From Chernobyl to Fukushima: Why now is the time for a global agreement on preventing technological disasters

Cihan Sultanoğlu - Rastislav Vrbensky

An expected, 8,000 people will take part this week (March 14-18) in an historic World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai, Japan. It’s a fitting location; this month marks the four-year anniversary since the Fukushima nuclear meltdown reminded the world of the threat posed by technological disaster.

The UNDP will be joining government officials, scientists and global leaders as we grapple with finding practical ways for countries to build resilience to disaster. 

In the shadow of Fukushima, we will look at a growing but often neglected hazard which demands our renewed attention: the threat posed by technological disasters like chemical accidents, nuclear emergencies and transport accidents with hazardous materials. 

According to the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters, more than 1,000 technological disasters have been reported worldwide since 2010. These numbers will grow with urbanization, expanding industrialization, climate change, the intensity of storms, sea-level rise and the effect of melting permafrost.

While focused health care programs and the monitoring of radiation or other fallout are needed in the immediate aftermath of technological disasters, so too are efforts that minimize deep-rooted and long-lasting human, societal, economic and environmental consequences of these incidents.

Our experience from Europe and Central Asia in tackling the human consequences of nuclear disasters is all the more relevant today. The accident at the Chernobyl nuclear plant in April 1986 caused widespread radioactive contamination in areas that are now part of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine.
Hundreds of thousands were uprooted, and millions were left psychologically traumatized by lingering fears about health and their prospects for work.

Decades of nuclear testing at Semipalatinsk in eastern Kazakhstan have had severe humanitarian, social, economic and environmental effects. Similar challenges exist in Central Asia, where uranium tailings from abandoned mines are often located close to densely population areas in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. 

Effective recovery from disasters goes far beyond cleaning up infrastructure. It also means helping communities pick up the pieces of the shattered lives of the survivors. This human side of recovery has certain characteristics that run through nearly all disasters, including technological ones: In the short term, people need information on the risks and impacts as well as psychological support and counselling to ease fears of radiation, anxiety, helplessness and feeling of abandonment. In the longer term, the needs of communities are best addressed by providing means to generate economic and social opportunities that restore self-confidence and adopt a forward-looking mentality.

Promotion of activism and self-help attitudes can counter the “victim mentality” and culture of dependency that arises in these circumstances.

To prevent the affected territories from becoming stigmatized and treated as “dirty and contaminated,” targeted efforts to support marketing, create employment opportunities, and concerted efforts to keep young people in the region are necessary.

Assistance to affected communities should start early and aim to minimize the disruption of people’s normal lives as much as possible. The concerns about lack of information, resettlement, and social benefits come into play immediately after a disaster occurs. Long-term challenges, such as psychological impacts, stigmatization of the territory and restoration of job opportunities can be minimized if appropriate action starts in the period of early recovery.

Next week’s World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Japan is tasked with adopting a post-2015 framework for reducing risk to disasters. To date, there is no global agreement in place to prevent and prepare for technological disasters. Now is the time to address this shortcoming if a new global framework is to be truly comprehensive and relevant to today’s disaster threats.

Such a framework should drive home the need to improve risk assessments and guidelines for both natural and technological hazards. It should urge national governments and international partners to make their work on disaster risk reduction comprehensive by including technological hazards. It should call for public information and community engagement for better preparation for technical disasters.
Furthermore, business and industry must command an indisputable role in preventing technical accidents and complying with relevant regulations.

A nuclear legacy in Europe and Central Asia has provided valuable historical insights as to how to handle some of the human consequences of such disasters, and improve recovery programs to get people’s lives back on track. What is further needed is a global agreement to prevent and prepare for these kinds of technological disasters. The Sendai conference is just the place to start.


Cihan Sultanoğlu is director of the Regional Bureau for Europe and CIS at the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Rastislav Vrbensky is manager of the UNDP Regional Hub in Istanbul.