The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster, The Earthquake and the Tsunami Revisited: What Have We Learnt?

→Japanese

Early on the 22nd of November, a magnitude 7.4 earthquake struck off the eastern coast of Japan, causing tsunami waves reaching 1.4 meters in places. It brought back memories of the terrible Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Disaster that happened five-and-a-half years ago.

Thankfully, the damage this time round was far less, although there was an accident at the Fukushima Daini nuclear power plant. At the no.3 reactor, the flow of the water cooling nearly 2,500 spent fuel rods was stopped for nearly 100 minutes. Although this incident was barely reported in the media, I do not think we can afford to take this incident lightly, because of several reasons I explain below.

First, we must keep in mind that Japan is a country prone to earthquakes. 20% of all M6+ earthquakes occur in Japan. ‘Earthquakes, lightening, fire and fathers,’ were the fearful things of Japan in old legend. Earthquakes are least predictable and yet they will unleash their wrath. After a large seismic event like the 3.11 earthquake, the crust becomes highly unstable, leading to even more heightened seismic and volcanic activity, which in turn calls for more awareness.

Apparently the government is preparing for imminent earthquakes along the Nankai Trough as part of this ‘preparedness’.

Another example is the designation of the 5th of November as World Tsunami Awareness Day, and on the 26th of November, Kuroshio town in Kochi hosted an event related to tsunami awareness, where 360 young people from 30 countries came together to learn about the dangers of tsunamis (in Japanese). Which makes it even more pitiful that the incident at Fukushima Daini happened followed by an earthquake and tsunami.

Second, Japan still has 50 nuclear reactors, most of which have the spent nuclear fuel rods stored in onsite pools filled with cooling water. Luckily for us, the fuel rods at Fukushima Daini were already being cooled for five years, meaning that the temperatures did not rise to a dangerous level. As you may recall, the U.S expressed urgent concern over the loss of cooling capability for the spent fuel rods stored at the no.4 reactor of Fukushima Daiichi.

Third, the ground movement on Nov 22 was reported as being below 100 Gal units. Japanese nuclear reactors are supposed to be built to withstand such shocks, and indeed ground movements of more than 400 to 600 Gal units, with backfitting to the main structure to ensure that the reactors are able to adhere to the higher requirements in light of new information. But what are these requirements, and are the changes adequate? Might they have forgotten to include spent fuel rods in new plans that meet these stringent requirements? Surely not, I hope. And yet… why do they, for example, persist in putting the spent fuel rods at the top of reactor buildings, a design that probably magnifies the movement in comparison to what it would have been at ground level? And what about the water coolant for these fuel rods?

Even when focusing just on the things that went wrong at Fukushima Daiichi, how have the lessons of thevhistorical disaster of Fukushima Daiichi been reflected in the current nuclear reactors of Japan? At the Sendai reactor? At the other reactors scheduled for re-start? The answers are not clear, leaving me very worried.

I have not heard an awful lot, and even if answers are attempted, they include jargon like ‘dry cask storage’ and are mentioned without conviction, without explanation, or any concrete examples. Discussion for discussion’s sake won’t take us very far, I’m afraid, yet it seems that it is exactly the case. Despite making ‘confident’ statements about resumption of operations at several nuclear power plants, it seems that the safety measures are sorely lacking. And this ‘small’ incident has laid bare the inadequacy of the Japanese response for all the world to see.

In my closing statement for the NAIIC report, I remark (in Japanese only).

” We are not without precedent with regards to disasters. The 2004 December Earthquake of magnitude 9.1, with massive tsunami, now known as the Sumatra-Andaman earthquake, was followed by an earthquake in 2005 with magnitude 8.6, and even this year (this statement was published in July, 2012) an M8.6 quake has struck the vicinity. There is nothing that allows us to assume that this will not happen in the case of the 2011 earthquake off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku. The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant has already been shown to be vulnerable, and as for the other nuclear power facilities in Japan, for which safety standards remain questionable, I am afraid we are in a race against time”.

A part of my comments have also appeared in an article on the recent earthquake in the New York Times. Japan is in quite a sorry state at the moment. I hear about the status of the safety of nuclear power plants and I am often asked for my views from outside world….

March 11; Five Years from the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident; My New Book, “Regulatory Capture”; At Cornell University in Ithaca


→Japanese

Five years have passed since the terrible tragedy of the Great East Japan Earthquake and the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident. How much progress has really been made in the reconstruction efforts? It is a difficult issue.

A few nuclear power plants have been restarted in Japan but it seems that accidents and problems are occurring rather frequently.

Dealing with the aftermath of the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident will likely take many more decades. We are faced with many major challenges and obstacles now and in the future, with no idea of how long we must cope with them.

Having served as the Chairman of the first independent investigative commission under the National Diet in Japan, the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC), I decided to publish my book, “Regulatory Capture: When Groupthink Can Kill” at this time. It can be found in bookstores or ordered online on Amazon. It is my sincere hope that many people will read it. If Japan remains in its current situation, the future does not look promising.

As part of the book launch, I held press conferences at the Japan National Press Club and the Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan. The conferences can be viewed on YouTube.

This was my fifth time speaking at the Japan National Press Club regarding the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident. Each time, my message has been fundamentally the same: the world is changing but will Japan change?

Right after the press conference, I traveled to Cornell University in Ithaca, New York. The Mario Einaudi Center for International Studies, directed by Professor Hirokazu Miyazaki, invited me to speak at the roundtable discussion, “Nuclear Power Roundtable: Five Years after Fukushima.”

The panelists were Professor Charles Perrow of Princeton University and Professor Sonja Schmid of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. I always enjoy taking part in such discussions. After the roundtable, we attended the reception and dinner.

The next day, I had breakfast with professors and students from Japan. In the evening, I invited two post-docs from Japan and China to join me for dinner and we chatted about various topics.

The subject of conversation that came up often during my visit was how few Japanese students and professors there were over here.

The world is filled with possibilities and I encourage young people to challenge themselves more. The world is waiting for you.

My New Book on Regulatory Capture, Now Available

→Japanese

Five years have passed since the March 11, 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and the unprecedented Fukushima nuclear power plant accident.

Three months before the earthquake and nuclear power plant disaster, the Arab Spring had begun in Tunisia.

The Arab Spring quickly spread to North Africa, the Middle East and now the region is experiencing a crisis that was unimaginable a few years ago, with a massive outpouring of refugees from North Africa and Syria to the EU.

In the midst of all of these major changes that have occurred throughout the world over the past five years, how has Japan changed?

With this question in mind, I focused on the lack of change in Japan in my new book on regulatory capture, through the lens of my experience as the Chairman of the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC) , the first independent investigation commission in Japanese constitutional democratic history.

It will be available in stores on March 10th and can be ordered on Amazon.

Today, I held a press conference at the National Press Club of Japan, where I introduced the book and spoke about these issues.

I would be honored if you would read it.

Visits to the UK in October and November – 1

→Japanese

Over these past two months, I have had the opportunity to be involved with the UK on several occasions.

At the beginning of October, I served as a panelist at a conference held by Chatham House and the Japan Foundation.

Chatham House is a world-renowned British think tank. I have visited and worked with them many times.

Last year, Chatham House launched a five-year seminar series in cooperation with the Japan Foundation. This year was the second conference, entitled, “The Role of the Nation State in Addressing Global Challenges: Japan-UK Perspectives.” I was invited to be a speaker on the “Fukushima” panel held on the second day. The panel chair was Sir David Warren, who was the British Ambassador to Japan at the time of the 3.11 earthquake and tsunami in 2011. I was also asked to write an essay for the conference and will introduce it here on my blog when it has been published.

In mid-October, I was in London, my last trip there having been in April. It was for the third meeting of the World Dementia Council (WDC) . Similar to the first meeting, it was held in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. I briefly touched upon documents provided by the Japanese government in preparation for the WDC Legacy Event Japan, which will be held in Japan in November. However, since I am not the representative of Japan, I focused on participating in the discussion as an independent board member.

Also in London, I had the chance to meet up with a few young people, whom I have worked with in the past.

After returning to Japan, I met with the Senior Partner of BLP, Mr Paisner, who has participated in the IBA Tokyo twice. He was well received at the GRIPS Forum, with a turnout of around 200 students and faculty members.

Before I knew it, it was the end of October and I welcomed Professor Peter Piot, the Director of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (this is only comprised of a graduate school) to give a lecture at the GHIT.

Thirty-eight years ago, he discovered Ebola in the Congo and was awarded the Hideyo Noguchi Africa Prize (it is the only award given by the Japanese government and I am the Chairperson of the prize committee). It was very busy, with over seventy organizations at the press conference, countless questions asked on Ebola and many other lectures to give.

In my spare time, I had the opportunity to meet with people from British companies in London and in Tokyo.

My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 8

→Japanese

I share with you the last section of my ‘Epilogue’ of the new book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organizations Fails’ by Mr. Sakon Uda, who served Project Manager of NAIIC.

Epilogue, ‘Obligation to Dissent’: What We Citizens Should Do Now
Kiyoshi Kurokawa, Chair of the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC)

8. Final Message

After the Great East Japan Earthquake and Fukushima nuclear power plant accident, many young people have taken the initiative to start more socially engaging work and projects, in particular through NPOs. They have chosen to actively participate in social work even after leaving university, without being tied down to the traditional employment structure. Overcoming many obstacles, they continue their work, driven by their strong motivation to make society a better place.

Some of the young members of NAIIC have also become involved in such activities. Tsuyoshi Shiina decided to build on his experience in NAIIC and ran in the general election, successfully becoming a member of the National Diet and is working hard despite facing many challenges. Yurina Aikawa is a young journalist who was only in her second year at the major national newspaper, the Yomiuri Shimbun, when left in order to join NAIIC. After the NAIIC report was submitted, she went on to further investigations into the situation of the disaster victims and published her findings in a book entitled, The Vulnerable Evacuees [Hinan-jyakusha, in Japanese] (Toyo Keizai Inc).

In order to make the enormous amount of research produced in the NAIIC report easier to understand to the public, some university students came together to establish “The Simplest Explanation of NAIIC” project. The project produced short animation videos of each chapter of the report, each approximately three minutes long. The videos are also available in English and the group is currently working to communicate the findings of the report to the global audience. The work of these young people has been organized and supported by Satoshi Ishibashi, who was the right arm of the Chief Administrator of NAIIC, Sakon Uda. Recently, there has also been interest among high school students in the project, who felt there was something they too could do by getting involved.

It is very encouraging to see the young generation, upon whose shoulders the future of Japan rests, taking such initiative in starting such activities. I hope that you will join me in supporting these young people and their impressive work.

References:
1. http://naiic.net/en/

→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 1
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 2
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 3
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 4
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 5
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 6 (1)
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 6 (2)
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 7
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 8

My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 7

→Japanese

I share with you the 7th section of my ‘Epilogue’ of the new book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organizations Fails’ by Mr. Sakon Uda, who served Project Manager of NAIIC.

Epilogue, ‘Obligation to Dissent’: What We Citizens Should Do Now
Kiyoshi Kurokawa, Chair of the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC)

7. Voting in elections is the right of each and every citizen

Regardless of one’s organizational membership or affiliation, one thing that each and every citizen must do is vote in elections. To vote is the right of every individual in a democracy and public administrative agencies conduct research on voter turnout (1). Consequently, if voter turnout is low, politicians will have little interest in the public and the government will not take voters seriously. Much of the public has little interest in electing members of both the national and regional parliaments, which constitute the branch of government that represents citizens. One issue that arises when voter turnout is low is that interest groups and lobbyists will have relatively more influence and the candidates they support are more likely to be elected. For this reason, ordinary citizens’ voices are less likely to be heard. Many people state that none of the candidates standing for election are representative of what they want. However, we must bear in mind that it takes time to make a democratic system work and that the democratic process only begins with citizens voting in elections. A working democratic system is not something that is given to a people but must be built by their own hands. It may be an overstatement but people who do not use their right to vote do not have a say in how society should work. Currently, low voter turnout among young people is a particularly pressing issue. The Japanese democratic system will function only if the younger generation participates in elections. It will take time but it is crucial to making the system work. The future of the younger generations is especially at stake. Through this process, we can expect candidates who are satisfactory to younger generations to gradually come about.

References:
1. http://www.soumu.go.jp/senkyo/senkyo_s/news/sonota/nendaibetu/index.html(Data from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, in Japanese)

→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 1
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 2
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 3
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 4
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 5
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 6 (1)
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 6 (2)
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 7
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 8

Panel at Tokyo University with Charles Casto

→Japanese

On October 9th, I was invited to speak on a panel entitled “Nuclear Energy; Post-3.11” at the Hongo campus of the University of Tokyo. The panel was moderated by Prof. Osamu Sakura of the University of Tokyo, with panelists, Kyle Cleveland of Temple University, Mr. Charles Casto, who is a long-time veteran in the field of nuclear power plant operation and regulation in the US, Mr. Tetsuro Fukuyama, who was the Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary at the time of the accident, Mr. Tatsujiro Suzuki, who represented Chair of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission during 3.11, and Mr. Yoichi Funabashi, the former editor-in-chief of the Asahi Shimbun and director of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident Private Independent Investigation Commission and myself.

The panelists had many opinions and we had a very engaging discussion. We had a large audience, including with NHK, National Broadcasting Station. When it came to the question and answer session, as it is often the case, many people gave their own views rather than asking questions. I had talked to the moderator, Prof. Sakura beforehand but perhaps this is the style of panel discussions in Japan.

Towards the end, we were joined by Mr. Hosono, who was a special advisor at the time of the accident (later Minister) and was the liaison between the US and Japanese governments and TEPCO.

I brought to the attention of the audience, the excellent 300 page report, “Crisis Management: A Qualitative Study of Extreme Event Leadership” by Mr. Casto, who wrote the report based on his experience during the Fukushima accident and now holds a PhD.

The panel discussion covered many topics but one of the major points was that “Japan was not in line with IAEA guidelines regarding the “defense in depth” standards for the evacuation of residents.” This is widely known by experts in Japan and around the world and it was pointed out that the necessary measures have yet to be put in place in many nuclear power plants in Japan.

What should be the next step? There is a tendency for many people to get bogged down by the details but I have focused on the fundamental issue. The National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC) not only covered the technical details of the accident but also the societal and structural issues in Japan, which served as the background to the Fukushima nuclear accident. Thus, I repeatedly explained that the accident was just the tip of the iceberg and that the fundamental problem lay in the governance structures in Japan, seen in the issues of regulatory capture and the separation of powers among the three branches of government.

The following day, I was delighted to receive an email from the simultaneous interpreter at the conference:

“Dear Mr. Kurokawa, thank you for the symposium yesterday. I am XX and did the interpreting at the symposium. What you said left a very strong impression on me as I was listening from my booth and it made me feel that there are many things we citizens must do as well. I would like to follow your work and look into these topics myself. I wish you all the best and would like to thank you again for yesterday.”

After I responded immediately, the interpreter wrote back:

“Thank you for your response. Since the symposium, I have been reading and listening to your work and I look forward hearing more from you in the future.”

It is wonderful that such exchanges can take place so easily via the internet.

Mr. Casto and I were on the same page about many things and the day before leaving Japan, he paid me a visit and we discussed many matters over a nice dinner together with some of my friends.

My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 6 (2)

→Japanese

I share with you the 6th section of my ‘Epilogue’ of the new book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organizations Fails’ by Mr. Sakon Uda, who served Project Manager of NAIIC.

Epilogue, ‘Obligation to Dissent’: What We Citizens Should Do Now
Kiyoshi Kurokawa, Chair of the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC)

6. What is accountability? (2)

Generally, in many Japanese organizations, the lack of a sense of responsibility at the individual level is a fundamental problem. The higher one’s position is in an organization, it should be that they not only have more authority, but also greater responsibility. However, when a problem arises, people in positions of power are often able to get away with “the responsibility to explain” and avoid taking individual responsibility. It is often the case that after a scandal, people in top positions apologize on national television and the problem is forgotten soon afterwards.

When an accident occurs and other countries are involved, determining the root of the responsibility causes major conflicts even if an agreement is reached in the end. In a globally connected world, there must be greater transparency in the authority and responsibility in Japanese organizations. The lack of transparency in the decision-making processes in Japanese organizations makes them bound to lose global trust.

Considering Japan’s presence in the world, as one of most known woman scholars Chie Nakane has stated, Japan is still quite sluggish from an international perspective. She further states that although Japan has overwhelming strengths as an economic and technological power, a Japanese leader who can express clear opinions with an international impact has yet to appear.

As a hint to solving this issue, this book by Mr Sakon Uda has argued for the importance of the obligation to dissent, and I encourage everyone to think deeply about what this entails. The obligation to dissent is extremely important in any organization. Jack Welch, the President and CEO of GE, has pointed this out as a significant element of corporate culture for successful companies (1). Rather than taking the passive attitude that nothing can be changed, it is critical to express one’s opinions regardless of one’s age and position in order to move a company in the right direction. Every member of an organization must do this and keep in mind that being critical will have positive effects on you, the organization and others. I would like to spread this awareness and encourage you to change your way of thinking by 180 degrees, through learning about the process of NAIIC and reading Mr. Uda’s book. The world is constantly moving and Japanese organizations are by no means immune to this ongoing change.

References:
1. Jack Welch and Suzy Welch, (2005). Winning. New York: Harper Business.

→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 1
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 2
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 3
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 4
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 5
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 6 (1)
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 6 (2)
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 7
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 8

My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 6 (1)

→Japanese

I share with you the 6th section of my ‘Epilogue’ of the new book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organizations Fails’ by Mr. Sakon Uda, who served Project Manager of NAIIC.

Epilogue, ‘Obligation to Dissent’: What We Citizens Should Do Now
Kiyoshi Kurokawa, Chair of the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC)

6. What is accountability? (1)

Many major corporations and governmental offices in Japan tend to firmly maintain order based on the rigid vertical relations between organizations and individuals, which is considered common sense in Japan. Even if this results in illogical or unfair situations at times, most people continue to follow these rules out of the belief that their companies will last forever and they must hold onto their jobs no matter what.

After Japan was defeated in World War II (WWII), the nation regained its confidence due to high economic growth in the Cold-War period but this gradually hardened into arrogance. The Iron Triangle of government, industry and bureaucracy, as well as academia and media formed the pillars of a structure of irresponsibility. This was built upon the myth of the infallibility of the bureaucracy, which was the same framework during WWⅡ.

In such a society, those at the top in positions of power and responsibility often act as if the issues they must face are someone else’s problems. Shirking their responsibilities, they refrain from speaking up as they should. They hold the misguided belief that there is nothing they can do about these issues. This mindset formed the background to the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident.

This book by Mr. Uda sharply points out that each individual who belongs to an organization must think about and deal with this problem. It would be a good reference book for people who work in large organizations, such as major companies and bureaucracies to reflect upon.

During these past twenty years, the word “accountability” has been used frequently. For some reason, in Japanese the term is translated as the “responsibility to explain,” which is a phrase that does not express the same level of seriousness. It is an example of the meaning being ‘lost in translation’ when translated from a foreign word into Japanese. In English, the meaning of “accountability” is stronger than mere responsibility, going one step further to indicate the act of carrying out the responsibility of the position. James C. Collins also touches upon this in How the Mighty Fall (1). This is a point that I have brought up numerously during the NAIIC press conferences. I have often inquired just how those in power in Japanese society plan to take responsibility when they fail to carry out the work they were appointed to do.

Kiyoshi Yamamoto has written an academic book on accountability, entitled Thinking About Accountability- Why it Became “Responsibility to Explain”(in Japanese, published in February 2013) (2). Issues in Japanese society, such as the Fukushima nuclear accident, the Olympus scandal, and bullying in Japanese schools prompted Mr. Yamamoto to write this book. He points out that the decision of the National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics (NINJAL) to translate accountability to “the responsibility to explain” had a large impact.

In the first chapter of this book, he draws attention to the high value placed on accountability in the governance in the US. He points out that this is signified by the renaming of the General Accounting Office (GAO), which is under the authority of Congress, to the Government Accountability Office in 2004. In chapter two, he reviews the reasons why accountability was translated in Japan to mean “the responsibility to explain.” In the eighth chapter, he goes on to examine accountability in Japanese society, taking into consideration the particular elements of the social fabric. Here, similar to Professor Chie Nakane, he discusses the vagueness of the role of responsibility within Japanese social and power structures. Furthermore, he argues that the disciplinary aspect of the word accountability is rarely used in the responsibility to explain. In the Chinese language, which does not have katakana characters and only uses kanji, accountability is translated as literally, “questioning responsibility.” He argues that the Fukushima nuclear accident and WWII were typical cases in Japan, in which responsibility was vague and never pursued. He cites Masahiro Shinoda and also looks at the relationship between public media and politics, for example, highlighting the differences between NHK and the BBC.

–To be continued.

References:
1. Jim Collins, (2009). How the Mighty Fall: And Why Some Companies Never Give In. New York: Harper Collins. [Translated into Japanese by Yoichi Yamaoka (2010)].
2. Kiyoshi Yamamoto, (2013). Thinking About Accountability- Why it Became “Responsibility to Explain” [In Japanese]. NTT Publishing.

→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 1
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 2
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 3
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 4
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 5
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 6 (1)
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 6 (2)
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 7
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 8

My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 5

→Japanese

I share with you the 5th section of my ‘Epilogue’ of the new book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organizations Fails’ by Mr. Sakon Uda, who served Project Manager of NAIIC.

Epilogue, ‘Obligation to Dissent’: What We Citizens Should Do Now
Kiyoshi Kurokawa, Chair of the National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC)

5. The Problem of the Groupthink Mindset

The “groupthink mindset” (Footnote 1) that this book examines is a deep-rooted problem. “Groupthink” is a challenge observed in many countries around the world but it is especially prominent in Japan. For example, when many Japanese people leave university and start working in a company, they believe that they will continue to belong to that organization. In the case of the central government ministries and agencies, if they enter the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, or Ministry of Education, they believe they will stay there or somewhere related for a lifetime. If they start working at TEPCO, they believe they will start and finish their career within TEPCO. The same goes for banks, trading companies and other big corporations. This is simply common sense in Japan.

For this reason, when people introduce themselves, they first say, “I belong to XX Bank,” “XX Ministry,” “XX Prefectural government,” “XX Electric Company,” without anyone blinking an eye. However, it is not the same overseas. Instead of saying, “I belong to XX Bank,” most people abroad would say, “I am a banker,” and the conversation would then go to “What kind of banking?” and “Where do you work now?”.

In Japan, rather than a particular field or sector of work, they define themselves by the organization or company they belong to. A person’s social status depends on the status of the organization and the position within it.

This mindset is perpetuated by elements of the surrounding culture and manifests itself in everyday language. For example, there are many different words that can be used in the Japanese language to mean “I” and “you.” It is important to select the appropriate word for the situation, which signifies the relationship between the two people. In the case of the written word for the masculine form of “I,” different nuances are evoked depending on whether the kanji, hiragana or katakana form is used. Many words are also gendered and used differently by men and women. Furthermore, whether a statement is affirmative or negative is indicated at the end of the sentence (the speaker’s opinion, “I think” or “I do not think” comes at the end of the sentence). Using this sentence structure, it is possible for the speaker to watch the reactions of the person listening and adjust what one says according to the flow of the conversation. Many language experts have pointed out this tendency.

Many books have been written on this subject, such as Chie Nakane’s Japanese Vertically Structured Society (1967) (Footnote 2). This provides the background for understanding the mindset of many Japanese.

The Dynamics of Vertical Society (1978), which was written after Japanese Society, was recently republished as a paperback in 2009. In the afterword, Chie Nakane states, “My reflection upon rereading my humble work after thirty years is that I do not see the purpose of changing or editing what I have written, as this was a book analyzing collective behavior and presenting logical assertions rather than just a description of Japanese society.”

Regarding the effects of the trend of globalization occurring across the world, Nakane states, “Rather than changing the Japanese societal structure per se, I see various areas where a rip occurs and the ventilation has gotten a little better. I welcome this trend and it is likely that more people will be able to assert their own agency. The social structures of groupism existing in Japan have often worked to hold back individual assertiveness. Such structures can be considered to be not only one of the features found in Japan but also the reason why Japan is not adequately living up to the role of a global player on the world stage.”

References:
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink (I felt the Japanese Wikipedia page’s explanation of groupthink fell short and opted to cite the English Wikipedia page instead)
2. Nakane, C. (1967). Japanese Vertically Structured Society (Tate -shakai -no -kozo. Kodansha.
3. Nakane, C. (1978). Dynamics of Vertical Society (Tate -shakai -no -rikigaku), Kodansha.

→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 1
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 2
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 3
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 4
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 5
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 6 (1)
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 6 (2)
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 7
→ My ‘Epilogue’ of Mr Uda’s Book ‘Obligation to Dissent: Why Organization Fails’ – 8