Japanese Nuclear Reactors were Geographically Positioned by Political Competition

[Dean]

Nuclear reactors were placed not out of engineering finesse and risk management, but out of the relative weakness that civil society was suffering from in target communities. Weaker communities were more likely to have such facilities placed in them, which gives rise to a political function in the placement of reactors, rather than the engineering function we might expect to take top priority.

Daniel Aldrich, as quoted in "The Monkey Cage":

While a large literature exists on the siting of controversial facilities, few theories about spatial location have been tested on large samples. Using a new dataset from Japan, this paper demonstrates that state agencies choose localities judged weakest in local civil society as host communities for controversial projects. In some cases, powerful politicians deliberately seek to have facilities such as nuclear power plants, dams, and airports placed in their home constituency. This paper then explores new territory: how demographic, political, and civil society factors impact the outcomes of siting attempts. It finds that the strength of local civil society impacts the probability that a proposed project will come to fruition; the greater the concentration of local civil society, the less likely state-planned projects will be completed.


http://www.themonkeycage.org/2011/03/where_does_japan_put_nuclear_f.html

(I thought you'd appreciate this, NoXion - the implications are there for both technocracy and nuclear power :))

[RedStarOverChina]

What I'd like to know is which smartass decided it was a good idea to built a nuclear power plant right on the coast. This is Japan we are talking about, they have tsunamis more often than I have my breakfast meals.

[Red Commissar]

What I'd like to know is which smartass decided it was a good idea to built a nuclear power plant right on the coast. This is Japan we are talking about, they have tsunamis more often than I have my breakfast meals.

Lot of nuclear plants usually need some intake of water for its functions. You actually have a considerable number of nuclear plants near some sort of water source for that purpose. Some use it as a secondary coolant others to take up for the steam process.

Though I like the point the article makes regarding how they choose specifically where. Generally communities that are better informed and more united might be in the position to demonstrate against the construction of something that might pose a risk, something like NIMBY's.