‘Structural Disasters’ Requiring Due Social Responsibility: Institutionalized Forbearance and Organizational Stakes

DOI NDL Digital Collections Web Site

Bibliographic Information

Other Title
  • 構造災と責任帰属――制度化された不作為と事務局問題――
  • コウゾウ サイ ト セキニン キゾク : セイドカ サレタ フサクイ ト ジムキョク モンダイ

Search this article

Abstract

<p>This paper attempts to elucidate the social mechanisms of ‘structural disasters’, which give rise to severe suffering in the general public, with particular reference to the Fukushima nuclear accident. The paper attempts to specify the aspects of problems that go beyond the widespread dichotomous framework of perpetrators versus victims in environmental sociology, from the viewpoint of the sociology of science and technology. In particular, the paper focuses on the process through which double under-determination has influenced the formulation, implementation, and evaluation of public policies preceding and following the Fukushima accident.</p><p>Three points are made based on the analyses of the guidelines for the utilization of SPEEDI (The System for Prediction of Environment Emergency Dose Information), of the organizational structure of the Governmental Examination Committee on the Fukushima accident, and of the siting of facilities for the disposal of HLW (high-level radioactive waste). Firstly, the social mechanism by which ‘institutionalized forbearance’ causes serious damage to third parties without breaking laws or moral ethics is revealed. Secondly, the paper illustrates the way in which the organizational structure made up of both investigators and stakeholders tends to carry over structurally originated problems and reproduce them. Thirdly, the paper highlights the possibility that social decision-making, with a very long time horizon and high degree of uncertainty, can bring about infinite responsibility, and eventually lead to collective irresponsibility.</p><p>Based on the insight into the novel dimensions of these three social mechanisms, which have been difficult to understand by utilizing the dichotomous framework of perpetrators versus victims, the paper argues for the importance of evaluating and allocating social responsibility to ex-ante expertise rather than ex-post expertise provided with hindsight. In conclusion, a policy to redesign institutional structures by creating a transparent scientific advisory system and a public record station of ’structural disasters’ is proposed.</p>

Journal

Related Projects

See more

Keywords

Details 詳細情報について

Report a problem

Back to top