Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

In February 2025, Japan adopted its 7th Strategic Energy Plan, shifting toward maximizing nuclear power use fifteen years after Fukushima. This presentation critiques the underestimation of nuclear costs and the use of misleading integration costs to devalue renewables, highlighting the resurgence of regulatory capture.

Paper long abstract

In February 2025, the Japanese government formally adopted the 7th Strategic Energy Plan, marking a clear reversal in national energy policy. The plan abandons the post Fukushima objective of reducing dependence on nuclear power and instead promotes its maximized use as a stable and low carbon energy source. This presentation examines the social and economic implications of this policy shift, with a particular focus on the renewed push for nuclear reactor restarts.

Drawing on the concept of Genpatsu Shinsai (the quake and nuclear disaster complex), I argue that key lessons identified after the 2011 accident, especially the recognition of Fukushima as a man-made disaster and the problem of regulatory capture, are increasingly being sidelined. Recent evaluations by the government’s Cost Verification Working Group claim that nuclear power remains cost competitive. A closer examination, however, reveals systematic underestimation of nuclear costs. These assessments rely on hypothetical model plants that fail to reflect the reality of sharply rising construction costs, which globally now reach trillions of yen per reactor, as well as escalating expenditures for safety measures and accident compensation. In addition, the polluter pays principle is being weakened, as accident-related costs are increasingly shifted onto the public through electricity network charges. By contrast, the potential of renewable energy is consistently undervalued. Despite international evidence showing renewables to be among the cheapest sources of electricity, Japanese policy making relies on conservative assumptions and inflated integration costs to justify continued reliance on nuclear power.

This presentation critiques these methodological choices and argues that they distort public debate and contribute to a persistent deadlock in Japan’s energy transition. It also questions the suitability of operators such as TEPCO to lead reactor restarts, given their record of safety failures, which casts serious doubt on the claim that safety is the highest priority. I conclude that Japan’s current policy trajectory risks repeating past mistakes by prioritizing the preservation of the nuclear power establishment over the development of a transparent and sustainable energy system.

Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

More than fourteen years after Fukushima, environmental and health controversies persist. This presentation examines how civil society organizations have become professionalized watchdogs in radiation governance, while their growing responsibilities paradoxically sustain neoliberal state retreat.

Paper long abstract

More than fourteen years have passed since the Fukushima nuclear disaster, yet major environmental and health issues remain unresolved. These include the ocean discharge of tritium contaminated water, the nationwide reuse of radioactive soil generated through decontamination work, and more than four hundred diagnosed cases of thyroid cancer among individuals who were children at the time of the accident. During this period, the Japanese state has pursued a neoliberal policy course that downplays contamination risks while shifting responsibilities for monitoring, care, and support onto individuals and civil society organizations in order to reduce public expenditure.

This dynamic reflects the structure of Japanese civil society conceptualized by Pekkanen (2006). While many local civil society organizations function as “cheap subcontractors” supporting the implementation of government policies, national level advocacy-oriented organizations that challenge state policies have remained weak in terms of resources and political opportunities. After Fukushima, advocacy-oriented organizations have continued to face severe financial constraints. Nevertheless, their activities have become increasingly professionalized and grounded in scientific knowledge, particularly in the field of radiation protection (Löschke 2025). This raises the question of how these organizations have sustained long term engagement with the enduring effects of the nuclear disaster despite limited resources and declining public attention.

Civil society organizations now operate as watchdogs in environmental and health governance. A central point of contention concerns the increase in pediatric thyroid cancer cases. The prefectural committee attributes this rise to a so-called screening effect and denies any causal relationship with radiation exposure. In response, civil society actors have challenged this narrative by inviting independent scientific experts and producing counterevidence. They also contest the ocean discharge of contaminated water and the reuse of radioactive soil through scientific and legal interventions.

This presentation argues that while civil society organizations have become indispensable providers of legal, scientific, and psychological support, their role remains paradoxical. By compensating for state inaction, they risk reinforcing neoliberal governance by reducing pressure on the state to assume responsibility. This presentation illustrates how civil society in post Fukushima Japan navigates both its expanded capacities and its structural limitations.

Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

Based on a 2025 NHK–Waseda survey distributed to 30,000 Fukushima evacuees with about 3,000 responses, this presentation shows that over 50 percent remain at high risk of PTSD fifteen years after the disaster. It argues that this chronic distress constitutes “social abuse” driven by structural violence and policy induced social indifference.

Paper long abstract

Fifteen years after the Fukushima nuclear disaster, the mental health of evacuees has shifted from an acute reaction to a condition best described as an “acute on chronic” crisis. Drawing on a large-scale survey conducted in 2025 by NHK and Waseda University, which was distributed to approximately 30,000 evacuees and received responses from about 3,000 individuals, this presentation provides a longitudinal analysis of persistent psychological distress. Despite official narratives of “reconstruction” and continued policy efforts toward nuclear restarts, the data show that more than 50 percent of respondents still exhibit stress levels consistent with probable Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. This proportion remains significantly higher than those observed after major natural disasters such as the Kobe earthquake.

This study applies the framework of “structural violence” (Galtung 1969) to explain why these psychological wounds have not healed. It argues that the distress experienced by evacuees is not merely an individual clinical issue but the outcome of social, economic, and political systems that perpetuate a “secondary disaster.” The 2025 survey reveals a stark reality. 55.8 percent of respondents report having experienced bullying or discrimination. To avoid social stigma, more than half continue to conceal their status as evacuees. This enforced concealment constitutes a form of “social abuse,” in which affected individuals are isolated and neglected by a society that prioritizes the “myth of safety” (Anzen Anshin Shinwa) over human rights. Furthermore, the termination of housing support and policies encouraging return under exposure standards of 20 mSv per year are analyzed as forms of indirect violence. These measures intensify family dissolution, often described as Genpatsu Rikon, and deepen economic insecurity.

By situating these findings within the panel’s broader focus on policy reversal, this presentation concludes that addressing Fukushima’s mental health crisis requires more than clinical intervention. It demands a fundamental transformation in how structural injustice and social inequality are confronted, as these forces continue to marginalize these “domestic refugees” fifteen years after the catastrophe.