[ Panels by World Area Main Menu ]
[ View the Timetable of Panels ]
Recalibrating Risk in a Changing Japan
Organizer, Chair and Discussant: Robert William Aspinall, Shiga University, Japan
Since Ulrich Beck first put forward the notion that a new paradigm of Risk Society was necessary to understand the place of the individual in the modern state, there has been an outpouring of research on this theme in Europe and elsewhere. The literature on risk society and Japan, however, is still sparse, in spite of the fact that modern Japan with its industrial overproduction, its preoccupation with all kinds of hazards and insecurities (both domestic and foreign), and its experience of a sometimes painful process of individualization, would seem to be a prime candidate for this kind of study. This panel, therefore, is convened as part of an effort to help put Japan on the Risk Society map. It brings together experts in politics, international relations and sociology to talk about their research into the concept of risk in contemporary Japan.
The four papers presented here examine different ways in which the concept of risk has been used for political purposes in contemporary Japan. Hook looks at how the Ministry of Foreign Affairs approaches the risks faced by Japanese nationals when they travel overseas. Takeda and Bradley are interested in the perception, construction and communication of various risks relating to the everyday consumption of food and drink. They show how the public discourse on what constitutes a safe environment goes beyond a simple technical analysis of what is ‘risky’ and becomes a political contest to gain the right to provide a dominant notion of risk knowledge.
Mediating Risk in Japan
Glenn D. Hook, Sheffield University, United Kingdom
The context of this paper is the paucity of research on risk in Japan. It is as if Ulrich Beck’s Risk Society (1992) has failed to exert any influence on scholars working in Japanese Studies. In Japanese, work on risk does exist, but here the reverse seems true: Beck has perhaps exerted too much influence in setting the parameters for the understanding of risk and society. This has meant that the multifaceted role the state plays in mediating risk has been ignored almost completely.
The aim of this paper is to investigate the state’s role in mediating risk under the Koizumi administration. It will elucidate how the state responds to risks faced by nationals who cross the sovereign territorial boundaries of the state. It is specifically interested in examining the role of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in mediating risk, examining four inter-related processes: 1) risk articulation: what are risks to nationals who travel overseas? How are these risks articulated for different parts of the world? 2) Risk boundary setting: what are the boundaries to risks to nationals who travel overseas? How have these boundaries been set during the Kozumi years? 3) Risk standard setting: what are the standards of risk set? How are these standards mediated. And 4) Risk regulation: what are mechanisms of regulation? How are these used by the state? The argument is that, with Koizumui’s support for the US ‘war on terror,’ the state is increasingly expecting the individual to shoulder the costs of risk.
Consuming risk: the governing of risks over livelihood in Japan
Hiroko Takeda, Sheffield University, United Kingdom
Eating food and drinking water is the most fundamental daily practice of human beings. Without doing so, our basic survival is in danger. Yet, industrialization increased the probability of the incidence of environmental pollution, while commodification of food and water has intensified uncertainty in the production and distribution process where human and institutional conduct is intricately organized. Simply put, in the everyday life of human beings in an advanced industrial country, the livelihood that we consume and embrace within our body appears ‘risky’, and this is particularly pertinent in postwar Japan where people’s everyday lives have been threatened by risk over livelihood, as exemplified by the Minamata disease, the Yukijirushi Milk scandal and the BSE case to name but a few.
The purpose of this paper is to examine how the risk perception over livelihood has been used to govern the Japanese people and society. As Mary Douglas has pointed out, ‘the selection of which dangers are terrifying and which can be ignored depends on what kinds of behaviour the risk-accusers want to stop’ (Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger, Routledge, 2002: xix). Hence, the articulation of risk to be perceived as something to be preempted among the populace is a means to install a governing order for individuals in communities, and in this sense, it is a highly political act. The paper traces how risk over livelihood has been articulated by the government and popular response to it in postwar Japan, and identifies the political nature of risk over livelihood.
Approaches to environmental risk in Japan
Mika Markus Mervio, Kibi International University, Japan
This paper examines both Japanese thinking and policy-making in reference to the search for ecologically sustainable social development. In this research, sustainable social development is understood in a broad sense under the influence of deep ecology that attempts to overcome the limits of an anthropocentric approach to life security and well-being, whereas environmental risk is analysed primarily in the light of discourses on risk society and reflexive modernization. The discussion starts with an overview of the theoretical development of green political theory, in particular that of the Nordic countries where it has influenced social discourses, activism and policy-making. The European cases provide us a contrast to analyse how “risks” are understood (from a Greener perspective) and what kind of policy and institutional responses to the risks are made available. My research then questions what kind of alternatives there are available for greens in Japanese politics. However, I also provide a wealth of examples from Japan to show that both societies have intellectual traditions and social thought that has questioned short-sighted approaches to the environment. However, in Japan this criticism has often failed to translate into policy-making. Through the contrast/comparison of Nordic and East Asian cases my paper will focus on the multifaceted faces of risks and attempts to search for ecologically sustainable social development in Japan – demonstrating that all these are embedded in culture, tradition and history.
Risk Communication in the BSE Debate in Japan
William Bradley, Ryukoku University, Japan
This paper explores some of the problems of locating risk discourses (Beck, 1992, 1999; Boyne, 2003; Strydom, 2002; Van Loon, 2002) in conflict arising from risk producing technologies in Japan. While the conceptual use of ‘technology’ often brackets the human agency involved in its production and consumption, it is necessary to include an interactional dimension to understand the production and dissemination of risk knowledge and communication about risk.
In contrast to the claim that risk is dealt with in Japan primarily through social mechanisms such as groupism and bureacracy (Clammer: 2001), the paper explores the roles of various actors, the media, citizen, industry, and institutionalized expertise groups that compete and interact to gain the right to provide a dominant notion of risk and risk knowledge. A case study of the banning of beef imports from the U.S. is examined to understand the multiplicity of definitions and interpretations of risk.
After the Japanese government banned imported beef from the U.S. in December 2003, a government panel was empowered to analyze the risk from imported beef. In November 2005, the panel concluded that it could not determine the risk because of the need for intensive testing not under its control in the U.S. Subsequently, the Japanese government lifted the ban, only to reinstitute it in January 2006 when U.S. compliance for safety measures were overlooked in an initial shipment. In this paper, I examine the communication of risk through the government panel, public hearings, and in the media.
References
Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.
Beck, U. (1999). World Risk Society. Cambridge: Polity.
Boyne, R. (2003). Risk. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Japan: Externalities, Energy and the Environment
Andrew Dewitt, Rikkyo University
This paper examines the mounting risks that Japan confronts on energy and the environment as well as the reasons for Japan's comparatively weak, reactive policy stance concerning these risks. The risks centre on the mounting negative externalities of fossil fuel dependence. These externalities include geopolitical risks, magnified in the Japanese case by a striking and growing dependence on the Middle East oil producers even as the region becomes increasingly unstable. In addition, the environmental consequences of fossil-fuel use are emerging as a multifaceted and global threat requiring a commensurate level of policy coordination.
Japan is generally regarded as strongly activist on the energy and environmental fronts, through such measures as conservation, global cooperation (eg, the Kyoto Treaty), and so forth. Indeed, given Japan's high level of oil dependence, high exposure on the environmental front, relative lack of extractive industries and so on, one should expect a powerful leadership role in countering these risks. But Japan's level of effort is well behind the Scandinavian countries, the UK, and others. The reasons for this gap between Japan's apparent incentives and its action are also discussed.