Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
reliability and we need to use calculated data in a proper way with reliable
references. How safe is safe enough? It is a question concerning not only science
but also sociology, which requires powerful and elaborate analysis on interplay of
science and society back and forth in both qualitative and quantitative way.
The government's role of informing the public of the risks is not easy due to the
prematured status of our society at the triple loop learning. The person to provide
this information must speak with knowledge and authority taking into account
uncertainties of the risks. Obviously there's a lot of concern about food and water
associated health issues, and it seems uncertain about the pathways and contami-
nation. Methods and/or procedures to evaluate risks and uncertainties are to be
explained explicitly in a global context when the risk information is given to the
public. If it is not possible, an individual care approach is more promising of rich
implications for the future. Media people must be competent to understand and
report the risk information properly with conscience. They must be able to distin-
guish fact and informed opinion from speculation as it is not easy for the public to
understand such explanation in the context of their risk and safety. Massive written
articles and snowballing massive explanations on each data set in the Internet
produced the status “chaos begets further chaos”. To reduce unnecessary stress/
fear and untold suffering due to health risks for workers, experts must work together
to explicitly explain the complex procedures of the ongoing problems—what we
know, what we do not know, what we expect to happen, and what we need to take
care of based on timely and proper compilations of each set of raw data from a
viewpoint of health protection. To enable spokespeople to provide essential raw
data that will reach the population in a timely and proper manner, key points must
be noticed and kept in mind. We again and again need to avoid “chaos begets
further chaos.” In any case, openess of data is the key in the reporting.
Global risk managements at the triple loop learning is required. Contamination
of the sea by release of radioactive materials implies very sensitive, ethical and
international issues and we need careful scientific surveys on the effects to the sea,
which should be followed up by international open discussions. As for our long-
term future, we need to prepare reference data for making decisions and organize
global discussions open for public. We are now learning a big social risk of nuclear
technology, and economic risks and environmental risks are waiting. Proliferation
risks exist every time. If nuclear power spreads to less developed countries without
deep repositories of expertise, we should consider a regulatory role for the Inter-
national Atomic Energy Authority, instead of its current role of helping countries
upgrade their safety and prepare for emergencies.
Potential natural disasters for each region are definitely to be taken into account
now, and all the paradigms that have driven our modern society should be critically
reviewed from scratch by global collaborations. We need to consider also risks of
other energy sources. The truth is that all energy choices carry risks, and serious and
continuous evaluations are required. Climate changes due to greenhouse gas emis-
sions may be more invisible, uncontrollable and complex. Sharing reliable data and
having productive global discussions transparent to the public are prerequisites to
Search WWH ::
Custom Search