IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jenvss/v5y2015i3p404-417.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From Chernobyl to Fukushima: an interdisciplinary framework for managing and communicating food security risks after nuclear plant accidents

Author

Abstract

This comparison of government disaster management and public communications after the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear accidents seeks to create a framework for disaster management that enhances food resilience (the ability of food systems to withstand perturbations that could cause disruption of food supply); and in the specific case of nuclear disasters, the avoidance of contaminated food and provision of alternative foods. This paper integrates food security, emergency management, and risk communications perspectives. Misinformation and incomplete information can bias decision-making and political actions. When risk communication is inadequate, the public reacts with fear, mistrust, panic and stress. People have difficulty deciding what they can safely eat and what they should not eat. Many choose to reject all food from affected regions, which can compromise food security. Lack of proper information may lead to such extremes in behavior as avoidance of dairy products and consumption of untested foods, which may in fact have high levels of radioactivity. The measures taken by the USSR after the Chernobyl disaster lacked consistency and clarity and were not effective in providing food security for the affected people. The government also demonstrated a lack of attention to social justice in its dealings with people who moved back to the contaminated area, ignoring government policy that they should stay out. Those people still suffer from food insecurity. In Japan, food that met government safety levels was available, but many consumers nonetheless questioned the safety of food supplies and farmers often were confused about production and marketing. In both the Chernobyl and Fukushima cases, the evacuation of affected people was aimed at reducing exposure to radiation and did not sufficiently consider neither the psychological and physical health impacts of resettlement nor the security and safety of food supplies. Government responses would have been more effective in some regions if a timely distribution program of adequate, safe alternative foods (especially radioprotectors) from non-affected areas had been initiated. Copyright AESS 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Belyakov, 2015. "From Chernobyl to Fukushima: an interdisciplinary framework for managing and communicating food security risks after nuclear plant accidents," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(3), pages 404-417, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jenvss:v:5:y:2015:i:3:p:404-417
    DOI: 10.1007/s13412-015-0284-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s13412-015-0284-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13412-015-0284-2?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. Pablo Figueroa, 2013. "Risk communication surrounding the Fukushima nuclear disaster: an anthropological approach," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 53-64, March.
    2. Bachev, Hrabrin & Ito, Fusao, 2013. "Fukushima nuclear disaster – implications for Japanese agriculture and food chains," MPRA Paper 49462, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bachev, Hrabrin, 2019. "Assessments of preparedness, agri-food impacts and implications for disaster risk management of Fukushima nuclear disaster," MPRA Paper 96917, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Goncharuk, A. G., 2019. "Alternative View on Wine Value and Its Measurement," Journal of Applied Management and Investments, Department of Business Administration and Corporate Security, International Humanitarian University, vol. 8(2), pages 88-106, May.
    3. Gülbanu Kaptan & Arnout R.H. Fischer & Lynn J. Frewer, 2018. "Extrapolating understanding of food risk perceptions to emerging food safety cases," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(8), pages 996-1018, August.
    4. Gerald Marten & Nurcan Atalan-Helicke, 2015. "Introduction to the Symposium on American Food Resilience (Part 2)," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(4), pages 537-542, December.
    5. Bachev, Hrabrin & Ito, Fusao, 2017. "Agricultural impacts of the Great East Japan Earthquake - six years later," MPRA Paper 79469, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Hrabrin Bachev & Fusao Ito, 2016. "Socio-economic impacts of the march 2011 earthquake, tsunami and nuclear accident on agri-food chains in Japan," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 3, pages 42-66,67-90.
    7. Rebekah Paci-Green & Gigi Berardi, 2015. "Do global food systems have an Achilles heel? The potential for regional food systems to support resilience in regional disasters," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(4), pages 685-698, December.
    8. Bachev, Hrabrin, 2015. "Изследване На Социално-Икономическите Ефекти На Земетресението, Цунамито И Ядрената Авария Във Фукушима През Март 2011 Година Върху Агро-Хранителните Вериги В Япония [A study on socio-economic impa," MPRA Paper 69426, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Daisuke Nakanishi & Kunihiro Yokota & Junichi Igawa, 2023. "Can scientific literacy reduce purchase avoidance of Fukushima products?," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 242-250, June.
    10. Hanna Valerie Wolf & Tanja Perko & Peter Thijssen, 2020. "How to Communicate Food Safety after Radiological Contamination: The Effectiveness of Numerical and Narrative News Messages," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-19, June.

    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. Bachev, Hrabrin & Ito, Fusao, 2017. "Agricultural impacts of the Great East Japan Earthquake - six years later," MPRA Paper 79469, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Bachev, Hrabrin, 2015. "Expert assessment on agri-food implications of March 2011 earthquake, tsunami and Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan," MPRA Paper 61607, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Hrabrin BACHEV, 2014. "Socio Economic And Environmental Impacts Of Match 2011 Earthquake Tsunami And Fukushima Nuclear Accident In Japan," Journal of Advanced Research in Management, ASERS Publishing, vol. 5(2), pages 127-222.
    4. Bachev, Hrabrin, 2015. "March 2011 earthquake, tsunami and Fukushima nuclear accident impacts on Japanese agri-food sector," MPRA Paper 61499, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Azim, Syeda Saadia & roy, arindam & Aich, Amitava & Dey, Dipayan, 2020. "Fake news in the time of environmental disaster: Preparing framework for COVID-19," SocArXiv wdr5v, Center for Open Science.
    6. Gralla, Fabienne & Abson, David J. & Møller, Anders P. & Lang, Daniel J. & von Wehrden, Henrik, 2017. "Energy transitions and national development indicators: A global review of nuclear energy production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1251-1265.
    7. Puppim de Oliveira, Jose A. & Fra.Paleo, Urbano, 2016. "Lost in participation: How local knowledge was overlooked in land use planning and risk governance in Tōhoku, Japan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 543-551.

    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:spr:jenvss:v:5:y:2015:i:3:p:404-417. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.