Coping through Social Management

Outside Japan there seems to be a strong sense that the Japanese government is covering up information or simply being vague about the extent of problems in Fukushima. Much of this is, of course, justified, because that is what all governments do. But there is a Western ethic, at least in the US, that policies should reflect a zero-tolerance for danger to human communities, and it almost seems to violate this ethic not to cancel life as usual in any town or city anywhere near Fukushima—even Tokyo. The reality is that we all live with risk—even driving cars is riskier than not, but untold lives have been saved because people were driven to hospitals.

So clearly, we live with risk. We balance risk and benefits as individuals and as communities. But things start to become shaky when safety measures (which help to balance out the risk) require higher levels of knowledge and sophisticated ‘fuzzy’ analytical capabilities on the part of large sections of the population. At some point of sophistication, the danger of failing to implement safety measures adequately weighs too heavily on people’s minds (consciously or subconsciously). That is when evacuation starts looking more attractive. In the case of foreigners living in Japan, that is when people start wondering why we stay.

However, in the case of a minutely managed society that the Japanese ‘nanny-ocracy’ is, problem-solving skill levels actually are so collectively high and based on exquisite collaborative abilities of the population at large, that it actually becomes possible to consider managing something as invisible and insidious as radiation and something as disturbing as after-shocks.* Because so many people are ready to follow directions, confer with each other, and rely on each other’s analytical sophistication, avenues start to emerge for managing the complex crises caused by the nuclear disaster.

As a case in point, the government has ordered all businesses and institutions to reduce their electricity usage by 25% this summer or face heavy fines. In tandem with that, there are elaborate protocols for inspecting a wide range of environmental quality factors. At the institution where I work, ICU, this includes surveys on five separate days during spring, summer and fall, at our main lecture hall. It will be conducted under Tokyo Metropolitan Governmental supervision in 13 classrooms spread throughout all of the four floors of that building. Surveying will measure:

·      ...Floating particulate matter

·      ...Carbon monoxide

·      ...Carbon dioxide

·      ...Etc.

I am not trying to imply that environmental surveys don’t happen elsewhere or that several cities in the US don’t conduct energy saving plans, but I am simply impressed with the level of cooperation that is expected here in Tokyo. It is expected, because it is received. People faithfully separate their garbage into at least six categories, to be put out on different days of the week, and even different weeks of the month! Tokyoites already understand 「弱冷房」(weak air conditioning), and we only got elevators and escalators in all the train stations in the 1990s. That is significant because trains are how most people get most places farther than 5 km. People are prepared to use less when asked to, and take care of their own rain protection, and watch radiation reports, and attend to information about different kinds of food.

So if Japanese willingness to consider living with nuclear fallout seems a bit unbelievable, that is a sign that that the unbeliever is underestimating Japanese social and human capital. Until one has encountered a society where so many people are willing to do what is required (social capital) and the vast majority of people are capable as well (human capital), coping mechanisms Japan is willing to entertain might well seem martyr-like.

*A large after-shock even occurred as I was writing this post.