Safety and the Sense of Security

Tsunehisa Katsumata Vice Chairmen of the Board of Councillors, Nippon Keidanren President, The Tokyo Electric Power Company, Inc.

In my office room, I keep a "daruma" figure with phrases of "sense of security, safety, trust and recovery" written on its back. I was given this daruma when I visited communities where my company's nuclear power plants are located after the series of inappropriate practices in inspection and maintenance at some of those power plants was reported two years ago to apologize for the trouble and concern it had caused to them.

While I am wishing to see the day when I can paint in the eye of this daruma as early as possible to mark the fulfillment of my goal, I find the four words on it very interesting and meaningful.

Usually, the differences between "safety" and "sense of security" is not clear. However, once dishonest conduct occurs, the products and the company involved directly in the dishonest conduct instantly lose public "trust," and "sense of security" changes to "sense of insecurity" or uneasiness. And distrust and uneasiness receive more attention, rather than scientific and physical safety. Because emotional factors are involved in this process, there is no clear and decisive way to completely dispel distrust and uneasiness.

Probably the best way would be to make straightforward and sincere efforts to remove the causes of inappropriate conduct and implement remedies, then let consumers and local residents of areas with nuclear plants know about our efforts through a thorough disclosure of information and improved communication, thereby helping restore trust and the sense of security.

My company is now on its way to regaining public trust and confidence and restoring people's sense of security. To precipitate the process, we are constantly carrying out such remedial measures in our efforts to realize the resumption of operations of all of our nuclear power plants as soon as possible.

In recent days, the U.S. concept of "safety" and the Japanese idea of "sense of security" are seen as clashing in negotiations on the U.S. request that Japan reopen imports of U.S. beef following the discovery of a cow suffering from mad-cow disease in the United States. The U.S. side emphasizes "safety" by arguing that there is very little risk of American beef harming to human bodies since careful surveillance is conducted on high-risk cattle, such as those having difficulty walking and those showing symptoms of central nervous troubles, but their consideration of "a sense of security" is not sufficient.

On the other hand, the Japanese side demands that the United States test all slaughtered cattle for the sake of "the sense of security" of consumers. It is typical Japanese logic to request tests of all slaughtered cattle, which the Japanese side says would give the public a sense of security and help restore public trust. The gap between the two positions is very wide.

I am interested to see to what extent this kind of Japanese-style argument or logic will work in the ongoing talks with Americans. But I tend to think that Japan should take a more scientific and rational approach to safety, while the United States needs to give a little more consideration to emotional "sense of security," not just rely on scientific "safety" alone. I hope the two countries will be able to find ways to narrow the distance between these two concepts of "safety" and "sense of security" as soon as possible.