled video is hosted by a collaborative web project organized by Sophia University graduate students, collabo311, of which one of the translators of the Fukushima power plant video, Keiko Nishimura, is a member.  Collabo311 reports on and analyzes cultural reactions to the events of 3.11 and includes various media, from Internet to architecture, spanning topics from radiation to animation.

本:「フクシマ」論 (2011)

開沼博(2011)『「フクシマ」論:原子力ムラはなぜ生まれたのか』青土社

本書は日本の原子力の分析を通して日本の戦後成長における地方の自発的服従の歴史的形成過程を考察した学術書である。著者は、原子力を地方に導入したい「中央」とその原子力を受け入れ維持したい「地方」によって構成される原子力ムラという概念を提示しながら、「戦後成長の基盤」としての原子力(経済)「地方の統治装置」としての原子力(政治)「幻想のメディア」としての原子力(文化)という視座から、戦後日本における原子力を分析している。原子力ムラには、行政・電力産業・政治家・学者・マスメディア・反・脱原発団体などを含む「中央の側にある閉鎖的・保守的な原子力行政」などで構成されたムラ(<原子力ムラ>と表記)がある一方で、「地方の側にある原発および関連施設を抱える地域」によって構成されたムラ(「原子力ムラ」と表記)が存在する。著者によれば、原子力の導入を通して自国のエネルギー資源の確保を目指す<原子力ムラ>(中央)と原子力を受け入れることを通して故郷の永続的発展を望む「原子力ムラ」(地方)という二項対立的な構造の中で、原子力が2つの構造をつなぐ媒介としての役割を果たすことを通して戦後の経済成長が達成されたという。加えて、著者は戦後の経済成長の過程において「原子力ムラ」(地方)がマスメディアに映された自らの「欠如」を自覚し、愛郷的精神からその「欠如」を埋め合わせるために自発的に原子力を受け入れていったと指摘する。しかし、「原子力ムラ」による原子力の自発的な受け入れが皮肉なことに「原子力ムラ」(地方)を「原子力ムラ」(地方)として固定化してしまったという。本書は著者が東京大学大学院学際情報学府修士課程に提出した修士論文をもとにして出版され、第65回毎日出版文化賞(人文社会部門)を受賞した。構成は以下の通り。

 序章  原子力ムラを考える前提―戦後成長のエネルギーとは

第一章 原子力ムラに接近する方法

第二章 原子力ムラの現在

第三章 原子力ムラの前史―戦時~一九五〇年代半ば

第四章 原子力ムラの成立―一九五〇年代半ば~一九九〇年代半ば

第五章 戦後成長はいかに達成されたのか―服従のメカニズムの高度化

第六章 戦後成長が必要としたもの―服従における排除と固定化

終章  結論―戦後成長のエネルギー

補章  福島からフクシマへ

補章は福島原発事故発生以降に追加された。著者はここで福島原発事故以降における脱・原発運動の問題点について次のように指摘する。「原発を動かし続けることへの志向は一つの暴力であるが、ただ純粋にそれを止めることを叫び、彼らの生存の基盤を脅かすこともまた暴力になりかねない。そして、その圧倒的なジレンマのなかに原子力ムラの現実があることが「中央」の推進にせよ反対にせよ「知的」で「良心的」なアクターたちによって見過ごされていることにこそ最大の問題がある。」(372-373頁)

本書は、戦後日本において原子力が果たした役割に加えて福島原発事故の原因について詳しく説明している。もともと修士論文として書かれた作品なので、大学生以上のテキストとしてのぞましい

- Yasuhito Abe

本: Site fights: Divisive facilities and civil society in Japan and the West

Aldrich, D.P. (2008). Site fights: Divisive facilities and civil society in Japan and the West. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

邦訳:ダニエル・P・アルドリッチ『誰が負を引きうけるのか:原発・ダム・空港立地をめぐる紛争と市民社会』世界思想社、2012年

本書は原子力発電所や空港やダムなどといった市民全体にとっては必要であるものの、それらの施設が設置される地域共同体には好ましくない影響を及ぼす可能性のある施設について、日本の国家機関と市民社会の関係性という観点から論じた専門書である。著者のダニエル・P・アルドリッチ(パデュー大学準教授)は本書を通じて、国家機関は市民社会の成熟度が低い地域にこれらの施設を設置する傾向があると主張している。著者によると、市民社会としていまだじゅうぶんに成熟していない地域において組織的な反対運動が存在しない場合には、政策立案者は強硬的な手段を通してその地域にこれらの施設を設置する傾向があるという。このことは、市民社会として成熟している地域において組織的な反対運動が起きた場合にのみ、政策立案者は地域住民の理解を得るために説得や補助金などのソフトな手段を講じる傾向があることを示す。

本書は日本の原子力政策および福島原発事故の理解を深めるうえで有益な資料であると言える。なお、本書は2012年に世界思想社から『誰が負を引きうけるのか:原発・ダム・空港立地をめぐる紛争と市民社会』として邦訳された。

本書の構成は以下の通り。

Introduction: Site Fights and Policy Tools

  1. Picking Sites
  2. A Logic of Tool Choice
  3. Occasional Turbulence: Airport Siting in Japan and France
  4. Dam the Rivers: Siting Water Projects in Japan and France
  5. Trying to Change Hearts and Minds: Japanese Nuclear Power Plant Siting
  6. David versus Goliath: France Nuclear Power Plant Siting
  7. Conclusion: Areas for Future Investigation

各章の中でもとりわけ東日本大震災に伴う福島原発事故の参考になるものとして、第五章と第六章が挙げられる。第五章では、日本の原子力政策の歴史が叙述されたのち、日本政府がいかにしてさまざまな地域住民による反原発運動に対処したかが分析されている。第六章は比較研究の対象として、日本の国家機構と共通点を多く持つフランスの事例が取り上げられている。国家機構では共通点が多いものの、日仏の政策立案者による反原発運動に対する対処の仕方には大きな違いが存在する。本書は専門的な用語が数々散見されるものの、その都度丁寧に説明されているため高校生高学年から大学生以上に適切な教材であると思われる。

-Yasuhito Abe

[関連した2011年のアルドリッチとデュシンベールに書かれた記事「Hatoko Comes Home」はこちら。]

記事: Hatoko comes home: Civil society and nuclear power in Japan

Dusinberre, M & Aldrich, D.P. (2011). Hatoko comes home: Civil society and nuclear power in Japan. The Journal of Asian Studies, 70 (3), 638-705

被爆地である広島からそう離れていない山口県上関町がいかにして1980年代初頭に原子力発電所を誘致するに至ったかを検証した研究である。1974年4月、日本放送協会(NHK)は朝の連続ドラマ「鳩子の海」の放映を開始した。この連続ドラマは、広島で被爆した後に山口県上関町の住民の養子となった少女(平和のシンボルの鳩から「鳩子」と名付けられる)が成長する過程を描いている。本論文の著者マーティン・デュシンベール(ニューキャッスル大学講師)とダニエル・P・アルドリッチ(パデュー大学準教授)は、戦後日本の原子力政策と上関町の過疎化を中心とした社会経済的衰退を描きつつ、石油危機後の中央政府や中国電力、そして地域のエリートや地域住民たちがどのような理由をもって原発誘致に至ったかかを検証している。

本論文は1980年代初期の山口県上関町というケースを取り上げた研究である。しかし、著者らによると、本論文に描かれている上関町の原発誘致決定に至るプロセスには、福島を含めた他の地域の原発誘致にも当てはまる共通点が存在するという。著者らは、上関町の原発誘致に至るプロセスにおける「地域社会の運営のされ方」「地域住民による自分たちの生活する地域の経済が衰退することへの恐れ」「電力会社による地域住民の日常生活に対する介入」「中央政府から地域社会に与えられる補助金の誘惑」「原発の安全性に関する議論が回避される」という点にこれらの共通点を見出している(702頁)。

日本の原子力政策および福島原発事故の理解を地域社会の立場から深めるうえで有益な資料であると言える。高校で習う戦後史の知識を要するので、大学生以上の教材として適切だと思われる。

-Yasuhito Abe

[関連したアルドリッチの邦訳された本『Site Fights』はこちら。]

書:《井中毒藥:核能時代開啟時的海中放射性廢棄物》(中文摘要)

書:井中毒藥:核能時代開啟時的海中放射性廢棄物

Hamblin, Jacob Darwin. 2008. Poison in the Well: Radioactive Waste In The Oceans At The Dawn of The Nuclear Age. Rutgers University Press.

Jacob Hamblin的著作《井中毒藥》一書描述了從第二次世界大戰到1972年倫敦公約(London Convention)間,科學家與政治家如何處理核能廢料問題。透過聚焦於美國與英國,Hamblin細緻地描繪科學社群、政治領域裡持續成長的衝突,與公眾對海中放射線廢棄物處置議題的覺醒。不甚熟悉此議題的讀者心中應會浮現以下問題:它是安全的嗎?諸多國家這樣做是不對的嗎?禁止它是正確的嗎?Hamblin分析此議題的方法是由「危險」這個概念出發,而此概念又與以下這兩個議題扣連在一起:暴露的程度與劑量,及如何決定其多寡。本書因此從一個最重要且基本的問題出發:如何決定臨界值?本書的第二個主題是突顯不同科學領域之間的衝突,也就是,到底該由健康物理學家(health physicists)或是海洋學家來定奪核廢棄物的相關議題。第三個主題是關於放射性廢料於冷戰時期國際關係裡的角色;作者詳細描述在冷戰時期中,以及在國家之間結盟合作的脈絡下,政治關係如何顯著地形塑核廢料的處理方式。最後,作者在處理放射線廢料與環境政策制定兩者關係時,主要關心的面向是公眾意見的角色與如何處理公眾的考量。

雖是生硬的放射線議題,Hamblin在書中提供給讀者相當可親的資訊。本書不是單純地重新回顧事實,而是生動地介紹個別人物、國內的、國際機構到國家與權力集團等。對於有興趣瞭解核能政策歷史的讀者而言,《井中毒藥》將是十分有用的一本書。科學研究與科技研究學者與學生,及環境政治、環境研究與環境史學者皆可因閱讀本書受益。 (本摘要原為 Sophia University的Graduate Program in Global Studies的 Tak Watanabe 教授在2011 春季班 開授課程的作業之一。)

- By Marlies Linhart, with translation by Kuan-Hung Lo (駱冠宏)

Editors’ Note: This is a Chinese translation of a Teach 3.11 annotation. We invite volunteers to translate and/or contribute content in Korean, Japanese, and Chinese languages. Thank you.

編輯的話: 本文為本站已發表的英文摘要之中文翻譯,我們誠摯地邀請有志者協助我們翻譯或撰寫韓文,日文,或中文的摘要。謝謝。

FILM: Ashes to Honey (2010)

Kamanaka, Hitomi. 2010. Ashes to Honey. Group Gendai.

“What is the best course of development for humankind?” director Hitomi Kamanaka asks in her 2010 film, Ashes to Honey. This documentary builds an argument for the necessity of a sustainable future by portraying a local struggle to preserve fishing and farming on the small island of Iwaishima, on the Pacific side of southwestern Japan, against a nuclear power plant proposed to be built across the bay. Filmed over the course of three years, Kamanaka and her crew gradually gained the trust of the islanders as a voice to adequately represent their concerns to a larger audience. Although completed before the Fukushima disaster, this film helps further historical understandings of ongoing debates related to nuclear power that have swept Japan and much of the world.

The trajectory of the film spans across local, global, and national arenas, and begins with one of the younger residents of Iwaishima, a man in his 30s named Takashi. Like most young residents, he had left the island for higher education. Uniquely, Takashi, who is son to the outspoken representative of the 27-year long struggle against the local power company, Chugoku Denryoku (“Chuden”), had also returned to the island to make his own life: a struggle at best since he began his endeavor with no knowledge of how to live off the land. Through Takashi and Chuden, the film presents its central problematic: both argue that development must take place but each have vastly different ideas about what a path to the future entitles.

The film expands its perspective on this issue by shifting its focus from Iwaishima to rural Sweden. Interviews with people involved in sustainability projects of small and large scales show how national administrators embraced a variety of renewable energy projects implemented by grass-roots efforts, ultimately ushering in a new era for national energy policy. This section serves as a counterpoint to Japan’s policies, which do little to discourage energy market monopolization, and offers a concrete model for the kind of change that Kamanaka advocates.

The emotionally evocative final third of Ashes to Honey depicts the actual practices of protest as the villagers’ fishing boats face off with Chuden’s ships in rain and rough seas. These sequences are especially potent for viewers familiar with Japan’s deep history of non-violent protest, such as the similar actions of the fishing collectives of Ominato against the government’s experimental, nuclear-powered ship the Mutsu. In contrast to the use of violence to resolve differences, Kamanaka’s film nods to the visual style of Tsuchimoto Noriaki’s “Minamata” films and stands as an example to students of how conflict can be politically charged yet non-violent.

Just as it effectively uses Swedish points of view to expand its perspective, educators can use Ashes to Honey to expand students’ perspectives on Fukushima and nuclear power in general. Kamanaka’s documentation of a complicated human story presents a starkly simple choice between two distinct paths of development: one sustainable and one dependent upon nuclear power, with all of the risks that it brings.

- Kenneth Masaki Shima

BOOK: Tal-Haek [Getting Off of Nuclear]: Post-Fukushima and the Logic of Energy Transformation (Korean, 2011)

Energy and Climate Policy Research Institute (South Korea) ed. 2011. Tal-Haek: Post-Fukushima wa Energy Jeonwhan Sidae-eui Nonri. 탈핵: 포스트 후쿠시마와 에너지 전환 시대의 논리 [Getting Off of Nuclear: Post-Fukushima and the Logic of Energy Transformation] Seoul: Imagine.

The nuclear disaster at Fukushima shocked South Korea, Japan’s geographically closest neighbor. Repercussions and responses within South Korea, however, have been multivalent. In contrast to Germany and other countries that have set out to stop or curtail nuclear power systems, the South Korean government has remained determined to increase its nuclear power capacity to provide for up to 59% of its entire electricity production by 2030. To implement its nuclear plans, the government recently designated a couple of sites for new nuclear power plant construction. Given other countries’ more cautious approach to nuclear power in the wake of Fukushima disaster, South Korea’s unabashed promotion of nuclear power suggests a need for wide attention and discussion.

A recently published collection of essays entitled Tal-Haek [脱核], the namesake of which refers to the “Getting Off of Nuclear” process, aims to do just this. The book project, organized by the Energy and Climate Policy Institute, a non-profit think tank that promotes a vision of “a world without nuclear power,” raises serious dissenting voices against the South Korean government’s nuclear power strategies. One essay by YU Jung Min, an expert in energy policy, particularly underscores the thematic concerns of the book through its attention to the similarities between Japan and South Korea in the “socio-political environments around nuclear power development.” Both countries relied on active government intervention to industrialize, Yu points out, and their nuclear power programs required their governments’ central planning and support. This government-led process created decision-making structures that did not embrace democratic and transparent procedures. Since both Japan and South Korea lacked natural resources for energy production, both welcomed nuclear power by invoking the concerns of energy security. Based on these observations, Yu and other authors call for “cautious social discussion on the energy policy in South Korea, one of the most active nuclear power nations in the world” (pp. 69-70).

In addition to Yu’s contribution, the lead essay by KIM Myung Jin surveys the history of nuclear power from the Manhattan Project, Three Mile Island and Chernobyl to the “Nuclear Renaissance” in the 21st century. LEE Heon Seok’s essay asks whether more nuclear power plants in Korea would be “a blessing or a disaster,” especially pointing out the lack of democratic procedures and legal bases in Korean government’s nuclear plant constructions. PARK Jin Hee, the Institute’s director, examines the history of Germany’s energy transition from the 1960s to the post-Fukushima period, suggesting a possible role model for South Korea’s reconsideration of its energy policy. The last essay by KIM Hyun Woo, which bears the namesake of the collection, argues that the anti-nuclear movement should consist of more than just slogans and offer a concrete “tal-haek scenario” based on quantitative analysis and action plans.

It remains to be seen whether this book would be successful in engendering more debates on nuclear power and related policy in Korean society, but the book will be useful for classroom discussions on Korea’s future direction in the post-Fukushima age.

-Chihyung Jeon

NOTE: Social History of Nuclear Power: Its Development in Japan (2011 edition)

新版 原子力の社会史

Editors’ Note: Readers may be interested to know that a new edition of Hitoshi Yoshioka’s book Genshiryoku no shakaishi: sono Nihon-teki tenkai (A Social History of Nuclear Power: Its Development in Japan) was published by Asahi Shimbunshuppan in October 2011. Click here to view an annotation based on the first edition, printed in 1999.

ARTICLE: Containing the Atom: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and Nuclear Power in the United States and South Korea (2009)

Jasanoff, Sheila, and Sang-Hyun Kim. 2009. “Containing the Atom: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and Nuclear Power in the United States and South Korea.” Minerva 47: 119-146. http://www.springerlink.com/content/y2738665782223l6/

By introducing the concept of “sociotechnical imaginaries,” this article examines and compares the historical differences of such imaginaries concerning nuclear power between the United States and South Korea. For the United States, the dominant imagery for nuclear power was a potentially “runaway” technology that required responsible “containment” to keep it under control, whereas South Korea regarded nuclear power as “atoms for development” and “a symbol of the power of science and technology” that the state desired to indigenize. The disparate imaginaries for nuclear power have evolved into not only diverged power-plant designs, but also different “civic epistemologies,” policies, and strategies on radioactive waste management and risk assessment in each country.

As Jasanoff and Kim point out, the imaginaries concept helps explain how the states and their citizens reacted to a variety of nuclear disasters and challenges such as Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and anti-nuclear movements. This imaginaries concept may also help students analyze how nations that have been embracing nuclear power technology such as Japan, the United States, South Korea, France, Germany, and others, react to the recent triple disasters in Japan on March 11, 2011. Moreover, this article could be used to help encourage students to think about and invent alternative sociotechnical imaginaries of nuclear power beyond containment and development options to contribute to a better understanding of the controversial technology.

Ling-Fei Lin

CHAPTER: Technology versus Commercial Feasibility: Nuclear Power and Electric Utilities (1999)

Low, Morris, Shigeru Nakayama, and Hitoshi Yoshioka. 1999. “Technology versus Commercial Feasibility: Nuclear Power and Electric Utilities.” In Science, Technology and Society in Contemporary Japan, 66-81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

This article is a chapter of a book coauthored by Morris Low, Shigeru Nakayama, and Hitoshi Yoshioka on the contemporary history of science and technology in Japan, published in the same year as Yoshioka’s book 原子力の社会史 (A Social History of Nuclear Power).   This chapter is a condensed account of the history of nuclear power in Japan, presumably authored primarily by Yoshioka.

Covering the early history of electric power before the war, the beginning of the atomic energy program in the 1950s, the introduction of reactors in the 1960s, and the fast breeder program up to the 1990s, this chapter examines the complex relations between the public good and private interests in technology and its industrial applications. While the power industry has been dominated by the private sector, and much of the responsibility for the nuclear power program has been carried by private power companies, the article argues that the distinction between private interests and the public good is blurred in Japan, and that it is not always clear which interests are served by the development of nuclear power.

As in Yoshioka’s book, this article claims that the development of nuclear reactors was motivated by a kind of “dual structure” consisting of two groups: MITI (the Ministry of International Trade and Industry) and private industry; and the STA (Science and Technology Agency) with public research corporations such as JAERI (Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute). The main task of the MITI group is the gradual expansion of the commercial nuclear enterprise, mainly by importing US reactors, whereas the STA group’s mission is the research and development of as-yet commercially unproven technologies such as fast breeder reactor designs and nuclear fusion.

The article claims, for example, that the reason Japan adhered to the fast breeder program can be explained by this dual structure — specifically the STA’s attempt to exert its influence. It was not that Japan was attempting to become an international nuclear power through its plutonium program; rather, the STA was using this program to maintain its domestic influence. The STA’s two main areas of jurisdiction were nuclear research and Japan’s space program. The uncertainty of the future of the space program rendered it an unreliable foundation upon which to justify the agency’s existence. In contrast, nuclear power was seen as a better bet; thus, the agency prioritized research on fast breeder reactor technology.

— Kenji Ito

ARTICLE: ‘The Energy of a Bright Tomorrow:’ The Rise of Nuclear Power in Japan (2011)

Nelson, Craig. 2011. “‘The Energy of a Bright Tomorrow’: The Rise of Nuclear Power in Japan.” Origins 4 (9) (June). http://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/origins/article.cfm?articleid=57.

Ohio State University’s online journal Origins (tagline: “Current Events in Historical Perspective”) has published a highly accessible article by Craig Nelson, a historian of Japanese nuclear power. Nelson fulfills the promise of the journal’s tagline by providing a concise overview of the history of nuclear power in Japan, tracing the story of how a nation victimized by atomic bombings and viscerally opposed to nuclear weapons could become among the world’s most dependent upon nuclear power generation. This article, appropriate for readers at the high school level and up, will be useful for teachers and students who wish to learn more about the often-ignored history of “nukes” in Japan spanning the period between the three names that everyone now recognizes: Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Fukushima.

Here is a brief excerpt:

We are haunted by the specter of our nuclear past. And given Japan’s complicated past with nuclear issues, it is especially surprising that Japan now has such a highly developed civilian nuclear power program, the third largest in the world after those of the United States and France.

The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, fallout from the testing of Soviet nuclear weapons, and the Lucky Dragon Incident of 1954 left the Japanese in the 1950s with what some observers have called a “nuclear allergy.” Historically, Japanese anti-nuclear-weapons activists have been among the most vigorous in the world.

But the desperate need for energy to power Japan’s rapid economic growth and the complexities of post-World War II international relations together led the Japanese government to pursue nuclear power.

Choosing a nuclear policy was one thing, persuading an initially reluctant public was quite another.   The government and electric utilities promoted the nuclear power option relentlessly, starting a public relations campaign in the mid-1950s that strove to cement a positive image of nuclear power in the public eye.

In Futaba, a sign bearing the town’s motto—“nuclear power is the energy of a bright tomorrow”—now stands as an eerie reminder of that campaign for a nuclear-powered future.

But nuclear power has remained a sensitive issue and the public has long expressed ambiguous feelings and increasing concern toward it.  The government, by contrast, has remained a firm supporter, even in the face of incidents and disaster that gave rise to questions about the wisdom and safety of nuclear power, such as Chernobyl and Three Mile Island (1979).

Regardless of the outcome of the disaster at Fukushima Daiichi, nuclear issues have played a starring role in Japanese politics, society, and culture for the past seventy years—one that is unlikely to disappear in the near future.

Read the full article at Origins.

Listen to an NPR interview with author Craig Nelson about the history of nuclear power in Japan.