IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v129y2019icp628-635.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recommendation to ASEAN nuclear development based on lessons learnt from the Fukushima nuclear accident

Author

Listed:
  • Kosai, Shoki
  • Yamasue, Eiji

Abstract

The disastrous circumstances in the aftermath of a massive event like Fukushima nuclear accident is not unique to Japan. The more exertion to prevent the next Fukushima nuclear accident is required not to reiterate the similar failure. The countries where nuclear power is potentially introduced in future need to study the lessons learnt from the Fukushima nuclear accident, which would help to highlight the critical point for the future nuclear operation. However, the scholarly application of the lessons from the Fukushima nuclear accident to such countries, in particular ASEAN Member States (AMS), has yet to be fully discussed. As such, this study first conducts the diachronic analysis of various energy and nuclear policies in Japan before and after the Fukushima nuclear accident and then identifies the three major lessons and challenges, that is; nuclear regulatory institutional reform, development of stringent regulation and public engagement in policy making. Finally, the current nuclear situation in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippine and Thailand in ASEAN is analyzed to extract the critical aspect of nuclear installation in AMS and to provide strategic implications on the basis of the identified lessons learnt from the Fukushima nuclear accident.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:129:y:2019:i:c:p:628-635
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2019.02.058
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142151930148X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.02.058?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. Sun, Chuanwang & Zhu, Xiting, 2014. "Evaluating the public perceptions of nuclear power in China: Evidence from a contingent valuation survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 397-405.
    2. Seoyong Kim & Sunhee Kim, 2017. "Impact of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident on Belief in Rumors: The Role of Risk Perception and Communication," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-21, November.
    3. Pongsoi, Parinya & Wongwises, Somchai, 2013. "A review on nuclear power plant scenario in Thailand," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 586-592.
    4. He, Guizhen & Mol, Arthur P.J. & Zhang, Lei & Lu, Yonglong, 2013. "Public participation and trust in nuclear power development in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 1-11.
    5. Zhu, Hongjia & Deng, Yongheng & Zhu, Rong & He, Xiaobo, 2016. "Fear of nuclear power? Evidence from Fukushima nuclear accident and land markets in China," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 139-154.
    6. Latré, Edwin & Perko, Tanja & Thijssen, Peter, 2017. "Public opinion change after the Fukushima nuclear accident: The role of national context revisited," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 124-133.
    7. Callegari, C. & Szklo, A. & Schaeffer, R., 2018. "Cost overruns and delays in energy megaprojects: How big is big enough?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 211-220.
    8. Hayashi, Masatsugu & Hughes, Larry, 2013. "The Fukushima nuclear accident and its effect on global energy security," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 102-111.
    9. Kim, Younghwan & Kim, Minki & Kim, Wonjoon, 2013. "Effect of the Fukushima nuclear disaster on global public acceptance of nuclear energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 822-828.
    10. Kunsch, Pierre L. & Friesewinkel, Jean, 2014. "Nuclear energy policy in Belgium after Fukushima," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 462-474.
    11. Pierre Louis Kunsch & Jean Friesewinkel, 2014. "Nuclear energy policy in Belgium after Fukushima," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/189447, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    12. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Bulan, L.C., 2011. "Behind an ambitious megaproject in Asia: The history and implications of the Bakun hydroelectric dam in Borneo," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 4842-4859, September.
    13. Nian, Victor & Chou, S.K., 2014. "The state of nuclear power two years after Fukushima – The ASEAN perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 838-848.
    14. Welsch, Heinz & Biermann, Philipp, 2014. "Fukushima and the preference for nuclear power in Europe: Evidence from subjective well-being data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 171-179.
    15. Wang, Qiang & Chen, Xi, 2012. "Regulatory transparency—How China can learn from Japan's nuclear regulatory failures?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 3574-3578.
    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. Florian Follert & Werner Gleißner & Dominik Möst, 2021. "What Can Politics Learn from Management Decisions? A Case Study of Germany’s Exit from Nuclear Energy after Fukushima," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-15, June.
    2. 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).

    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. Chuanwang Sun & Nan Lyu & Xiaoling Ouyang, 2014. "Chinese Public Willingness to Pay to Avoid Having Nuclear Power Plants in the Neighborhood," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(10), pages 1-27, October.
    2. Zeng, Ming & Wang, Shicheng & Duan, Jinhui & Sun, Jinghui & Zhong, Pengyuan & Zhang, Yingjie, 2016. "Review of nuclear power development in China: Environment analysis, historical stages, development status, problems and countermeasures," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1369-1383.
    3. Lam, Jacqueline C.K. & Cheung, Lawrence Y.L. & Han, Yang & Wang, Shanshan, 2022. "China's response to nuclear safety pre- and post-Fukushima: An interdisciplinary analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    4. Wang, Jing & Li, Yazhou & Wu, Jianlin & Gu, Jibao & Xu, Shuo, 2020. "Environmental beliefs and public acceptance of nuclear energy in China: A moderated mediation analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    5. Lam, J. & Cheung, L. & Han, Y. & Wang, S., 2018. "China’s Response to Nuclear Safety Post-Fukushima: Genuine or Rhetoric?," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1866, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    6. Contu, Davide & Strazzera, Elisabetta & Mourato, Susana, 2016. "Modeling individual preferences for energy sources: The case of IV generation nuclear energy in Italy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 37-58.
    7. 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.
    8. Sun, Chuanwang & Zhu, Xiting, 2014. "Evaluating the public perceptions of nuclear power in China: Evidence from a contingent valuation survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 397-405.
    9. Mu, Ruimin & Zuo, Jian & Yuan, Xueliang, 2015. "China's approach to nuclear safety — From the perspective of policy and institutional system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 161-172.
    10. 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.
    11. Guo, Yue & Ren, Tao, 2017. "When it is unfamiliar to me: Local acceptance of planned nuclear power plants in China in the post-fukushima era," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 113-125.
    12. Soni, Anmol, 2018. "Out of sight, out of mind? Investigating the longitudinal impact of the Fukushima nuclear accident on public opinion in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 169-175.
    13. 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.
    14. Guo, Xiaopeng & Guo, Xiaodan, 2016. "Nuclear power development in China after the restart of new nuclear construction and approval: A system dynamics analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 999-1007.
    15. Magazzino, Cosimo & Mele, Marco & Schneider, Nicolas, 2021. "A D2C algorithm on the natural gas consumption and economic growth: Challenges faced by Germany and Japan," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    16. Leurent, Martin & Jasserand, Frédéric & Locatelli, Giorgio & Palm, Jenny & Rämä, Miika & Trianni, Andrea, 2017. "Driving forces and obstacles to nuclear cogeneration in Europe: Lessons learnt from Finland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 138-150.
    17. Qi, Wen-Hui & Qi, Ming-Liang & Ji, Ya-Min, 2020. "The effect path of public communication on public acceptance of nuclear energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    18. Hong, Sanghyun & Bradshaw, Corey J.A. & Brook, Barry W., 2014. "Nuclear power can reduce emissions and maintain a strong economy: Rating Australia’s optimal future electricity-generation mix by technologies and policies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 712-725.
    19. Segantin, Stefano & Testoni, Raffaella & Zucchetti, Massimo, 2019. "The lifetime determination of ARC reactor as a load-following plant in the energy framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 66-75.
    20. 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.

    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:enepol:v:129:y:2019:i:c:p:628-635. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.