Premium
Disowning F ukushima: Managing the credibility of nuclear reliability assessment in the wake of disaster
Author(s) -
Downer John
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
regulation and governance
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.417
H-Index - 45
eISSN - 1748-5991
pISSN - 1748-5983
DOI - 10.1111/rego.12029
Subject(s) - credibility , nuclear power , credence , political science , narrative , reliability (semiconductor) , nuclear disaster , power (physics) , nuclear power plant , law , computer science , ecology , linguistics , philosophy , physics , quantum mechanics , machine learning , biology , nuclear physics
This paper reflects on the credibility of nuclear risk assessment in the wake of the 2011 F ukushima meltdowns. In democratic states, policymaking around nuclear energy has long been premised on an understanding that experts can objectively and accurately calculate the probability of catastrophic accidents. Yet the F ukushima disaster lends credence to the substantial body of social science research that suggests such calculations are fundamentally unworkable. Nevertheless, the credibility of these assessments appears to have survived the disaster, just as it has resisted the evidence of previous nuclear accidents. This paper looks at why. It argues that public narratives of the F ukushima disaster invariably frame it in ways that allow risk‐assessment experts to “disown” it. It concludes that although these narratives are both rhetorically compelling and highly consequential to the governance of nuclear power, they are not entirely credible.