Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Susanne Brucksch
(Teikyo University)
Florentine Koppenborg (FU Berlin)
Tine Walravens (Copenhagen Business School)
Send message to Convenors
- Stream:
- Anthropology and Sociology
- Location:
- Bloco 1, Piso 1, Sala 1.10
- Sessions:
- Friday 1 September, -
Time zone: Europe/Lisbon
Short Abstract:
The panel elaborates how the concept of safety is negotiated among various societal actors referring to the distinction of science-based vs. value-based risk perception, and which efforts authorities conduct to reestablish public trust in the field of food safety, public health and energy security.
Long Abstract:
In modern societies like Japan, the organisation of daily life with a growing urban population relies in manifold ways on complex infrastructures and production systems. Based on highly specialised societal sub-systems, these infrastructures require well-structured regulation and management. More precisely, this inevitably resulted in an environment where power, agency and control is distributed among various authorities with varying scientific expertise in order to balance values, trust and legitimacy within democratic societies. One feature related to these three dimensions is safety referring to the human right of bodily integrity, which can be found in realms such as food systems, public health or protection against nuclear radiation.
Inspired by the US idea of "safety first", the concept has been actively promoted in Japan through the anzen dai-ichi movement since 1915 for enhancing workplace and traffic security (Horiguchi 2011). Over decades, the term anzen - referring more to the avoidance of objective and calculable risk - became coupled with the term anshin - reassurance from subjective risks. Calling Japan a mainly anshin society in risk perception, Kamisato (2016) points to a great deal of people seeking reassurance from governmental authorities. This tendency can be observed to a certain extent in public health and food safety as well. However, public trust in security standards eroded after several scandals such as BSE and medical errors but, particularly, after the Fukushima accident. Against this backdrop, the three panel contributions tackle the question how the concept of safety is negotiated and redefined among various societal actors referring to the distinction of science-based versus value-based perception of risks. Moreover, the papers elaborate on which efforts the authorities conduct to re-establish safety standards and public confidence in the field of food safety, public health and energy security.
At first, Walravens draws attention to Japan's institutional efforts after food-related incidents by presenting findings from a qualitative content analysis. Afterwards, Koppenborg elaborates on the ongoing struggle over defining nuclear safety after the Fukushima accident. Hereafter, Brucksch reflects the overwhelming safety focus in device approval of PMDA that has difficulties in balancing patient needs, medical risks and public expectation.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Friday 1 September, 2017, -Tine Walravens (Copenhagen Business School)
Paper short abstract:
This presentation explores how regulatory authorities in Japan aim to re-establish trust in their food safety monitoring after selected food incidents since the BSE crisis in 2001 It is argued that the coupled term anzen-anshin is applied as both a political construct and an anxiety-reducing tool.
Paper long abstract:
The discovery of the first 'mad cow' case in Japan in 2001 deeply eroded public trust in the regulatory framework to ensure food safety. Safety-related crises such as the BSE incident are considered an inherent element to the food system and as endogenous episodic phenomena, they trigger immediate regulatory responses (Kjaernes, Harvey, Warde 2007). Indeed, far-reaching institutional changes followed, along with promotional and educational campaigns as the government set out to regain consumer confidence (MAFF 2001). Starting from the BSE crisis in 2001, this presentation explores in which way post-incident efforts have been conducted by the regulatory authorities in Japan, in order to re-establish trust in their food safety monitoring. The paper draws on a qualitative content analysis of representative governmental data on food-related incidents and their regulatory aftermath. The cases explored are the BSE crisis in 2001-2003 and the frozen gyoza contaminations of 2008.
As suggested by Yamaguchi (2014) and Sternsdorff-Cisterna (2015), the Japanese coupled term of anzen-anshin is applied as an analytical tool to analyse the role of science as opposed to affective values and other factors within the trust-building efforts. Accordingly, I argue that the anzen-anshin rhetoric is a useful political construct justifying institutional decisions on the one hand and an anxiety-reducing tool on the other, convincing the public of the safety of the food supply and the regulatory framework while leaving the actual risk open for interpretation.
Furthermore, referring to four dimensions of trust in regulatory authorities - (1) openness and honesty, (2) care and concern, (3) competence and (4) consensual values- , this paper tests whether trust-building efforts by the government after the selected food incidents are still mainly decided by the factors openness and competence, as suggested in a study by Maeda and Miyahara in 1998 (2003).
Florentine Koppenborg (FU Berlin)
Paper short abstract:
This paper sheds light on efforts to improve nuclear safety in the aftermath of the Fukushima nuclear accident. It argues that a struggle emerged over defining nuclear safety driven in large parts by citizen groups filing lawsuits against reactor restarts on the grounds of safety concerns.
Paper long abstract:
The Fukushima accident eroded trust in the safety of nuclear power plants and prompted anti-nuclear protests. In response, government bodies in charge of nuclear safety measures were reformed resulting in the establishment of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA, Genshiryoku kisei iinkai) in 2012. The NRA pledged to implement strict measures based on latest scientific findings to protect people's lifes and the environment and to reassure citizens' confidence (NRA 2012). Challenging NRA decisions on reactor safety is possible through the legal system and various citizen groups have already filed lawsuits. With courts as the only bodies with the authority to override NRA decisions, the outcome of these lawsuits has strong implications regarding the future of nuclear power in Japan. These lawsuits raise the question how safety is defined among various actors and whether appropriate measures are implemented meeting which bottom-lines. More precisely, the paper illuminates the ongoing struggle over defining nuclear safety among politicians, bureaucrats, scientists and citizens' groups by focusing on the Abe administration, NRA and judges in the different rulings on injunctions against reactor restarts sought on the premise of safety concerns. It argues that considerable tensions are visible between the government's desire to provide reassurance (anshin), the NRA's science-based approach to safety (anzen) and court rulings which diverge on whether the efforts undertaken are sufficient. The findings presented are the result of a three-year research project on nuclear safety governance reform in the wake of the Fukushima accident.
Susanne Brucksch (Teikyo University)
Paper short abstract:
The paper elaborates how safety is understood and established in processes of medical device approval in Japan. It argues that the value-based concept of anshin (reassurance) beside the science-based one of anzen (avoidance of danger) resulting in difficulties to balance safety and bearable risks.
Paper long abstract:
The Japanese government underlines medical technologies as one focus area to achieve a "healthy and active ageing society as a top-runner in the world" (Innovation 25, Comprehensive STI Strategy). Basically, medical instruments can be used to manipulate the human body, ranging from general devices with extremely low risk to such ones highly invasive to patients. This leads to the question how safety is understood and established in processes of medical device approval in Japan. Over the past years, the scholarship in and outside Japan regularly pointed to the so-called "device lag", which allegedly was caused by a dominating focus on safety at the cost of those patients in urgent need for enhanced treatments. Several authors levelled criticism that this circumstance did not only inhibit innovation but also access to cutting-edge technology, referring to the patient right argument. In 2014, the legislation changed in Japan and approval processes were re-organised by establishing the PMDA (Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Agency). However, voices remain that the PMDA is still facing high public expectation of safety standards defined as "the absence of risks" whereas, in the EU and US, the concept of safety as "avoidance of non-acceptable risks" is more common (Kishimoto 2016). Thus, I argue in this paper that beside the science-based perception (anzen) the value-based concept of anshin (reassurance) develops wide influence causing politicians to put further reforms on a hold. More precisely, PMDA officials seem to continuously have difficulties in balancing safety and bearable risks due to the political nature of discussing safety in medical contexts in Japan. To analyse the ambivalent perception of safety in this context, this paper draws on preliminary results from an interview study conducted in 2016 in Japan.