TOKYO - Chubu Electric Power Co. is alleged to have engaged in misconduct in connection with the assumptions for seismic ground motion used as a benchmark in the earthquake-resistant design of the Hamaoka nuclear power plant in Omaezaki, Shizuoka Prefecture.
After the company submitted its report, discussions are expected to move forward on identifying the cause and preventing a recurrence, but it is also important to consider why misconduct occurs in the first place.
When wrongdoing comes to light, attention tends to focus on how to punish the culprit. Instead, what is needed is an environment in which regulations and rules are seen as legitimate.
Social psychology research has shown that what matters for people in following rules is not only "fear of punishment" but also whether "regulations are accepted as legitimate." Even if penalties are strengthened, violations are more likely when rules are perceived as "not legitimate."
Japan's nuclear industry already has ample "fear of punishment." When problems or misconduct occur, operators face intense criticism and heavy pressure. Delays in restarts or the revocation of operating permits can have an enormous impact on corporate management.
By contrast, "legitimacy" does not appear to be sufficient. While operators work to pass reviews under strict safety standards, there are a certain number of people who, in their hearts, do not regard the current regulations as legitimate.
In an interview, conducted on condition of anonymity, about the Hamaoka plant issue, a company employee said, "Compared with other plants, the seismic ground-motion assumptions are extremely strict, and we are being asked for a degree of conservatism that appears excessive rather than reasonable. If we try to debate the Nuclear Regulation Authority head-on on technical grounds, it takes far too long, so we cannot push back."
The remarks may appear biased or self-serving, but similar views have been heard in interviews with other operators as well. This suggests there may be strong dissatisfaction with the legitimacy of regulation.
Even if regulations are lacking in legitimacy, rule-breaking cannot be tolerated. However, views regarding whether something is legitimate can differ greatly.
It is legitimate for regulators to take the lessons of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster seriously and apply strict standards with safety as the top priority. Still, operators' dissatisfaction with regulations they cannot accept may be an underlying factor contributing to rule-breaking by people on the ground.
Japan's nuclear industry has repeatedly seen incidents that have shaken society. Operators have been strongly criticized time and again, but has such a simplistic good-versus-evil approach improved the situation?
The fundamental reason misconduct has not decreased may not be a deterioration in safety awareness or morals, but rather a business environment in which operators do not feel rules and regulations are legitimate.
One key to enhancing legitimacy may be candid dialogue.
I have conducted interview-based research involving operators and regulatory officials, and many people speak surprisingly candidly when anonymity is assured. Each time, I am reminded how superficial the information obtained through mass media and public documents can be.
What I have felt through interviews is not that "one side is to blame," but that "operators and regulators have major misunderstandings about each other." It is desirable to dispel those misunderstandings through candid dialogue.
Ryota Matsui was born in Kagawa Prefecture in 1983. After leaving an electric power company, he earned a doctorate in business administration at Tokyo Metropolitan University. After serving as a lecturer at Yamanashi Prefectural University, he has held his current post as associate professor there since April 2026. His specialties are behavioral decision-making theory and systems thinking, and his books include "The Irrational World of Nuclear Power."
