Teach 3.11 Update


Want to know what’s going on with Teach 3.11 lately? We gave a presentation about our  new web site design at a workshop on Teaching STS and HPS on 7 Jan. 2014, in Yokohama, Japan. The new site reflects feedback we have been collecting from our community over the past year and half. We’re still under construction, so please feel welcome to preview it at www.teach311.org and drop us a line at teach3eleven@gmail.com if you have any comments. Thanks!

The slide show:

Screen Shot 2014-02-01 at 5.37.49 PM

Contact teach3eleven@gmail.com if you want to use the Teach 3.11 platform for your teaching, learning, or to apply your translation skills, or if you wish to share about any relevant resources from the past or present. Teach 3.11 is a joint project of the Forum for the History of Science in Asia and SHOT Asia Network.

Buku: Earthquake Nation: The Cultural Politics of Japanese Seismicity, 1868-1930 (Bangsa Gempa Bumi: Politik Budaya Seismik Jepang, 1868-1930). (2006)

Clancey, Gregory. 2006. Earthquake Nation: The Cultural Politics of Japanese Seismicity, 1868-1930. University of California Press.

(Buku: Bangsa Gempa Bumi: Politik Budaya Seismik Jepang, 1868-1930. (2006))

Bangsa Gempa Bumi memberikan konteks sejarah penting untuk memahami kejadian gempa bumi di Kobe (1995) dan di daerah Tōhoku and Kanto di Jepang (2011). Buku yang menerima penghargaan Sidney Edelstein Award dari Masyarakat Sejarawan Teknologi (Society for the History of Technology) ini dengan fasih mengulas interaksi antara seismologi, arsitektur, teknik, budaya, politik, dan bumi di masa yang sangat dinamis dalam sejarah Jepang.

Periode Meiji (1868-1912) sudah sering dicirikan sebagai era demam “modernisasi” dalam sejarah Jepang. Di masa itu, bagaimana peran yang dimainkan oleh disiplin ilmu seismologi dalam membentuk konsepsi masyarakat Jepang mengenai alam, teknologi, dan keilmuan “Barat” vs. Jepang dan negara Asia lainnya?  Bagaimana seismologi—disiplin ilmunya, teknologinya, dan pengalaman fisiknya—mempengaruhi proyek-proyek pembangunan bangsa, “modernisasi”, dan ekpansi kekaisaran Jepang? Dua pertanyaan ini diulas oleh Clancey secara rinci dan ditulis dengan bahasa lugas.

Kejadian sejarah yang mendorong analisa dan narasi buku Clancey adalah gempa bumi besar Nōbi (the Great Nōbi Earthquake) yang diperkirakan mencapai 8.0 skala Richter. Gempa bumi ini memporakporandakan Nagoya di tahun 1891 dan merenggut nyawa sekitar 7.000 orang, 140.000 orang kehilangan rumah, dan menjadi ujian yang berat bagi Pemerintahan Meiji.  Clancey menelusuri “budaya politik seismik Jepang” sebelum gempa bumi ini terjadi hingga  gempa bumi besar berikutnya (the Great Kanto Earthquake) dan kebakaran yang terjadi sesudahnya di tahun 1923 yang meluluhlantakkan Tokyo dan Yokohama dan menelan korban 142.000 orang.

Clancey memberika argumen multidimensional dan kompleks sebagai berikut: Dalam masa demam “modernisasi” (atau yang awalnya disebut “Westernisasi”) di era Meiji, arsitektur Barat yang terdiri dari bebatuan didengungkan sebagai simbol peradaban modern yang kokoh, tahan lama, dan bersifat maskulin. Sedangkan bangunan Jepang yang terbuat dari kayu digambarkan sebagai arsitektur yang lemah, rentan, dan cenderung feminin, simbol dari tradisi yang sudah ketinggalan jaman.  Gempa bumi besar Nōbi secara harfiah benar-benar menggoncangkan ide-ide ini ketika gempa bumi tersebut menghancurkan banyak bangunan bebatuan yang kaku yang tidak sefleksibel bangunan-bangunan kayu, setidaknya di antara bangunan-bangunan yang terkenal. Walaupun pemandangan Nōbi dipenuhi oleh kerangka arsitektur Jepang dan Barat, wartawan-wartawan dan para seniman Jepang memproduksi wacana mengenai rapuhnya struktur bangunan ala Barat dibanding arsitektur Jepang yang sepertinya memiliki ketahanan yang lebih tinggi. Wacana ini memunculkan semangat nasionalis baru yang kemudian diadopsi oleh negara (dan kemudian kekuatan imperalis) Jepang saat bangsa itu sedang giat-giatnya membangun.

Untuk para guru dan murid yang ingin menggunakan versi ringkasan buku ini, Clancey telah menerbitkan makalah 50 halaman yang menceritakan banyak mengenai Gempa Bumi Besar Nōbi.

Tyson Vaughan diterjemahkan oleh Anto Mohsin

Clancey, Gregory. 2006. “The Meiji Earthquake: Nature, Nation, and the Ambiguities of Catastrophe.” Modern Asian Studies 40:909-951.  Artikelnya bisa dilihat di: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3876638.

Article: “An Envirotechnical Disaster: Nature, Technology, and Politics at Fukushima” (2012)

Pritchard, Sara B. 2012. “An Envirotechnical Disaster: Nature, Technology, and Politics at Fukushima.” Environmental History 17: 219–243.

Environmental History 17.2 CoverIn this essay Sara B. Pritchard critically examines two related analytical frameworks in the study of disaster and technology.  Pritchard highlights the explanatory power of Charles Perrow’s influential conceptual tool “normal accident” and Thomas P. Hughes’s equally well-regarded notion “technological systems” as well as their shortcomings.  Using the two ideas as a basis, Pritchard offers a new concept “envirotechnical system” to explain the events that took place at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in the wake of an earthquake, tsunami, and full meltdown of three of the six nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power complex.

Pritchard argues that the “triple disaster” can be usefully thought as an “envirotechnical disaster, a result of the convergence of natural and sociotechnical processes,” extending Perrow’s and Hughes’s analytical frameworks (220).  She shows that in addition to figuring out and highlighting some significant sociotechnical factors of the disaster (e.g. Japan’s decision to build the nuclear complex to meet Japan’s energy demands), it is equally vital to understand how some environmental elements (water, air, human bodies, and nuclear radiations) played a role and were even enlisted to contain a more devastating disaster.

Her envirotechnical analysis is well informed by scholarship that is situated at the intersection of environmental history and history of technology. Additionally, her essay engages with concepts drawn from works on the studies of risk and disaster, enriching her examination of what transpired since the disaster occurred on March 11, 2011.

Finally, what makes her argument convincing is her critical and reflective discussion of her own conceptual framework, acknowledging a dire consequence of an envirotechnical analysis in absolving responsible parties of any guilt in a legal process. To address this issue, Pritchard discusses the role of power and politics at Fukushima, including claiming how economics can be “a powerful form of politics” (231).  Related to this, she offers a relevant concept “envirotechnical regime [that] foregrounds the politics of [how the natural and the technological intersected at Fukushima], and how particular groups and institutions pushed for linking nature and technology in specific ways, both in situations of normalcy and those of crisis” (231).

For teaching purposes, this essay complements a PBS documentary Inside Japan’s Nuclear Meltdown (2012) and it would go well with many readings she cites in her essay. As a result, her 71 footnotes provide a valuable resource for anyone who wants to look in more detail the works she cites and to even draw up a syllabus for an undergraduate or graduate level seminar.

Anto Mohsin, Science and Technology Studies, Cornell University.

FILM: Inside Japan’s Nuclear Meltdown (2012)

PBS Frontline. 2012. Inside Japan’s Nuclear Meltdown. Accessed on Nov 17, 2013, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/japans-nuclear-meltdown/

This 55-minute documentary shows how the triple disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plants unfolded during the first few days after an offshore earthquake triggered a 14-meter tsunami which inundated the nuclear plant complex that subsequently led to the full meltdown of three nuclear reactors. The movie recounts the Japanese government’s and TEPCO’s responses to contain the disaster. In order to highlight their attempts to solve the dire situation, the film producer shows footage of workers at the plant and interviews key figures such as Mr. Naoto Kan (the Japanese Prime Minister at the time the accident occurred) and Mr. Akio Komuri (the Managing Director of TEPCO Nuclear Division).

The documentary highlights the tension that arose between the Japanese government and TEPCO executives over decision-making strategies to rein in a potential catastrophic nuclear radiation disaster that would affect not only Japan but also the world. It depicts how decisions were made to select and instruct workers to cool the nuclear reactor after the backup power generators went out and the workers’ experience as they reflect back on their endeavors. A few members of the Japanese Self-Defense Force and of the Tokyo Fire Department shared their thoughts as they recounted their efforts to control the situation.

The film also gives voice to a resident who lived close to the plant.  Mr. Kimura, a Japanese farmer who worked in a nearby area when the disaster occurred tried in vain to search for his family members who were swept by the tsunami.  He had to face difficult choice between evacuating the area and staying on to find his wife, father, and daughter.

Overall, the film does a good job portraying the frontline scenes of the Japanese effort to avert a more damaging disaster. The evolving crisis inside the nuclear complex is well explained by the narrator and nicely illustrated by still and moving visual aid.  This documentary would be an excellent companion to two essays: Gabrielle Hecht’s “Nuclear Nomads: A Look At the Subcontracted Heroes” and Sara B. Pritchard’s “An Envirotechnical Disaster: Nature, Technology, and Politics at Fukushima,” Environmental History 17 (April 2012): 219–243.

Anto Mohsin, Science and Technology Studies, Cornell University.

Bab Buku: “Starts and Stops” (“Permulaan dan Perhentian”) (2008)

Greene, J. Megan. 2008. “Starts and Stops,” The Origins of the Developmental State in Taiwan, 14-46. Harvard University Press.

(Bab Buku: “Permulaan dan Perhentian” (2008): Lembaga Riset Tenaga Nuklir di Taiwan.)

Bagi yang tertarik menyelami awal mula penelitian tenaga nuklir di negara sebelah timur Jepang, sejarah kebijakan sains di Taiwan yang ditulis oleh Greene menjelaskan peran penting fisika nuklir di awal pemerintahan Kuomintang dalam investasi riset di bidang sains. Buku ini, terutama bab “Berawal dan Berhenti” (“Starts and Stops”), menggambarkan upaya pembangunan lembaga negara yang mempromosikan penelitian energi nuklir dalam dua dekade pertama pasca PD II. Sejak tahun 1980an, para peneliti yang dilatih oleh di lembaga penelitian nuklir Taiwan yang dibangun di tahun 1950an dan 1960an, telah memainkan peran penting dalam debat publik mengenai keselamatan energi dan dampak lingkungan. Bab ini menganalisa awal mula kenapa dan bagaimana lembaga penelitian tenaga nuklir dibangun oleh negara.

Greene menelusuri berbagai perubahan sejarah yang terjadi pada upaya pemerintahan Kuomintang dalam mempromosikan “pendidikan sains dan institusi aplikasi riset” dari 1927 sampai 1958.   Walau pemerintah Kuomintang antusias dalam mendukung pendidikan sains dan riset di China dari tahun 1927 sampai 1949, antusiasme ini berkurang drastis rejim ini pindah  ke Taiwan di tahun 1950an.  Ada banyak faktor yang menyebabkan hal ini. Salah satunya adalah perlunya fasilitas riset yang mahal. Lagipula, investasi untuk fasilitas yang mahal, yang “merepresentasikan suatu komitmen permanen atau semi-permanen ke pulau,” berlawanan dengan rencana pemimpin Kuomintang yang akan kembali untuk merebut daratan China.

Dalam konteks sejarah seperti ini, Greene menjelaskan bahwa rencana pemerintah Kuomintang untuk mendirikan beberapa institusi energi atom di tahun 1950an dikarenakan potensi aplikasi militer dari riset tersebut. Dari halaman 43 sampai 45, dia menulis mengenai tiga badan riset atom di Taiwan dan hubungan mereka dengan institusi riset dan badan-badan pemerintah AS.

Institusi pertama yang dibangun adalah Komisi Energi Atom (AEC), yang dipimpin oleh Executive Yuan (semacam Kabinet atau Dewan Menteri) setelah pemerintahan Taiwan menandatangani kesepakatan dengan AS pada tahun 1955 tentang penggunaan atom secara damai. Institusi kedua adalah program pasca sarjana di bidang fisika nuklir di Universitas Nasional Tsing Hua pada tahun 1957. Di universitas yang sama dibangun juga satu reaktor “kolam renang” yang sebagian dibiayai oleh Komisi Energi Atom Amerika Serikat di tahun 1957 dan mulai berfungsi di tahun 1961. Institusi ketiga adalah Chungshan Institute of Science and Technology, sebuah unit militer yang didirikan oleh AEC, yang turut berpartisipasi dalam riset nuklir di tahun 1960an.

Bab ini menganalisa kontekst kepentingan pemerintahan Kuomintang dalam melakukan riset tenaga nuklir, termasuk dalam mencetak dan melatih beberapa generasi ilmuwan nuklir. Usaha ini berbeda dengan sikap pemerintah Kuomintang terhadap bidang ilmu-bidang ilmu lainnya di tahun 1950an. Bab buku ini sangat cocok untuk digunakan di kelas-kelas yang berhubungan dengan perkembangan sains yang didukung oleh negara dan peran sains semasa Perang Dingin.

Honghong Tinn diterjemahkan oleh Anto Mohsin

Educational Module: Multiple Histories of the Fukushima Disaster

by Shi-Lin Loh
Ph.D. candidate, Dept. of East Asian Languages and Civilizations, Harvard University

Themes and rationale:

Fukushima is a disaster that implicates multiple histories; there is no single narrative that can encompass the causal factors of its impact and significance. This unit aims to provide students with knowledge of the some of these histories – namely, the introduction of nuclear power to Japan via America and Japanese agents after WWII (Yoshimi 2012), as well as the twentieth-century trajectory of Japan’s northeastern region, where Fukushima is located (Oguma 2011). Finally, the concept of ‘sociotechnical imaginaries’ is also offered as a way to think about the motivations for and stakes of why states choose to adopt certain kinds of science and technology, and the broader connections between politics and S&T (Jasanoff and Kim 2009).

The readings below offer three different perspectives from which to consider histories around Fukushima. Yoshimi (2012) writes from a transnational context of U.S.-Japan relations during the Cold War; Oguma (2011) delves into the national context of the legacies of WWII on the socioeconomic infrastructure of Japan’s northeast. Finally, Jasanoff and Kim (2009) discuss the comparative international contexts in which the U.S. and South Korean governments adopted nuclear power.

Students could be asked to discuss which perspective they find most useful or compelling. For instance, are they convinced by Jasanoff and Kim’s argument that “media packages” are distinct from “sociotechnical imaginaries”? (p.123) What about countries where the state is actively involved in the media? (China, Singapore, Japan’s ‘press club’, etc.)

Students might also be asked to think about what other angles or kinds of data give a fuller picture of the causes and impact of Fukushima vis-à-vis these pieces – for instance, oral histories or interviews with residents of northeastern Japan. How does learning about the legacies of WWII and the Cold War change their understanding of nuclear power in Japan?


1. Sheila Jasanoff and Sang-Hyun Kim, “Containing the Atom: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and Nuclear Power in the United States and South Korea.” Minerva 47 (2009): 119–146.
[Teach 3.11 Annotation]

2. Shun’ya Yoshimi, “Radioactive Rain and the American Umbrella.” Trans. Shi-Lin Loh. The Journal of Asian Studies Vol. 71, No. 2 (May) 2012: 1–13.
[Teach 3.11 Annotation]

3. Oguma Eiji, “The Hidden Face of Disaster: 3.11, the Historical Structure and Future of Japan’s Northeast.” Trans. Kyoko Selden. The Asia-Pacific Journal Vol 9, Issue 31 No. 6 (August 1) 2011. Available at http://www.japanfocus.org/-Oguma-Eiji/3583.
[Teach 3.11 Annotation]

Book: Kizuna: Fiction for Japan

Millis, Brent, ed. 2011. Kizuna: Fiction for Japan. [S.l.]: Createspace.

kizunabanner2 copy

Kizuna is a mixed-genre anthology of short-fiction produced with the intent of aiding children orphaned by the earthquake and tsunami that struck on March 2011. To that effect, one must first adjust his-or-her expectations before reading it. Although it is labeled “Fiction for Japan”, the reader will soon find that there is not much to be had ‘of’ or ‘about’ Japan in its pages. Instead, most of the stories are of the science-fiction/horror genre where even the most insistent attempts to draw connections to place or event are disappointed. Some exceptions to this, though they are in the minority, are Shinya Gaku’s “That Long Day”, which surveys an ordinary day gone awry when disaster strikes, and “The Old Man and Honey”, in which Minoru Inaba depicts emotional turmoil in the aftermath of tragedy. Yet, the anthology’s overall effect on its reader remains dissonant when measured against the backdrop to which it is set.

Despite this, one must keep in mind the principle that can bring writing of such diversity together in the first place. ‘Kizuna’, Kanji of the Year for 2011, means ‘bond’ in English, though it must also be noted that its etymology also divulges a more negative connotation: to encumber, to restrict. Nevertheless, both in the context of this anthology and to the people of Japan, its meaning is clear. Kizuna represents the spirit and sentiment that unite people regardless of their differences, seen in the intensity of emotion and effort put toward relief and rebuilding; contributions both big and small. It is this sentiment that editor Brent Millis hopes to extend as he appeals for readers to “create your own bond with the people of Japan”, without connotations or restrictions, just as the authors featured in this anthology have.

Zachary Tan (Nanyang Technological University)

文章:“ 冷静客观的工作”:对原子辐射生物学效应研究的首次协谈 (中文摘要)

文章:“ ‘冷静客观的工作:对原子辐射生物学效应研究的首次协谈Hamblin, 2007

Jacob Hamblin, “‘A Dispassionate and Objective Effort’: Negotiating the First Study on
 the Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation,” Journal of the History of Biology 40, no. 1 (March 2007): 147-177.

Jacob Hamblin在这篇文章中从一个侧面检查了20世纪50年代对公众环境中安全原子辐射水准进行辩论的历史。文章内容集中在美国国家科学院1956年的报告《原子辐射生物学效应》(Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation, 简称BEAR)的制定过程。Hamblin认为此报告的制定是一个协谈过程。这个协谈过程在持不同意见的美国科学家与美国政府官员之间,在美国科学院和英国医学研究理事会之间完成,并与高度政治化的对原子实验沉降物公众恐慌和1956年美国总统大选的政治背景进行抗衡。

– By Zuoyue Wang (王作跃), with Chinese translation from Lijing Jiang (姜丽婧)

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.

编辑的话: 本文为本站已发表的英文摘要之中文翻译,我们诚挚地邀请有志者协助我们翻译或撰写韩文,日文,或中文的摘要。谢谢。

Article: “Radioactive Rain and the American Umbrella” (2012)

Shun’ya Yoshimi, “Radioactive Rain and the American Umbrella.” Trans. Shi-Lin Loh. The Journal of Asian Studies Vol. 71, No. 2 (May) 2012: 1–13.


This article discusses Japan’s nuclear power infrastructure via U.S.-Japan relations in thegeopolitical context of the Cold War. It puts the origins of Japan’s nuclear power program in the period of the “postwar” (i.e. after the end of the Pacific War in 1945), a term which carries special significance within Japanese studies as a particular turning point for the country’s history due to the remaking of the former imperial power as a constitutional democracy and its new, close ties to the United States. Yoshimi argues that, even before the Japanese government began actively soliciting land and technology to build nuclear power plant complexes in the 1960s, the trajectory of nuclear power development taken by Japan was already conditioned by U.S. policies regarding nuclear power and Communism during the 1950s, under the Eisenhower administration, namely the “New Look” and “Atoms for Peace” projects.

America’s initiation of these projects, particularly “Atoms for Peace”, allowed Japanese conservatives in government and corporate circles to jump on the bandwagon of nuclear power development to promote Japan’s own economic and political interests. Indeed, after an accident involving a Japanese fishing boat that accidentally experienced fallout from a U.S. hydrogen bomb test in the Marshall Islands, the idea of “Atoms for Peace” promoting not only grand ideals of peace and anti-Communism, but also an affluent lifestyle, became used to quell the fears that people in Japan had towards nuclear power. Yoshimi traces America’s penetration of Japan’s political and socioeconomic infrastructure through these Cold War policies, endorsed by agents in Japanese state and industry. In his analysis, a reliance on American strategy, policies and technology during the postwar allowed what he terms the “triple exposure” of Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the Bikini (or Lucky Dragon) incident into the background of Japanese people’s consciousness.

This article is a useful piece that might be read alongside Peter Kuznick’s “Japan’s Nuclear History in Perspective,” which gives more details on the U.S. side of the story. [“Japan’s Nuclear History in Perspective.” Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (13 April). http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/japans-nuclear-historyperspective-eisenhower-and-atoms-war-and-peace ] Yoshimi, as a Japanese academic, provides a counterpoint to Kuznick’s piece that discusses the larger significance for Japan to have been a part of these Eisenhower-era policies. Students might also be asked to do some follow-up reading on the U.S. Atoms for Peace project in other countries besides Japan and to discuss the Japanese case in comparison.

Shi-Lin Loh, Dept. of East Asian Languages and Civilizations, Harvard University

記事: Information Infrastructure and Descriptions of the 1857 Fort Tejon Earthquake

Finn, M. (2013). Information Infrastructure and Delac_48_2_front_smscriptions of the 1857 Fort Tejon Earthquake. Information & Culture, 48(2), 194-221.

1857年1月9日午前、カリフォルニア州サンアンドレアス断層上でマグニチュード7.9の地震が発生した。震源地はフォートテフォン付近。北はメアリーズヒルから南はサンディエゴまで揺れが感じられたという。地震による死者は2人だった。地震発生後、カリフォルニア州住民は地震の原因および被害状況について理解しようと努めた。筆者のミーガン・フィン(現在、マイクロソフトリサーチで博士研究員)は当時のカリフォルニア州の情報基盤(Information infrastructure)に焦点を当てつつ、新聞記事、手紙、その他の定期刊行物を一次資料として、当時のカリフォルニア州住民が地震をいかに理解したかについて考察している。当時の情報基盤として、新聞、手紙、電報と言ったメディアに加えて、これらのメディアを流通させる蒸気船、至急便貨物集配人、郵便制度、電信システムの役割、ひいては地震を記述し記録する(現代とは異なる)当時の慣習(とくに時間の計測に伴う慣習:timekeeping)の果たした役割などにも言及している。


—Yasuhito Abe, University of Southern California

Article: “The Hidden Face of Disaster: 3.11, the Historical Structure and Future of Japan’s Northeast” (2011)

Oguma Eiji, “The Hidden Face of Disaster: 3.11, the Historical Structure and Future of Japan’s Northeast.” Trans. Kyoko Selden. The Asia-Pacific Journal Vol 9, Issue 31 No. 6 (August 1) 2011. Available at http://www.japanfocus.org/-Oguma-Eiji/3583.

oguma_screenshot_smallThis article discusses the historical sociology of the Tōhoku region—Japan’s northeast—and how it is the product of a socio-economic structure constructed from c. the 1930s to the 1970s. Oguma traces the legacies of policies practiced by the central Japanese government and Japanese industries in the pre-WWII, wartime and postwar periods. The Tōhoku region used to be a key supplier of Japan’s rice and Tokyo’s labour force in the first decades after WWII. From the 1930s, too, it began to be an important source of Tokyo’s electricity. Tōhoku’s history of being a provider of resources for Tokyo, along with the decline of the coal industry in the same region, led to the Fukushima coast was considered a good candidate to locate nuclear power plants in the 1960s.

The essay ends with a consideration of the impact of globalization on the economic health of Tōhoku and briefly discusses some of the issues obstructing its reconstruction and post-disaster recovery. Oguma points out that the histories of development and decline he summarises in the first half are linked to the complications of reviving the region’s socio-economic health in the wake of Fukushima. Overall, the essay is a useful, condensed portrait of a marginalized region whose existence was supported by being a source of necessities for other places in Japan; at the same time, he weaves the larger perspective of global security issues during the Cold War into the picture. His essay is thus an informative and thought-provoking piece about the ways in which Tōhoku came to be, on the eve of Fukushima, as well as the broader trajectories of state and industry policies in Japan during these decades.

Shi-Lin Loh, Dept. of East Asian Languages and Civilizations, Harvard University

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)

Artikel: “Teknologi vs. Kelayakan Komersial: Tenaga Nuklir dan Kelistrikan” (1999)

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

Artikel ini merupakan salah satu bab di buku yang ditulis oleh Morris Low, Shigeru Nakayama, and Hitoshi Yoshioka yang membahas tentang sejarah kontemporer ilmu pengetahuan dan teknologi di Jepang. Buku tersebut dipublikasikan pada tahun yang sama dengan bukunya Yoshioka 原子力の社会史 (Sejarah Sosial Tenaga Nuklir). Artikel ini merupakan ringkasan sejarah energi nuklir di Jepang yang dikarang oleh Yoshioka.

Bab yang cakupannya meliputi sejarah energi listrik sebelum perang, awal mula program nuklir di tahun 1950an dan reaktor di tahun 1960an serta program reactor fast breeder sampai dekade 1990an ini menelaah hubungan yang kompleks antara kepentingan publik dan swasta dalam hal teknologi dan aplikasinya. Di Jepang, walaupun industri tenaga listrik selalu didominasi oleh pihak swasta dan usaha-usaha kelistrikan program energi listrik dijalankan oleh kepentingan pihak swasta, artikel ini berargumen bahwa kepentingan swasta dan publik batasannya kabur dan kepentingan pihak mana yang dilayani oleh perkembangan energi nuklir tidak selalu jelas.

Seperti dalam bukunya Yoshioka, artikel ini mengklaim kalau perkembangan reaktor nuklir didorong oleh “struktur ganda” yang terdiri dari dua kelompok. Yang pertama MITI (Kementrian Perdagangan dan Industri Internasional Jepang) dan industri swasta. Yang kedua STA (Badan Sains dan Teknologi) beserta perusahaan riset publik seperti JAERI (Institut Riset Atom Jepang). Tugas utama grup yang pertama adalah mengembangkan secara berkala pengusahaan nuklir dengan mengimpor reaktor-reaktor Amerika Serikat. Sedangkan misi grup STA adalah riset dan perkembangan teknologi mutakhir yang belum dikomersialkan seperti desain reaktor fast breeder dan fusi nuklir.

Artikel ini mengklaim bahwa alasan Jepang mengembangkan reaktor fast breeder  adalah karena struktur ganda ini, terutama usaha-usaha grup STA untuk memengaruhi kebijakan nuklir Jepang. Bukan karena Jepang mencoba menjadi negara nuklir melalui program plutoniumnya. Tetapi lebih karena STA menggunakan program ini untuk dapat menancapkan pengaruhnya di dalam negeri. Sebenarnya cakupan kerja STA meliputi riset nuklir dan program antariksa Jepang. Hanya saja, karena ada ketidakpastian atas masa depan program antariksa STA memilih untuk konsentrasi pada program nuklir energi. Oleh karena itu badan ini memprioritaskan teknologi reaktor fast breeder.

–  Kenji Ito diterjemahkan oleh Anto Mohsin


Igarashi Cover五十嵐泰正. 「安全・安心の柏産柏消」円卓会議.  2012.  みんなで決めた「安心」のかたち―ポスト3.11の「地産地消」をさがした柏の一年.  東京:亜紀書房

2011年3月11日に発生した東日本大震災、そして続く福島第一原子力発電所事故は、甚大な数の被災者、そして多くの混乱をもたらした。そして、被害の状況は、なおも現在進行形で続いている。そのような中で、食品の安全性をめぐる問題もまた大きくクローズアップされ、数多くの実践がなされることとなった。ここで、紹介する「みんなで決めた「安心」のかたち―ポスト3.11の「地産地消」をさがした柏の一年」は、千葉県柏市で震災以降に生じた農作物をめぐる課題に対して「安全・安心の柏産柏消」円卓会議が中心となって行った実践について記述したものである。そして、ここで描かれる内容は、3・11をめぐる問題群、そしてPublic Engagementを中心としたSTS的課題群にも示唆を与えるものと考えられる。



実際の測定作業とルール作りはどのように行われていったのだろうか。柏市のケースでは、人々は実際に放射性物質を自分たちで「測る」という行為を現実的に可能なものとし、またそのためのルールや体制作りを実践する必要に迫られていた。その克服には、人、モノ(機械・機器)、アイディア、協働といった事柄が不可欠となる。また自分たちで「測る」といっても、様々な困難がある。放射線量は遮蔽しなければ変動してしまうものであり、ピンポイントの場所の放射線量、とりわけ小さい値を測ることはテクニカルにも難しい作業となる。そのような中で考えだされていった方針は、圃場の中で最も放射性物質の濃度が高い場所を特定し、その場所から取れた野菜を核種判断もできる精度の高い装置で検査する方式であった。その際、農業の専門家である農家が、圃場の性格(風の向きや水の流れ)を熟知していたことも、放射性物質がたまりやすい場所、すなわち最も放射性物質濃度の高い場所を見抜く際に機能することとなった。恐らくは、この話を聞くと、Brian Wynneによる一連の研究群を思い出す方もいるだろう。加えて、そこには、震災以降に出会うこととなった新しい問題に対して、機器の使い方をはじめ様々に学習し、「測る」という行為を実践し、その過程でまた問題自体を関係者間で検討・熟知・共有し、実行可能な解決方法の次のステップを模索するという相互学習のプロセスが存在している。

そして、もう一つ決めていかなければならない事柄が、自分たちの「納得」できる食品安全基準はどこかという問題であった。日本では、震災後に新食品基準値として100 bq/kgが提示されていた。しかし、柏市での試みでは、以下のような要素を勘案した新しい基準、自分たちが実践できる、納得できる、合意できる基準の作成が目指された。その際の基本となる考え方は以下のようなものであった、


そして結果として、この事例では、新食品基準値の5分の1である、20 bq/kgを自分たちの基準とすることで合意をみることになる。

多様なステークホルダーと住民が参加し、「測る」という行為を媒介としつつ相互学習を行い、実際の「納得」と「合意」を目指したプロセスと実践は、STSにとって、とりわけPublic Engagementに関わる議論に多くの示唆を与えるだろう。また放射性物質の拡散に関わる、デリケートな課題についての最新の取り組み例である点も無視できない。

標葉隆馬 (総合研究大学院大学)


Houshasen Hibaku no Rekishi Cover中川保雄. 2011. 放射線被曝の歴史-アメリカ原爆開発から福島原発事故まで. 東京:明石書店








井沼 睦 (神戸大学)

参考図書1「原爆調査の歴史を問い直す」2011年3月出版 科学技術問題研究会
http://blogs.shiminkagaku.org/shiminkagaku/report_atomicbomb_history_201103.pdf)参考図書2「米軍占領下の原爆調査 原爆加害国となった日本」1995年10月 笹本征男

本: Reconstructing Kobe: The Geography of Crisis and Opportunity (2010)

ReconstructingKobeEdgington, David W. 2010. Reconstructing Kobe: The Geography of Crisis and Opportunity. University of British Columbia Press.

ブリティッシュコロンビア大学の地理学者であるDavid W. Edgingtonは、阪神淡路大震災後の神戸市復興計画の10年間について詳細に調査した。筆者は震災後1995年から2005年までの政治的、経済的、社会的、また物質的な神戸の変化を、理論というよりは、当時の言説に関する報告、図表や写真などの大量のデータを使用し辿る。他地域の災害復興計画の研究のための比較研究として、多様な範囲の学部生、院生のためのディスカッションや分析材料として、また、現在の東日本を形づくる復興の背景を理解するために、本書は有効である。

筆者は「crisis」と「opportunity」という二元の意味を持つ「危機」と「場所」を繋げ震災後の神戸を“geographies of crisis” と“geographies of opportunity”のパッチワークとして描く。本書は、震災前の状況、震災自体の特徴、政府とNGOの復興への取り組み、地域社会の取り組みと政府との関係、という四つの枠組みで構成される。




Tyson Vaughan, Cornell University
英語本文の翻訳担当者: 井沼 睦 (神戸大学)

*参考の動画:Prof. Edgingtonが神戸と仙台を比較(http://www.asiapacificmemo.ca/japanese-geography-expert-david-edgington-video

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)


(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.