M. Murakami et al.: Radioprotection 2025, 60( 4), 337 – 343 339
the younger generation. A system must be established to promote cooperation and encourage the participation of a diverse range of stakeholders, including evacuees and new residents. Diversity is useful for addressing complex situations at the local level, but in order to promote the efficient participation of diverse stakeholders after an accident, it will be necessary to establish systems that enable such participation before an accident occurs.
2.1.5 Compromise versus consensus
Within the decision process and the selection of the recovery strategy, compromise is important for recognizing diverse opinions and restoring trust. Given the wide range of values at stake, it is generally difficult to reach a consensus among all concerned citizens on the sensitive issues to be addressed in the recovery process. Since the recovery process is long-term, it is necessary to regularly review compromise and respond flexibly. This also requires establishing clear rules and mechanisms of decision making and building an adaptable recovery process.
2.1.6 Holistic approach and sustainable development
A holistic approach is necessary to comprehensively manage the impact of accidents. Incorporating sustainable development goals enhances local resilience and contribute to framing the possible future for the communities living in affected areas. Here, incorporating the SSH perspective enables to properly address the broader social and ethical issues( Croüail et al., 2020; ICRP, 2018).
2.1.7 Policy of science
The prioritization and handling of scientific issues in radiological protection and management of nuclear accident should be determined with consideration of the social context. In Japan, it is important to understand the history of the atomic bombs, the development of civil nuclear power, and the nuclear accidents. Deepening expertise in radiological protection and appropriately reconciling the opposing views of experts and citizens are key to recovery.
3 Summary of the first Osaka workshop on SSH in the management of the recovery process
The workshop was held based on the proposals made during the online meeting. The aim was to exchange opinions on an interdisciplinary approach to the recovery of Fukushima and radiological protection, from viewpoints of SSH and related science and technology, and to identify issues and lessons learned with a focus on the recovery after the Fukushima accident. Finally, it was also intended to share future perspectives.
Presenters and participants were invited, mainly from experts in the Society for Risk Analysis Japan and organizations related to radiological protection in France. Thirty-five experts( 27 from Japan, 6 from France, and 2 from the United States) participated in the workshop. The workshop was divided into an opening session, five presentation sessions( a total of 19 presentations), and a final overall discussion( Tab. 1).
The five presentation sessions were as follows. In Session 1, as an introduction to the workshop, there were presentations on the overview of the online meeting held in May 2024, the co-expertise process, and the negative impact of post-disaster surveys including the mental and physical impact on the people affected by the accident through excessive surveys. In Session 2, under the theme of recovery process and future, there were presentations on the characteristics of new residents in communities affected by the accident, responsibility towards future generations, the power balance from a gender perspective, and the role of SSH in decision-making. In Session 3, under the theme of public health aspects, the longterm course of post-traumatic stress disorder after the accident and the relationship with the human dimensions, and a comparison of risk perceptions of radiation exposure. In Session 4, under the theme of public acceptance, there were presentations on the French cases of collaboration between expertise and decision-making, and four studies on public acceptance of final disposal of soils after the accident( i. e., the role of information dissemination in public debate, evaluation of the quality of discussions in participatory workshops, a method of using games to identify the perspectives of the involved party, and the recent findings on acceptance of final disposal). In Session 5, entitled“ education, communication, and culture,” presentations were made on Osaka University’ s educational activities in areas affected by the accident, methods for designing deliberative workshops on Fukushima, the relationship among the land, environment, culture, and human dimensions in tourism, life communication after crisis, and communication and stable iodine administration. Sufficient time was allocated for discussion in all the sessions. The discussion was characterized by interdisciplinary exchanges across the boundaries of SSH, medicine, nursing, and environmental sciences.
A general discussion then took place during which seven main points were addressed:“ negative impact of surveys,”“ harmful rumours,”“ sense of values,”“ culture,”“ power balance,”“ communication,” and“ education”.
3.1 Negative impact of surveys
Many surveys have been conducted after the accident. While surveys are the cornerstone for formulating important policies for the recovery, they also have negative impacts, including the mental and physical impact on the people affected by the accident and eventually a loss of trust in science( Kobayashi et al., 2025). To overcome this negative impact, it is first necessary to reinforce ethical guides for surveys and then to share awareness among experts, including learning about the culture of the affected area and providing training on survey methods. Furthermore, introducing the co-expertise process would also help break down the imbalance between experts and residents by promoting listening and dialogue between experts and citizens regarding the current situation and the recovery strategy.