Fukushima ron: genshiryoku‐mura wa naze umareta noka (Fukushima Village: How Did The Nuclear Village Come into Being?)– By Hiroshi Kainuma
Fukushima ron: genshiryoku‐mura wa naze umareta noka (Fukushima Village: How Did The Nuclear Village Come into Being?) , by . Tokyo : Seido‐sha , 2011 , pp. 403 , ¥2310 (ISBN 4791766109 ).
Fukushima ron, or Fukushima Village (my English translation of the title), was published just after the earthquake, tsunami, and the collapse of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station. This was a coincidence. The author, Hiroshi Kainuma, confesses that such a disaster was most unexpected. He had been conducting fieldwork in the surrounding local communities that he named Genshiryoku‐mura (Nuclear Power Village) and after 3/11, the book became one of the best‐sellers of the nuclear genre.
Fukushima ron was originally written as a Master thesis and was to be completed in late January 2011. It was just one of the theses submitted every year to the Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, at the University of Tokyo, and it just happened that it was submitted before the collapse of the Fukushima nuclear power station actually took place. As a professional sociologist‐to‐be and young Japanese man born in Fukushima, Mr Kainuma gave a comprehensive sketch of what had been going on in this isolated, poor, rural area that seemed nothing out of the ordinary. His sociological description, in the post‐colonial study approach, was highly evaluated by both academicians and general readers alike, and he was awarded the Mainichi Publication Prize, 2011, in the humanities and social sciences category.
Fukushima shot to world fame after 3/11. Fukushima Prefecture is located in the northern part of Japan. Facing the Pacific Ocean, it consists of three parts, namely, Hamadori (the coastal district), Nakadori (the inland district), and Aizu (the mountain district). The Pacific coast zone is the most densely occupied with nuclear stations, and is within easy reach as a transmission area for electricity to the Tokyo area. The coastal area of Fukushima was selected as an ideal site for nuclear power stations because of its small population and the ample availability of flat lands which were formerly used as sea‐salt factory plants. Also, local leaders supported the establishment of nuclear facilities when they were told that special subsidies would be allocated to the villages by the government.
“Those who live in the neighboring areas of a nuclear site should be concerned at all times being next to such dangerous facilities. If you conduct fieldwork research, you expect to find that all the residents are sick, or tired, or depressed with fear because of the nuke sites and with so many anti‐nuke movements everywhere. Such naive assumptions of mine were turned over one by one after I started my research in the Fukushima nuke‐site and had the opportunity to speak with the informants.” These are the first few lines of the book. The residents there live a normal everyday life in the Nuclear Village, just like any other local rural community in Japan. They welcomed the nuclear industry because it has improved their life, and because they no longer need to work outside their hometown in the winters anymore. It brought many new jobs and extra income. Their local communities could not do without the nuke sites once they were given access to financial support.
What is the Focus of This Book?
The author points out that there have been three approaches to nuclear issues in post‐war Japan. The first approach is the macro‐approach, which includes many kinds of investigations at both global and national levels dealing with energy and economy. The second one is the mezzo‐approach, which includes studies of social and environmental movements. The third is the micro‐approach, which includes recent detailed studies of local communities with multiple agents. Fukushima ron, mainly based on the third approach, casts light on the interaction between the two layers of the Nuclear Village. The upper layer of the village consists of Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), the former Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI), the Science and Technology Agency, key persons in the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), mass media, and other major agents at the national level. The lower layer of the village consists of ordinary community members, leaders in local politics, subcontracting firms under TEPCO, anti‐nuke activists, and other players. The author describes the reality there as a mutually reproductive process among multiple agents from the two layers of the village. For example, a village chief who had acted as a leader of the local anti‐power station movement for many years later turned into a supporter of the nuclear policy of the upper level village. He has shown consistency because he first tried to protect his village against change from the outside, then he found the acceptance of nuclear policy to be more beneficial to the well‐being of the villagers. Pro‐ and anti‐nuke options were the inter‐changeable means for his final objective, which was the development of the local community. Another example is former Governor Eisaku Sato of Fukushima Prefecture (whose name is the same as a former Prime Minister) and acknowledges, himself, to be a politician of authentic conservatism. He supported the introduction of nuclear facilities to Fukushima, at first convinced that there should be no danger as long as the central government guaranteed the safety of the nuclear facilities. Later he gradually became skeptical about the credibility of the guarantees after repeated accidents in the nuclear power stations, and declared his independence from the national nuclear policy until he was arrested for suspicion of taking bribes. Dependence of the local leaders can turn to independence from governmental control on occasions.
Dependency of local districts on the central government was carefully designed and introduced by the post‐war Japanese administration. In the pre‐war period, governors of each prefecture were appointed by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and they were replaced quite often when they were not in harmony with local leaders. After the post‐war reforms, governors were elected by the local voters and the central government controlled the local districts through regulations and subsidies to local governments. As a result, a dependency was produced, and the willingness to accept nuclear facilities was fostered gradually at the local level. Once independence was initiated, it reproduced itself addictively, which we can define as a series of improper actions reinforcing one another. The post‐colonial structure emerged in the intertwined relationship of interdependence between national‐ and local‐level actors.
What is the Keyword in This Book?
Concealment. The negative side of reality became invisible in accordance with the interdependence created among the related actors. MITI, TEPCO, highly ranked officers in the government and academicians say the nuclear plant is safe, and the project goes on. Once the project is accepted by the local community, the nuclear plant should be safe. It is safe because it was said to be safe, and it was said to be safe because it is safe. The existing risks cannot be mentioned, cannot be counted, cannot be considered. This is concealment. It is partly intentional, partly unintentional. Thus, TEPCO employees are not conscious of workers of subcontract companies in local communities, and they are not conscious of floating workers who usually take charge in dangerous works and live in cheap lodges.
The mechanism of concealment extends also to academicians. The nuclear scientists are mainly hired and supported by big companies or a national institution. Naturally they tend to play favoritism and are a part of the concealment cycle over nuclear safety. Sociologists are the rare exception as they are of no use to the nuclear industries, which is why such a revealing book like Fukushima ron was made possible.
What is the Conclusion of This Book?
Fukushima Ron gives a comprehensive perspective of post‐war Japanese society with nuclear plants as its focal point. The readers will understand what was neglected when economic growth was given first priority. Modernity (the advanced nuclear technology) and pre‐modernity (the local community left behind) were coupled together to promote the nuclear industry, which was necessary for the purpose of energy supply. A simple perspective is not enough to reveal the entire scope of the reality.
After 3/11, What are the Lessons We Can Learn from This Book?
The meltdown was not announced for months after it happened. The Cabinet, Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) and TEPCO showed their inability to coordinate well. A series of “unforeseen” events happened after the tsunami and earthquake, and these were used as the excuse for the loss of control of the nuclear plant. The author writes that he was unable to imagine that such a big accident might occur in the Fukushima nuclear plant. Still he felt that something unexpected would happen someday, somewhere, probably in developing countries where nuclear technology was being newly introduced. One important point of this book is that there is still a “village” at the top level of Japan, just under its very modernized surface. We all live in uncertainty in contemporary society, and a “village” does not have the capacity to face such kinds of risks.
Finally, How did This Book Reveal the Reality of the Nuclear Village?
The author conducted many interviews with all kinds of members of the Nuclear Village and found that there is a collective deceit or neglect concerning the nuclear reality. The author also admits that he himself remained indifferent because he was only a young sociology student located on the outside of the Nuclear Village's inner circle. Thus he was able to give a full description of the Village as well as its concealment. The readers know his description to be true because they read it after the 3/11 accident. Like readers who first read the last pages of a detective story and then read it from the beginning, the outcome of the book is guaranteed to the reader. However, therein lies the problem as discussed by Michel Foucault. Foucault wrote that every discourse is destined to be affected by a contemporary invisible power. If his assertion is right, his own discourse is also affected by the invisible power. In the same sense, if the power of the Nuclear Village is penetrating, the independence of the discourse of this book remains somewhat questionable. However, his type of questionability is common to all post‐colonial studies, and not solely applicable to this book.
To summarize, this book is one of the great achievements of the year 2011, and should remain a memorable book long associated with the name of the 3/11 Fukushima disaster.




