Stakeholder #3

Stakeholders are the people or groups that have money or resources invested in a specific controversy. In the case of the Fukushima-Daiichi disaster the stakeholders were different groups of people and institutions. One of these groups was the Japanese government itself who is a major utilizer of nuclear energy.

Freewallpic, "Japanese Flag", 6/23/2011, Copyright 2013

1. Can you describe this third stakeholder in 200-250 words? If they're an individual, vividly describe how they look, what they wear, how they move. Tell us how they sound, how they talk, what their mannerisms are. Conjure them in our mind's eye, by appealing to at least THREE of our FIVE senses. If the stakeholder is an institution or group, then describe the institution and how it appears in the world. How do people encounter this group or institution, digitally or physically? Describe their website or headquarters or something else that physically represents the group to the world at large.
The Japanese government is a major stakeholder in this controversy because the disaster happened on its own soil. With the meltdown of the reactors, the Japanese government lost a major source of electricity for its citizens. In 2009, the Japanese government relied on nuclear energy for 27% of its total energy needs. The government has 48 operational nuclear plants. If the population of Japan were to decide that nuclear power was not a safe choice, the country of Japan would lose over 50,000GWh per year of electricity. Although the government is not directly involved with the generation of energy, it does control who can build power plants and how many of them can be running at any given time. People do not directly interact with the government but interact with representatives of the government. They can interact with them physically when they talk to these representatives and they can interact with them digitally when they access their website or other form of electronic communication. The government is run by the conservative Liberal Democratic Party of Japan (yeah, conservative and liberal) and their website is very professional.

2. Can you identify THREE specific claims being made by this stakeholder? The claims should be public and about the specific story you're investigating. Provide direct quotes for three different claims or ideas made in public by this stakeholder. Each quote should be clearly hyperlinked to the original source.
"With regard to dealing with the contaminated water from the station, the policy of the Japanese government is based on three principles: 1) removing the source of the contamination, 2) isolating water from the contamination source, and 3) preventing leakage of the contaminated water." -Source

"In order to ensure the delivery of readily understandable information to the affected, Local Headquarters published newsletter to post in shelters of the suffering areas (5 editions to date) and broadcasted radio programs featuring Q&A session at two local radio stations (AM and FM) everyday since April 11. These contents are posted on METI website to allow the affected including those who evacuated out of Fukushima Prefecture to have access to them." -Source
 
"With regard to the identification of the actual status of emergency incidents at reactor facilities, emergency measures to be taken to control the incidents, and other matters, the Government and the nuclear operator established Integrated Headquarters for the Response to the Incident at the Fukushima Nuclear Power Stations (currently renamed as Government – TEPCO Integrated Response Office) (in operation from March 15 at Head Office of TEPCO) for the purpose of working together, sharing information, making decisions and issuing instructions on necessary responses." -Source
 
3. Can you explain how valid these claims are? Objectively, how much weight do these claims carry? How credible are they? Be specific. Think about how poorly or successfully the stakeholder cites FACTS, plays on our EMOTIONS, or presents themselves as a CREDIBLE actor in the debate.
These claims are valid because they depict the actions of the government and their plans to resolve the problems caused by the Fukushima-Daiichi meltdown. The stakeholder cites facts very well, which is to be expected because it is in a statement submitted to the International Atomic Energy Association. The stakeholder does not play on our emotions but instead focuses on facts to persuade the audience of their reliability.

4. Can you explain how these claims are similar and/or different to the other stakeholders? Be clear and precise - does this stakeholder have anything in common with others involved in the debate? Who do they have the least in common with? Why?
The Japanese government claims are similar to TEPCO's because they are connected. The government relies on nuclear energy to function as does TEPCO. They also have some of the same goals as the NEI because they want t expand their nuclear energy capacity even after this set back.