The 6th Citizen-Scientist International Symposium on Radiation Protection

Why have people in Fukushima felt anxiety
and distrust?
NPO H Risk C-Cube
Tomoko Tsuchiya        

My Opinions• Failures in crisis communication are sources of anxiety

and distrust of people in Fukushima• The reason why people have felt anxiety is lack of credibleorganization and less information that people want to know
• The most important thing is to regain trust and credibility forgovernment and scientists• To complete mental and social well-being, governmentand scientists have to guarantee freedom and rights ofpeople, especially both rights to know and to decideconcerning his/her risks• We have to really listen the public and to collaborate withthem to solve many and difficult problems

Purpose of Crisis Communication• To save people• To help people protect themselves (to help people regainsome sense of control)• To minimize those things that confuse or disturb people’slife
In the case of the Fukushima NPP accident• Late information concerning radioactivecontamination• Insufficient examination of radiation exposure doses• Activities imposed expert’s judgements on thevictims

Monitoring data of contamination were notused to protect the public• Monitoring of radioactive contamination began on the evening ofMarch 11, 2011. On March 15 the data showing the expansion ofcontamination to the north-west area was reported to MEXT
• Max. 330μSv/h at 20km north-west of Fukushima daiichi NPP• MEXT informed media without supplying the information of the monitoringpoint• MEXT provided this information on its website, but did not let to know thelocal government having the monitoring point in their territory• Nuclear Safety Commission was doubtful of the data and ordered tomeasure the radiation level again• This area was left as zones for sheltering indoors until April 22,

when the Japanese government ordered evacuation of the public
within 1 month (over 90% of residents left their home by the last
third of June, 2011Only 1080 children surveyed• After 2 weeks from the accident, radiation specialists examinedwith survey-meters 1080 children who were under 15 years oldand who lived in Iidate, Kawamata, and Iwaki where heavy
radioactive contamination were thought probable.
• NSC estimated there were no children whose thyroid exposure
doses were over 50mSv.
• Thyroid examination began in October, 2011, for young

population under 18 years old of about 380,000.
• Over 100 cases of thyroid cancer have so far been reported• The control group consists of about 4,300 young people(excluding infants under 3 years old) living outside Fukushima
pref.
“They finally showed me the result of the whole body counter saying‘There’s no problem’, but it was several months after the accident,”
complain many parents.

Failure in Risk Communication• What they called “risk communication” to reduce anxiety about radiation

was carried out• It mainly provided basic knowledge of radiation and explained that the risk of theradiation was low• It often compared the risk of radiation with that of diagnostic radiation exposure, orthat of not eating enough vegetables• Few efforts were directed to understand victims’ anxiety and to help the public control
their risk by themselves• Experts of communication were absent from the “risk communication"

Experts of communication• know it is impossible to change people’s risk perception• understand it is necessary to provide the information people want
• think it important to elaborate measures with people based on their lifestyle and value

After experiencing several failures, we have tried to improve risk
communication activities. But we have to start our efforts to recover trust frompeople.

Measuring radioactivity with residents• Change of victim’s mind
Local people say :• Radioactive contamination was lower than I expected• I could confirm our perception by measuring results• We trust your data, while data published by national or prefectural

government is doubtful• I wanted you to know our situation where we cannot return home
• We want to measure the same points again, so that we can compare
how the radiation levels changed• We want to recover our life
• I don’t want to return home yet, but I want to keep my “hope to return”
Understandeach other• Lessons learnt by supporters• The diffused “average” data make people doubtful, because they are
different from their own data
• There are many and complicated reasons for why people do not want
to return to their home towns• It is important to acquire together “necessary” scientific data that “makesense” to the victims

For the future

Right to know & Right to decide by oneself
concerning one’s own risks• Diversity of policies• People want policies supporting them not only “to return to their home town”,
but also “to regain their own life”• People worry about the situation at Fukushima daiichi NPP. But TEPCO has
not provided evacuees sufficient information about what is going on in the NPP• Care to parents• Explanation about thyroid examination result is insufficient, especially in such acase where nothing irregular was found in the first expamination, butsomething was found in the second one• For the parents to be able to make choices with no regret for their children,
careful and scrupulous informed consent is indispensable• Consultation to recover community• Present “return home” policy decided and promoted by local governments→ decision by each resident• Community-based consultation is necessary to complement physical, mental
and social well-being