The Logic of Nuclear Power Plants: Getting Compensation Before the Accident From a Period of High Growth to an Era of Rural Decline

The Logic of Nuclear Power Plants: Getting Compensation Before the Accident From a Period of High Growth to an Era of Rural Decline

The parenthetical comment about it being too late to get compensation for fishing after the accident reflects the reality that they were forced to prioritize their livelihoods over ethics. In the coastal areas where the nuclear power plant project was underway, the fishing industry was a livelihood fraught with debt and instability, as the population exodus and industrial decline began at the end of the high-growth period. Income would cease immediately if fish could no longer be caught, but repayment and living expenses would not wait. Compensation after an accident takes time to negotiate and process, and there is a strong possibility that their livelihoods will be ruined in the meantime. This is why the idea of withdrawing money before the damage surfaces and preparing ahead of time was born. Although this logic may seem distorted at first glance, there is a distrust of the system in the background. There was no guarantee that the government or power companies would take r
esponsibility promptly, and the reality was known that proof of causality was required. Compensation is spoken of not as individual greed, but as a collective survival strategy through fishing cooperatives and local influential people. In the resignation that if the nuclear power plant did not come, the community would be destroyed first, compensation was not a preparation for the accident, but a compensation for the changes in life that had already begun. This narrative quietly shows that the relationship between nuclear power and compensation was shaped not by ideology but by the sense of time of daily life.