9:20-9:40 Dame Carol Black DBE FRCP FMedSci is Principal of Newnham College, Cambridge University. She has held top positions in medicine and now holds high-level policy advisory positions on health and work in the United Kingdom
Dame Carol Black DBE FRCP FMedSci Principal of Newnham College, Cambridge University. She has held top positions in medicine and now holds high-level policy advisory positions on health and work in the United Kingdom
Kyoko Nomura Director, Support Center for women physicians and researchers, Associate professor, Department of Hygiene and Public Health, Teikyo University, School of Medicine, Associate professor, Teikyo School of Public Health
Global leadership in the extreme: crisis leadership in post-Fukushima
keynote talk given at the 7th Ludwig Boltzmann Forum at the Embassy of Austria, Tokyo, 20 February 2015
by: Dr. Chuck Casto, Casto Group Consulting LLC, Licensed Nuclear Power Station Operator. Was NRC regulator responsible for 23 nuclear power stations. Leader of the US Integrated Government and NRC efforts in Japan during the Fukushima nuclear accident in 2011.
The earth is flat enhanced global leadership is needed. A nuclear accident in one country is a nuclear accident everywhere.
Japan – the Fukushima disaster revealed an imbalance of power and leadership:
misalignment of values
actions are needed to realign values
Needed enhancements for extreme crisis leadership, not only developing countries, but also including 1st world, developed countries such as Japan.
The USA are very experienced in assisting 2nd and 3rd world, developing countries in times of disaster and the response is essentially standardized. However, the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear disaster was the first time, where the USA assisted a developed 1st world country in coping with a disaster.
The Fukushima Dai-Ichi disaster revealed the need to standardize our plans for domestic and international responses in times of disaster. We need to understand how nations define severe accident response, post-disaster recovery and preparations for extreme events.
Fukushima-Dai-Ichi was a system failure, a consequence of an imbalance of power and responsibility
Broken information flow
There was a lack of flow of information between government, utility and the public, and a lack of formal communication between the disaster site and the Government leadership – the disaster site was an isolated island.
Imbalance of power
This lack of sufficient information flow was compounded by imbalance of power and legal uncertainty. Several different laws and Government agencies applied, and there was confusion between Atomic Energy Basic Law, Emergency Laws, Basic Energy Plan, Industry Ministry (METI), Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA), Self Defense Forces and other agencies.
There was confusion and conflicts over division of labor and responsibility, regarding venting of the reactors, injection of water and evacuation of local communities.
Imbalance of responsibility
There must be a clear legal basis for roles and responsibilities, which was not the case because of conflicts between different applicable laws (e.g. nuclear laws and emergency laws) and between different agencies and the utilities.
Ultimately the utilities (Tokyo Electrical Power Company TEPCO) must be responsible, however, the public and the government are reluctant to give the utilities the clear and sole responsibilty.
There is an uncertainty about “acceptable risk”. Risk management had been replaced by “Japan’s nuclear safety myth”, and preparations for nuclear accidents were not sufficient.
It is necessary to realign responsibility, accountability, power and achieve a balanced system
Japan needs to realign responsibility, accountability, power between:
Government / Diet (Japan’s Parliament)
Government agencies (MEXT, METI, NRA)
Prefectural and local Government
non-governmental organizations and the public
In particular, Government and Diet (Japan’s Parliament) need to exercise power, while the nuclear utilities must assume full responsibility and be fully accountable.
The nuclear regulator must be fully accountable to the Diet (Japan’s Parliament), and the Diet must assume the responsibility to supervise the nuclear regulator.
A public discussion on national level must determine which risk is acceptable, and the regulator must regulate to this acceptable risk, and be supervised by the Diet.
Questions and Answers
Question by Shuji Nakamura: what do you think is the best energy for Japan
Answer by Dr Chuck Casto: because of Japan’s earthquake and other risks, geo-thermal energy and wind might be the most suitable.
Question: are modern nuclear reactors safe?
Answer by Dr Chuck Casto: like modern cars, modern nuclear reactors are better engineered and generally safer than old designs from 30-40-50 years ago. If Japan could afford this, I would advise Japan to replace all old reactors with new modern reactors.
Question: are your worried about the safety of nuclear reactors in China and other countries?
Answer by Dr Chuck Casto: of course I am worried about the safety of nuclear reactors in China, in other developed and developing countries. I am also worried about the safety in our own country – the USA, because in the USA we have lost much needed basic skills such as welding. We need to keep our basic skill such as welding. France has an advantage in nuclear power, because in France all reactors use the same basic design. So improvements of this basic reactor type at one plant can be used to improve the safety at all other plants. In the USA, or in other countries we have many different reactor designs, so its much more difficult to manage the safety, and to bring improvements from one plant to others which might be differently designed reactors.
Charles A. Casto: “Crisis management: A qualitative study of extreme leadership“, (2014), Dissertations, Theses and Capstone Projects. Paper 626. A Dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Business Administration in the Coles College of Business, Kennesaw State University
1970s: overwhelmed with vertical integration and self-sufficiency
1980s: appreciation of the yen (1985 Plaza Accord)
1990s: collapse of the Bubble (1991), relocation of production to Asia, three excesses:
2000s: lost 20 years
Going forward, Japan has the option of growth under new business models, or continue to stagnate with matured industries
While there is dramatic global market expansion in many business areas in the global electrical industry, e.g. for Lithium Ion Batteries, DVDs, Car navigation units, DRAM, Japan’s market shares are falling in most sectors. For example, Japanese market shares for LCD, DVD players, Lithium Ion batteries, or car navigation units have fallen from almost 100% global market share 5-10 years ago to 10%-20% today.
Restructuring mature industry can generate more economic benefit than innovating a new industry:
large established market, although low growth
reduced number of players in the market following consolidation
Revitalization of JVCKENWOOD
the current main business as the core – not new business
speed, like “fresh food”
eliminate hidden waste and loss costs
eliminate vested rights
Kenwood in 2002 was in a disastrous condition:
net income: YEN -27 Billion (= US$ -270 million)
debt: YEN 110 Billion (= US$ 1.1 billion)
accumulated losses: YEN 45 Billion (= US$ 450 million)
net worth: YEN -17 Billion (= US$ -170 million)
Restructuring by March 2003:
Financial restructuring: Dept/equity swap. Moved from YEN 17 billion negative net worth to positive within 6 months
Business restructuring: focus on core business. Terminated cellular phone business.
Management restructuring: management consolidation. Eliminate huge wastes and losses in subsidiaries.
Restructuring in FY2003 achieved a V-shape recovery. Net income margin was improved from -8% in FY3/2002 to 2%-4% in recent years.
In mature markets, growth is achieved through M&A, reducing the number of players in the market. As the top player in the market, profitable growth improved:
Main four players in the car electronics after-market before Kenwood-JVC merger:
after the JVCKENWOOD merger, and restructure to minimize losses from the TV business:
JVC and KENWOOD formed a capital and business alliance in July 2007, followed by management integration in October 2008, and a full merger in October 2011. The business portfolio was restructured, and in particular big losses in the TV business were reduced. Fixed costs were reduced by 40% by selling off assets, reduction of production and sales sites, and 25% voluntary retirement.
This structural reform was completed in the FY3/2001, and led to another V-shaped recovery, and to profitable growth under the new medium term business plan.
The JVC-KENWOOD merger led to big jumps in market share in many markets, and thus to very much improved profitability.
Why did Japan’s mass production type electronics fail?
Answer: Japanese management failed to deal with globalization and digitalization.
Other factors that contributed to Japan’s failure are vertical integration, technology leakage from exporting production facilities, insufficient added value compared to the high Japanese labor costs, and lack of money for investment, because Japanese companies largely relied on bank loans instead of equity.
Japan’s heavy electrical industry on the other hand is competitive – why?
1. Creative know-how in the heavy electrical industry is in human brains, therefore more difficult to leak to competitors under Japan’s employment circumstances.
2. huge capital investment is needed, and almost fully depreciated in Japan. Therefore the depreciation costs exceeds HR costs.
How can Japan become competitive again?
Japan needs to accelerate growth strategies in those areas, where Japan has competitive advantage, and where Japanese industries can differentiate themselves. Examples are industrial areas which depend on a long-term improvements and advanced technologies, and techniques of craftsmen, and in next generation technologies.
JVC KENWOOD takes action to innovate
JVCKENWOOD invested in a venture capital fund: the WiL Fund I, LP to reinforce alliances with potential ventures in Japan and overseas
JVCKENWOOD invested in ZMP Inc. to promote car telematics and car auto-control
by Kiyoshi Kurokawa, Academic Fellow of GRIPS and former Chairman of Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission by National Diet of Japan
summary written by Gerhard Fasol
Professor Kurokawa set the stage by describing the uncertain times, risks and unpredictabilities in which we live – while at the same time internet connects us all, all while the world’s population increased from about 1 billion people in 1750 to about 9 billion people today.
Major global risks in terms of impact and likelihood are (General Annual Conference 2013 of the World Economic Forum):
severe income disparity
chronic fiscal imbalances
rising greenhouse gas emissions
water supply crisis
management of population aging
Top trends for 2014, ranked by global significance (World Economic Forum, Outlook on global agenda 2014):
rising social tensions in Middle East and North Africa
widening income disparity
persistent structural unemployment
intensifying cyber threats
diminishing confidence in economic policies
lack of values in leadership
the expanding middle class in Asia
This changing world needs a change of paradigm:
resilience instead of strength
risk instead of safety
Many recent “Black Swan events” bring home that:
to err is human
Fukushima Nuclear Accident Investigation Commission NAIIC of the Japanese Parliament:
Professor Kiyoshi Kurokawa chaired the Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC) by the National Diet of Japan, which was active from December 8, 2011 to July 5, 2012. While Parliamentary commissions to investigate accidents, problems and disasters are quite frequent in most Western democracies, this was the first time ever in the history of Constitutional Democratic Japan, that a Parliamentary investigation commission was constituted.
Examples of Parliamentary commissions in other western democracies are:
Three Mile Island, USA 1979
Space Shuttle Challenger, USA 1986
9.11 Terrorist Attack, USA 2001 and many many many more in USA
Oslo’s shooting incident, Norway 2011
Mad Cow Disease, UK 1997-, and several Parliamentary commissions every year in UK
Fukushima Nuclear Accident Investigation Commission of the Japanese Parliament NAIIC key results: Fukushima nuclear disaster was caused by “regulatory capture”
The key result of the Parliamentary Commission is, that the Fukushima nuclear disaster was caused by “regulatory capture”, a phenomenon for which there are many examples all over the world and which is not specific to Japan. Regulatory capture was studied by Goerge J Stigler, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1982 for “for his seminal studies of industrial structures, functioning of markets and causes and effects of public regulation”.
Since the full report of the Independent Parliamentary Commission NAIIC is long and complex to read, few people are likely to read the full reports and watch the videos of all sessions.
Therefore short summary videos the key results of the Independent Parliamentary Commission NAIIC were prepared both in Japanese and in English.
The simplest explanation of The National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission NAIIC Report (English):
1. What is the NAIIC?
2. Was the nuclear accident preventable?
3. What happened inside the nuclear plant?
4. What should have been done after the accident?
5. Could the damage be contained?
6. What are the issues with nuclear energy?
“Groupthink can kill”
We need leaders to be accountable, and we need to understand that “Groupthink” can lead to disasters.
We need the obligation to dissent instead of compliance.
The Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC) was like a hole body CT scan of the Governance of Japan.
Richard Feynman when charing the Space Shuttle Accident investigation wrote in 1986: “for a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
For his work chairing the Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC) Professor Kurokawa was selected as one of “100 Top Global Thinkers 2012” by Foreign Policy “for daring to tell a complacent country that groupthink can kill”.
Professor Kurokawa was awarded the AAAS Scientific Freedom and Responsibility Award “for his courage in challenging some of the most ingrained conventions of Japanese governance and society.
“Japan is clearly living in denial, water keeps building up inside the plant, and debris keeps piling up outside of it. This is all just one big shell game aimed at pushing off the problem until the future”, New York Times, quotation of the day, September 4, 2013 Professor Kiyoshi Kurokawa
(Gerhard Fasol, CEO of Eurotechnology Japan KK. Served as Associate Professor of Tokyo University, Lecturer at Cambridge University, and Manger of Hitachi Cambridge R&D Lab.)
Ludwig Boltzmann, the scientist
Ludwig Boltzmann’s greatest contribution to science is that he linked the macroscopic definition of Entropy which came from optimizing steam engines at the source of the first industrial revolution to the microscopic motion of atoms or molecules in gases, this achievement is summarized by the equation S = k log W, linking entropy S with the probability W. k is the Boltzmann constant, one of the most important constants in nature, linked directly to temperature in the SI system of physical units. This monumental work is maybe Boltzmann’s most important creation but by far not the only one. He discovered many laws, and created many mathematical tools, for example Boltzmann’s Equations, which are used today as tools for numerical simulations of gas flow for the construction of jet engines, airplanes, automobiles, in semiconductor physics, information technology and many other areas. Although independently discovered, Shannon’s theory of noise in communication networks, and Shannon’s entropy in IT is also directly related to Boltzmann’s entropy work.
Ludwig Boltzmann, the leader
Ludwig Boltzmann was not only a monumental scientist, but also an exceptional leader, teacher, educator and promoter of exceptional talent, and he promoted many women.
One of the women Ludwig Boltzmann promoted was Henriette von Aigentler, who was refused permission to unofficially audit lectures at Graz University. Ludwig Boltzmann advised and helped her to appeal this decision, in 1874, Henriette von Aigentler passed her exams as a high-school teacher, and on July 17, 1876, Ludwig Boltzmann married Henriette von Aigentler, my great-grand mother.
Another woman Ludwig Boltzmann promoted was his student Lise Meitner (Nov 1878 – Oct 27, 1968), who later was part of the team that discovered nuclear fission, work for which Otto Hahn was awarded the Nobel Prize. Lise Meitner was also the second woman to earn a Doctorate degree in Physics from the University of Vienna. Element 109, Meitnerium, is named after Lise Meitner.
Nagaoka Hantaro, First President of the University of Osaka – Ludwig Boltzmann’s pupil
The first President of Osaka University (1931-1934), Nagaoka Hantaro (1865 – 1950) was Ludwig Boltzmann’s pupil around 1892 – 1893 at Muenchen University.
Ludwig Boltzmann, a leader of science
Ludwig Boltzmann was connected in intense discussions with all major scientists of his time, he travelled extensively including three trips to the USA in 1899, 1904 and 1905, about which he wrote the article “Die Reise eines deutschen Professors ins El Dorado”, published in the book “Populäre Schriften”.
Ludwig Boltzmann published his first scientific publication at the age of 21 years in 1865. He was appointed Full Professor of Mathematical Physics at the University of Graz in 1869 at the age of 25 years, later in 1887-1888 he was Rektor (President) of the University of Graz at the age of 43 years.
He spent periods of his professional work in Vienna, at Graz University (1869-1873 and 1876-1890), at Muenchen University (1890-1894). When working at Muenchen University, he discovered that neither he nor his family would not receive any pension from his employment at Muenchen University after an eventual retirement or in case he dies before retirement, and therefore decided to return to Vienna University in 1894, where he and his family were assured of an appropriate pension. During 1900-1902 he spent two years working in Leipzig, where he cooperated with the Nobel Prize winner Friedrich Wilhelm Ostwald.
Ludwig Boltzmann did not shy away from forceful arguments to argue for his thoughts and conclusions, even if his conclusions were opposite to the views of established colleagues, or when he felt that philosophers intruded into the field of physics, i.e. used methods of philosophy to attempt solving questions which needed to be solved with physics measurements, e.g. to determine whether our space is curved or not. Later in his life he was therefore also appointed to a parallel Chair in Philosophy of Science, and Ludwig Boltzmann’s work in Philosophy of Science is also very fundamentally important.
I discovered the unpublished manuscripts of Boltzmann’s lectures on the Philosophy of Science, stimulated and encouraged by myself, and with painstaking work my mother transcribed these and other unpublished manuscripts, and prepared them for publication, to make these works finally accessible to the world, many years after Ludwig Boltzmann’s death.
Ludwig Boltzmann was a down to earth man. He rejected the offer of Nobility by His Majesty, The Emperor of Austria, i.e. the privilege to be named Ludwig von Boltzmann (or a higher title) instead of commoner Ludwig Boltzmann. Ludwig Boltzmann said: “if our common name was good enough for my parents and ancestors, it will be good enough for my children and grand children…”
Summary: understanding Ludwig Boltzmann.
Boltzmann’s thoughts and ideas are a big part of our understanding of the world and the universe.
His mathematical tools are used every day by today’s engineers, bankers, IT people, physicists, chemists… and even may contribute to solve the world’s energy problems.
Ludwig Boltzmann stood up for his ideas and conclusions and did not give in to authority. He rejected authority for authority’s sake, and strongly pushed his convictions forward.
What can we learn from Ludwig Boltzmann?
empower young people, recognize and support talent early.
exceptional talent is not linear but exponential.
move around the world. Connect. Interact.
don’t accept authority for authority’s sake.
science/physics/nature need to be treated with the methods of physics/science.