Advertisement
Japan
OpinionComment
David Morris
David Morris

Opinion | Japan should heed fishing industry concerns about Fukushima radioactive water discharge plan

  • The Pacific fishing industry, already stressed from climate change and illegal overfishing, does not need additional challenges
  • As long as concerns remain about marine life and food safety, Tokyo should apply the precautionary principle it insists from others, like with genetically modified food

Reading Time:3 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
37
Demonstrators hold signs reading “No dumping” and “No to the sea, yes in the land” at a protest against Japan’s Fukushima waste water discharge plan, in Seoul, South Korea, on July 8. The proposal has also been criticised by China and is opposed by Japan’s fishing industry. Photo: Bloomberg
David Morris
Japan, in planning to start discharging over a million tonnes of radioactive waste water into the Pacific soon, has turned a deaf ear to the concerns of the region’s fishing industry. Fishermen in the Pacific, already under pressure from climate change and overfishing, now face threats to their reputation for food safety.
Advertisement
The failure of the Fukushima nuclear power plant after a tsunami hit 12 years ago resulted in radioactive repercussions that will last for decades. The water used to cool the damaged nuclear reactors continues to accumulate, and is stored in huge tanks. Plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company is set to release this waste water into the Pacific Ocean this year and continue for an estimated three decades at least.

Yet the Japanese government had reportedly promised not to do so unless it had stakeholder support. The fishing industry is not happy with the plan. The reputation of their catch is at stake. Consumers, not least in Japan, demand to know their seafood is safe and are increasingly aware of the environmental pressures on the region’s fishery resources.

There are concerns about the impact of the planned, slow release of radioactive waste water into the ocean on marine life and for consumers of affected seafood. When it comes to the safety and reputation of Japan’s food, perhaps the government should apply the precautionary principle that it insists from others.

I was a senior adviser to the Tasmanian government about 20 years ago when a letter arrived from the head of one of Japan’s major trading houses demanding that Tasmania certify that its agricultural products were free of genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

Advertisement

The reputation of Tasmania’s high-quality food exports was at stake, and the government took the then-controversial decision of applying the world’s first moratorium on GMOs. That decision was all about protecting market reputation.

Advertisement