423.4
Public Participation and Deliberation about Nuclear Energy Policy: A Case Study of “National Debate” after Fukushima Accident

Tuesday, July 15, 2014: 9:15 AM
Room: F202
Oral Presentation
Naoyuki MIKAMI , Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan
This paper explores the possibility of public participation in decision-making on nuclear energy policy through a case study of “National Debate” on energy choices after the Fukushima accident in Japan. Japan has been pressed to fundamentally reform its national energy policy in order to break away from the excessive dependence on nuclear energy. In the summer of 2012, the DJP (the Democratic Party of Japan) coalition government at that time presented a set of national energy policy options, which ranged from the complete phase-out of nuclear power to partial abolition. In order to stimulate public discussion whether to withdraw from nuclear energy, the then DJP government introduced the method of deliberative poll and invited about 290 randomly selected citizens around the country to discuss the energy choice. The deliberative poll was the first-ever public participation and deliberation about nuclear energy on a national level, and this paper focuses on the process and result. As the result of the deliberative poll, approximately half of the participants supported the complete phase-out of nuclear energy, and it was reflected on the government policy decision to some extent. Some of the major findings from the participant observation of the deliberative poll are as follows: first, the public participation and deliberation substantially impacted on the policy formulation, producing a complementary effect to a wide range of direct actions such as demonstration and public comments. Second, the deliberative poll provided ordinary citizens with opportunities to question the existing authority of experts and make informed judgments about national energy policy. Third, however, the result of the deliberative poll was abandoned once the conservative coalition took power at the end of the year, and there still remain many challenges about connections between public deliberative/participatory exercises and decision-making in energy policy.