FUKUSHIMA Lives on the Line

160/306

156entitlements will be endless. I do not believe this is a foolproof solution. The first step in a real plan for resolution is to make progress with straightforward studies of the food supply and internal radiation exposure, so that parents can eventually feel “it is safe to go back to Fukushima.” And we need real leadership that will ensure that this progress is made. Victims Ought Not Criticize Fellow Victims——The nuclear accident is an unfortunate event that must simply be accepted and dealt with, correct?Kikuchi: Yes, that is correct. Since the earthquake, the word kizuna (bonds of friendship) has become widespread. But I have noticed incidents in which disaster victims criticize other victims; this is appalling. There have been individuals who have sounded warnings about the dangers of nuclear power plants even before the accident, and there are academic papers on the subject. But these opinions have been in the minority and we did not bother to heed the warnings. We, the citizens of Japan, and the government, are the ones who have allowed nuclear power plants to be set up. First, we have to face up to this fact and turn to the experts across the globe to discover ways to deal with the problem.——After the earthquake, the media featured a fair number of people referred to as “atomic energy specialists.”Kikuchi: An atomic energy specialist or expert is someone who has spent his or her academic or professional career studying atomic energy issues. Here in Japan, we don’t have that many people with this designation, which is why it is important to consult experts across the globe. We have to become wiser here at home and educate ourselves and the generations to come. We made nuclear power a pillar of our national energy policy, but failed to fulfill our “risk communication” responsibility toward the populace.Meaning of Risk Communication——What exactly is risk communication?Kikuchi: In the English-speaking world, there are experienced scientists called “science writers” or “risk communicators,” who are responsible for conveying information on scientific issues to the general population in layman terms. For example, I have given about 50 lectures a year, and the style of lectures widely varies for experts and the general audience. To ensure that the content is comprehensible to the latter, I have to adjust my way of speaking. It is unfortunate that such kind of risk communicators is almost nonexistent in Japan. One of the few experts we do have is Mr. Shunichi Yamashita, who I invited to speak on campus in my capacity as the university vice president. He has been to Chernobyl and is the foremost medical expert with a wealth of experience in atomic energy. Going forward, I believe FMU needs to train competent risk communicators and convey to a wide audience, in particular the youth, the multifarious issues related to nuclear power. More importantly, we have to do it in such a way that the issues are easily understood.A Higher Level of Awareness of People Overseas about Risks of Nuclear Power ——Do people overseas have a high level of awareness about risks?Kikuchi: Yes, they do. This is why we have created a new division at FMU, the Department of International Cooperation. Overseas observers are taking a very level-headed approach to learning from the incident in Japan. Initiatives have been taken to build nuclear power plants in Southeast Asia and the Middle East. This might not be the most elegant way of saying it, but they realize that they need nuclear power and that accidents are inevitable. Therefore, they are also earnestly studying disaster response measures to such

※このページを正しく表示するにはFlashPlayer9以上が必要です