Impact of the discharge of treated water on residents’ intention to return to areas near the TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station a decade after the accident

Open Access

Issue		Radioprotection Volume 60, Number 1, January-March 2025


Page(s)		99 - 108
DOI		https://doi.org/10.1051/radiopro/2024036
Published online		14 March 2025

Aldrich D et al. 2015. Social capital and community resilience. Am Behav Sci 59: 254–269. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Ando R et al. 2023. Report on the 23rd Fukushima Dialogue “Thinking together about issues of Fukushima Daiichi treated water”. Radioprotection 58 (1): 5–10. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
Basic Policy on handling of ALPS treated water at the Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings’ Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, 2021. Available online: https://www.meti.go.jp/english/earthquake/nuclear/decommissioning/pdf/bp_alps.pdf [Google Scholar]
Bodas M, et al. 2022. Risk Perception of Natural and Human-Made Disasters—Cross Sectional Study in Eight Countries in Europe and Beyond. Front Public Health 10:825985 [Google Scholar]
Bourguignon M. 2022. The necessary development of post-nuclear accident management preparedness. Radioprotection 57 (1): 7–8. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
Clement C, et al. 2022. Maintenir les recommandations de la CIPR adaptées aux besoins. Radioprotection 57: 93–106. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
Clement C, et al. 2021. Keeping the ICRP recommendations fit for purpose. J Radiol Prot 41: 1390–1409. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Croüail P. et al. 2020. Analysis of the modalities of return of populations to the contaminated territories following the accident at the Fukushima power plant. Radioprotection 55: 79–93. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
Do X. 2020. Return Migration after the Fukushima nuclear disaster: the impact of institutional and individual factors. Disasters 44 (3): 569–595. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Facility construction begins for Japan’s Fukushima nuclear wastewater release amid opposition. Available online: https://english.news.cn/20220805/e5c88eb3134f4786b3070af31f364b48/c.html [Google Scholar]
Fukushima Prefectural Government. Result of sea area monitoring associated with the discharge of ALPS treated water into the sea 2023 November 14–16. Available online: https://www.pref.fukushima.lg.jp/site/portal-english/en-moni-k.html [Google Scholar]
Gagné I. 2020. Dislocation, social isolation, and the politics of recovery in post-disaster Japan. Transcult Psychiatry 57 (5): 710–723. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Hande V. et al., 2023. Changes in the intention to return and the related risk perception among residents and evacuees of Tomioka town 11 years after the Fukushima nuclear accident. J Disaster Med Public Health 17: e386. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Huaxia (2022). Facility construction begins for Japan's Fukushima nuclear wastewater release amid opposition (Xinhua net) [Google Scholar]
IAEA. 2015. The Fukushima Daiichi Accident, Report by the Director General. Available online: https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/Pub1710-ReportByTheDG-Web.pdf [Google Scholar]
IAEA. 2022. Review of Safety Related Aspects of Handling ALPS Treated Water at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. Report 4: Review Mission to TEPCO and METI. Available online: https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/report-4-review-mission-tepco-and-meti.pdf [Google Scholar]
IAEA. 2023. Comprehensive report on the safety review of the ALPS treated water at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. Available online: https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/iaea_comprehensive_alps_report.pdf [Google Scholar]
ICRP Publication 146. 2020. Radiological protection of people and the environment in the event of a large nuclear accident,Ann. [Google Scholar]
Maeda Y. et al., 2002. Determinants of trust in industry, government, and citizen’s groups in Japan. Risk Anal 23 (2): 303–310. [Google Scholar]
Matsumoto M. 2018. Formation of third place by evacuees from nuclear accident: case study of wide area residents’ association of Tomioka town, Futaba County, Fukushima Prefecture. J Disaster Res 13 (6): 1142–1156. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Matsunaga H. et al., 2021. Intention to return in residents of Okuma and its characteristics: the evacuation order was lifted eight years after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident. J Radiat Res. 62: 68–70. [Google Scholar]
Murakami M. et al., 2019. Lower psychological distress levels among returnees compared with evacuees after the Fukushima nuclear accident. Tohoku J Exp Med 247: 13–17. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
NEA. 2020. Making the most of practical experiences gained during past crises or disasters for improving mental health and psychosocial support in radiation emergencies. Available online: https://www.oecd-nea.org/upload/docs/application/pdf/2020-09/egnr_web_events_-_flyer_final.pdf [Google Scholar]
Onyx J, et al. 2000. Measuring social capital in five communities, J Appl Behav Sci 36: 23–42. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Panchenko S. 2001. Chernobyl in three dimensions. Addressing the Rehabilitation and Secondary Medical Consequences of the Chernobyl Disaster European Commission. Available online: http://en.ibrae.ac.ru/russian/chernobyl-3d/society/III_3_6.htm (Translated from Russian by DeepL). [Google Scholar]
Saito M. et al. 2017. Development of an instrument for community-level health related social capital among Japanese older people: the JAGES Project. J Epidemiol 27: 221–227. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Shimizu N. 2022. Nuclear disaster and gender: invisible women’s experiences of the disaster and their support needs. Academic Trends 27 (4): 441–445. (Translated from Japanese by DeepL). [Google Scholar]
Staněk R. et al., 2021. Social capital and mobility: an experimental study. MUNI ECON Working Paper. Available online: https://doi.org/10.5817/WP_MUNI_ECON_2021-12 [Google Scholar]
Sung O et al. 2022. Radiation risk perception and its associated factors among residents living near nuclear power plants: a nationwide survey in Korea, Nucl Eng Technol 54 (4): 1295–300. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Takamura N et al., 2021. Experiences of crisis communication during radiation emergency and risk communication for recovery of the community in Fukushima. J Radiat Res 62: 95–100. [Google Scholar]
Thu Zar W et al. 2023. An analysis of the desire to make radiation measurements and to dialogue with experts among the residents of Tomioka town, Fukushima Prefecture: about the implementation of the co-expertise process. Radioprotection 58: 79–89 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
Tokuda Y et al. 2009. Assessing items on the SF-8 Japanese version for health-related quality of life: a psychometric analysis based on the nominal categories model of item response theory. Value Health 12: 568–573. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Tomioka Town. What we do at Tomioka Town Food Inspection Center”. Available online: https://tomioka-radiation.jp/shokuhinkensajo.html [Google Scholar]
Uchida Y et al. 2015. Changes in consumer behavior regarding local food products after the Fukushima nuclear disaster: a case study of Fukushima City. Agric Human Values 32 (3): 495–504. [Google Scholar]
Uekusa S et al., 2022. Conceptualizing disaster social capital: what it is, why it matters, and how it can be enhanced. Disasters 46: 56–79. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
UNSCEAR. 2022. Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation, Vol I. Available online: https://www.unscear.org/unscear/uploads/documents/unscear-reports/UNSCEAR_2020_21_Report_Vol.I.pdf [Google Scholar]
Villalonga-Olives E et al., 2017. The dark side of social capital: a systematic review of the negative health effects of social capital, Soc Sci Med 194: 105–127. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Yamaguchi A et al., 2017. Influences of social capital on natural disaster research in Japan. J Sustain Dev 10: 46–54. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Yamakawa M, et al. 2017. Rebuilding Fukushima, 1st ed. Routledge: Abingdon, New York, pp 43–47. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.