Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
High-Level Radioactive Disposal Policy in Japan: A Sociological Appraisal
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
High-Level Radioactive Disposal Policy in Japan: A Sociological Appraisal
Do you wish to request the book?
High-Level Radioactive Disposal Policy in Japan: A Sociological Appraisal
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
High-Level Radioactive Disposal Policy in Japan: A Sociological Appraisal
2023
Overview
This study critically appraises the Japanese government’s high-level radioactive disposal policy by drawing on three sociological perspectives: risk society, sociology of scientific knowledge, and social acceptance. The risk society theory emphasizes that the Government of Japan and scientists under its control are pursuing nuclear power policy and repository siting within the conventional paradigm of the first modernity, which no longer aligns with the current reality of nuclear power utilization and its public awareness in Japan. Thus, a reflexive response from the policy side is essential to address the demands of a risk society. The sociology of scientific knowledge supports this view by demonstrating that, while scientists under governmental control attempt to convince the public of the safety of their geological disposal methods and the scientific validity of their siting procedures, these claims are largely a social construction of knowledge riddled with uncertainty and ambiguity about inherent environmental risks. The social acceptance standpoint also reveals a substantial bias in government measures toward ensuring distributive, procedural, and interpersonal fairness. Specifically, it critiques the heavy official reliance on monetary compensation to the host community, limited consideration of the allocation of intergenerational decision-making rights based on the reversibility principle, and the implementing agency’s one-way asymmetrical risk communication for public deliberation.
