IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v67y2021ics0160791x21002104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative analysis of decision making regarding nuclear policy after the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident: Case study in Germany and Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Nam, Hoseok
  • Konishi, Satoshi
  • Nam, Ki-Woo

Abstract

We undertake a comparative analysis of the decision-making steps involved in the nuclear policies in Germany and Japan after the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident in 2011. We consider five factors to understand these vastly different decisions on nuclear policy. We found that the accident occurred during an election period in Germany, resulting in changes in the stances of the ruling party, whereas the political stability of the ruling party was not highly challenged in Japan. Economic and technical factors indicate that the cost of generating electricity as renewable energy in Germany has been reduced enough to replace nuclear energy. An interconnected grid, as a geopolitical factor, helps to import electricity into Germany, the net electricity exporter, in case of a shortage. Given that the economic, technical, and geopolitical factors do not apply to Japan, Japan should restart its nuclear power plants, unless the political stability of the ruling party is jeopardized by the public through the electoral system. From the comparison, we derive general lessons: (1) a social factor affects the political factor when it jeopardizes the ruling party; (2) mature renewable technologies with economic competitiveness in a country can replace nuclear power; (3) the geopolitical situation may affect the nuclear policy, but not as a critical factor.

Suggested Citation

  • Nam, Hoseok & Konishi, Satoshi & Nam, Ki-Woo, 2021. "Comparative analysis of decision making regarding nuclear policy after the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident: Case study in Germany and Japan," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:67:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x21002104
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101735
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X21002104
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101735?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Furlan, Claudia & Guidolin, Mariangela & Guseo, Renato, 2016. "Has the Fukushima accident influenced short-term consumption in the evolution of nuclear energy? An analysis of the world and seven leading countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 37-49.
    2. Gozgor, Giray & Lau, Chi Keung Marco & Lu, Zhou, 2018. "Energy consumption and economic growth: New evidence from the OECD countries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 27-34.
    3. Huenteler, Joern & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Kanie, Norichika, 2012. "Japan's post-Fukushima challenge – implications from the German experience on renewable energy policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 6-11.
    4. Poortinga, Wouter & Aoyagi, Midori & Pidgeon, Nick F., 2013. "Public perceptions of climate change and energy futures before and after the Fukushima accident: A comparison between Britain and Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1204-1211.
    5. Rehner, Robert & McCauley, Darren, 2016. "Security, justice and the energy crossroads: Assessing the implications of the nuclear phase-out in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 289-298.
    6. Adams, James & Clark, Michael & Ezrow, Lawrence & Glasgow, Garrett, 2004. "Understanding Change and Stability in Party Ideologies: Do Parties Respond to Public Opinion or to Past Election Results?," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(4), pages 589-610, October.
    7. Ahearne, John F., 2011. "Prospects for nuclear energy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 572-580, July.
    8. Sanne, Johan M., 2012. "Learning from adverse events in the nuclear power industry: Organizational learning, policy making and normalization," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 239-250.
    9. Guidolin, Mariangela & Guseo, Renato, 2016. "The German energy transition: Modeling competition and substitution between nuclear power and Renewable Energy Technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1498-1504.
    10. Kosai, Shoki & Yamasue, Eiji, 2019. "Recommendation to ASEAN nuclear development based on lessons learnt from the Fukushima nuclear accident," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 628-635.
    11. Ratinen, Mari & Lund, Peter D., 2014. "Growth strategies of incumbent utilities as contextually embedded: Examples from Denmark, Germany, Finland and Spain," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 81-92.
    12. Thomas, Steve, 2012. "What will the Fukushima disaster change?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 12-17.
    13. Ando, Michihito, 2015. "Dreams of urbanization: Quantitative case studies on the local impacts of nuclear power facilities using the synthetic control method," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 68-85.
    14. Baruch, Jordan J., 2008. "Combating global warming while enhancing the future," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 111-121.
    15. Kuo, Po-Yao, 2015. "The impacts of energy trends and policies on Taiwan's power generation systems," AGI Working Paper Series 2015-10, Asian Growth Research Institute.
    16. Bruninx, Kenneth & Madzharov, Darin & Delarue, Erik & D'haeseleer, William, 2013. "Impact of the German nuclear phase-out on Europe's electricity generation—A comprehensive study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 251-261.
    17. Ebrahimi Sarcheshmeh, Elaheh & Bijani, Masoud & Sadighi, Hassan, 2018. "Adoption behavior towards the use of nuclear technology in agriculture: A causal analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 175-182.
    18. Scott, James A. & Ho, William & Dey, Prasanta K., 2012. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for bioenergy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 146-156.
    19. Okyay U an & Ebru Ar c o lu & Fatih Y cel, 2014. "Energy Consumption and Economic Growth Nexus: Evidence from Developed Countries in Europe," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 4(3), pages 411-419.
    20. Irandoust, Manuchehr, 2018. "Innovations and renewables in the Nordic countries: A panel causality approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 87-92.
    21. Kharecha, Pushker A. & Sato, Makiko, 2019. "Implications of energy and CO2 emission changes in Japan and Germany after the Fukushima accident," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 647-653.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Phil Johnstone & Andy Stirling, 2015. "Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories inGermany And the UK: From ‘Regimes’ to ‘Democracies’ in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-18, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    2. Kalkbrenner, Bernhard J. & Yonezawa, Koichi & Roosen, Jutta, 2017. "Consumer preferences for electricity tariffs: Does proximity matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 413-424.
    3. Vladimir M. Cvetković & Adem Öcal & Yuliya Lyamzina & Eric K. Noji & Neda Nikolić & Goran Milošević, 2021. "Nuclear Power Risk Perception in Serbia: Fear of Exposure to Radiation vs. Social Benefits," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    4. Ozcan, Mustafa, 2019. "Factors influencing the electricity generation preferences of Turkish citizens: Citizens' attitudes and policy recommendations in the context of climate change and environmental impact," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 381-393.
    5. Bjoern Hagen & Adenike Opejin & K. David Pijawka, 2022. "Risk Perceptions and Amplification Effects over Time: Evaluating Fukushima Longitudinal Surveys," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-18, June.
    6. Jan Goebel & Christian Krekel & Tim Tiefenbach & Nicolas Ziebarth, 2015. "How natural disasters can affect environmental concerns, risk aversion, and even politics: evidence from Fukushima and three European countries," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 28(4), pages 1137-1180, October.
    7. Ozan Korkmaz & Bihrat Önöz, 2022. "Modelling the Potential Impacts of Nuclear Energy and Renewables in the Turkish Energy System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-25, February.
    8. Bessi, Alessandro & Guidolin, Mariangela & Manfredi, Piero, 2021. "The role of gas on future perspectives of renewable energy diffusion: Bridging technology or lock-in?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    9. Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna, 2014. "Measuring the impact of nuclear accidents on energy policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 121-129.
    10. Furlan, Claudia & Mortarino, Cinzia, 2018. "Forecasting the impact of renewable energies in competition with non-renewable sources," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 1879-1886.
    11. Sun, Chuanwang & Zhu, Xiting & Meng, Xiaochun, 2016. "Post-Fukushima public acceptance on resuming the nuclear power program in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 685-694.
    12. Bunea, Anita M. & Della Posta, Pompeo & Guidolin, Mariangela & Manfredi, Piero, 2020. "What do adoption patterns of solar panels observed so far tell about governments’ incentive? Insights from diffusion models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    13. Nam, Hoseok, 2020. "Impact of nuclear phase-out policy and energy balance in 2029 based on the 8th Basic Plan for long-term electricity supply and demand in South Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    14. Uji, Azusa & Prakash, Aseem & Song, Jaehyun, 2021. "Does the “NIMBY syndrome” undermine public support for nuclear power in Japan?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(PA).
    15. Furlan, Claudia & Guidolin, Mariangela & Guseo, Renato, 2016. "Has the Fukushima accident influenced short-term consumption in the evolution of nuclear energy? An analysis of the world and seven leading countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 37-49.
    16. Hayashi, Masatsugu & Hughes, Larry, 2013. "The policy responses to the Fukushima nuclear accident and their effect on Japanese energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 86-101.
    17. McCauley, Darren & Brown, Antje & Rehner, Robert & Heffron, Raphael & van de Graaff, Shashi, 2018. "Energy justice and policy change: An historical political analysis of the German nuclear phase-out," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 317-323.
    18. Papież, Monika & Śmiech, Sławomir & Frodyma, Katarzyna, 2019. "Effects of renewable energy sector development on electricity consumption – Growth nexus in the European Union," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-1.
    19. repec:ags:aaea22:335434 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Villanthenkodath, Muhammed Ashiq & Mahalik, Mantu Kumar, 2021. "Does economic growth respond to electricity consumption asymmetrically in Bangladesh? The implication for environmental sustainability," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    21. Bruno Ferman & Cristine Pinto & Vitor Possebom, 2020. "Cherry Picking with Synthetic Controls," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 510-532, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:67:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x21002104. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.