DUE DATE: Wednesday, 28th February, 2024..

No extension

ENTERPRENUERSHIP ASSIGNMENT 1

Fukushima Disaster: How an Earthquake Triggered Japan’s Tokyo Electric Power Company
(TEPCO) 2011 Nuclear Disaster by Tai Hing Sung, 2015.

Fukushima accident, also called Fukushima nuclear accident or Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
accident, at the Fukushima Daiichi (“Number One”) plant in northern Japan, was the second
worst nuclear accident in the history of nuclear power generation. The site is on Japan’s Pacific
coast, in north-eastern Fukushima prefecture about 100 km (60 miles) south of Sendai. The
facility, operated by the Tokyo Electric and Power Company (TEPCO), was made up of six
boiling-water reactors constructed between 1971 and 1979. At the time of the accident, only
reactors 1–3 were operational, and reactor 4 served as temporary storage for spent fuel rods.

TEPCO officials reported that tsunami waves generated by the main shock of the Japan
earthquake on March 11, 2011, damaged the backup generators at the Fukushima Daiichi plant.
Although all three of the reactors that were operating were successfully shut down, the loss of
power caused cooling systems to fail in each of them within the first few days of the disaster.
Rising residual heat within each reactor’s core caused the fuel rods in reactors 1, 2, and 3 to
overheat and partially melt down, leading at times to the release of radiation. Those holes
partially exposed the nuclear material in the cores. Explosions resulting from the build-up of

1
pressurized hydrogen gas occurred in the outer containment buildings enclosing reactors 1 and 3
on March 12 and March 14, respectively. Workers sought to cool and stabilize the three cores by
pumping seawater and boric acid into them. Because of concerns over possible radiation
exposure, government officials established a 30-km (18-mile) no-fly zone around the facility,
and a land area of 20-km (12.5-mile) radius around the plant which covered nearly 600 square
km (approximately 232 square miles) was evacuated.

A third explosion occurred on March 15 in the building surrounding reactor 2. At that time the
explosion was thought to have damaged the containment vessel housing the fuel rods. (In
actuality, the explosion punched a second hole in the containment vessel; the first hole had been
created earlier by melted nuclear material that passed through the bottom of the vessel.) In
response, government officials designated a wider zone, extending to a radius of 30 km around
the plant, within which residents were asked to remain indoors. The explosion, along with a fire
touched off by rising temperatures in spent fuel rods stored in reactor 4, led to the release of
higher levels of radiation from the plant.

In the days that followed, some 47,000 residents left their homes, many people in areas adjacent
to the 20-km evacuation warning zone also prepared to leave, and workers at the plant made
several attempts to cool the reactors using truck-mounted water cannons and water dropped from
helicopters. Those efforts met with some success, which temporarily slowed the release of
radiation; however, they were suspended several times after rising steam or smoke signalled an
increased risk of radiation exposure. As workers continued their attempts to cool the reactors, the
appearance of increased levels of radiation in some local food and water supplies prompted
Japanese and international officials to issue warnings about their consumption.

At the end of March 2011, the evacuation zone was expanded to 30 km around the plant, and
ocean water near the plant was discovered to have been contaminated with high levels of iodine-
131, which resulted from leakage of radioactive water through cracks in trenches and tunnels
between the plant and the ocean. On April 6 plant officials announced that those cracks had been
sealed, and later that month workers began to pump the irradiated water to an on-site storage
building until it could be properly treated. On April 12 nuclear regulators elevated the severity
level of the nuclear emergency from 5 to 7the highest level on the scale created by the
International Atomic Energy Agency placing it in the same category as the Chernobyl accident,

2
which had occurred in the Soviet Union in 1986. Melted material fell to the bottom of the
containment vessels in reactors 1 and 2 and bored sizable holes in the floor of each vessel a fact
that emerged in late May, 2011. It was not until the middle of December 2011 that Japanese
Prime Minister Noda Yoshihiko declared the facility stable, after the cold shutdown of the
reactors was completed.

As the fallout pattern became better understood, an additional corridor of land covering roughly
207 square km (80 square miles) and stretching away from the initial 20-km zone was also
designated for evacuation in the months following the disaster. Months later, radiation levels
remained high in the evacuation zone, and government officials remarked that the area might be
uninhabitable for decades. However, they also announced that radiation levels had declined
enough in some towns located just beyond the original 20-km evacuation warning zone that
residents could return to their homes there. Although many areas located within the 20-km
evacuation warning zone and the expanded zone (an area called the “difficult-to-return” zone)
continued to remain off-limits due to high radiation levels, officials began to allow limited
activities (business activities and visitation but no lodging) in other previously evacuated areas
with moderately high radiation levels. Beginning in July 2013, evacuation orders were lifted in
some areas characterized by lower levels of radiation both within and beyond the 20-km
evacuation warning zone. A 2016 study on the effects of the accident on fish and marine
products showed that the contamination level had decreased dramatically over time, though the
radioactivity of some species, especially sedentary rockfish, remained elevated within the
exclusion zone. By March 2017 all evacuation orders in the areas outside the difficult-to-return
zone (which continued to sequester some 371 square km [about 143 square miles]) had been
lifted.

Fukushima exclusion zone

Historically, there was little in the way of safety equipment to prevent accidents, and long-term
exposure to dangerous chemicals could cause severe disablement and death. Before factory
owners were called on to make their workplaces safer, many workers were injured in accidents.
When permanent disability was the result, often that worker was doomed to a life of poverty,
since there was often little in the way of compensation for his or her injury. The rise of

3
occupational medicine in the industrial era, accompanied by an increased recognition of
occupational hazards, led to improved measures of protection for workers.

Required:

In entrepreneurship, one of the primary challenges for any startup founder or business owner is
navigating ethical dilemmas. While some ethical issues are clearly defined by laws and
regulations, others may be more ambiguous. Entrepreneurs are expected to conduct their
business activities in compliance with applicable legal requirements and ethical standards. They
must also adhere to governance guidelines established by stakeholders, such as boards of
directors, who oversee the company's operations. Throughout history, philosophers have
extensively studied ethical behavior, and their insights serve as valuable guidance for
entrepreneurs in assessing the ethicality of their decisions and actions. Recognizing the
importance of ethical conduct, entrepreneurs must proactively integrate ethical considerations
into the culture and operations of their organizations. By doing so, they can uphold integrity and
trustworthiness in their interactions with stakeholders and the broader community.

i. How can entrepreneurial leaders, embodying qualities of resilience and adaptability,

leverage theories of Corporate Governance to navigate ethical dilemmas in the aftermath of a
corporate disaster like Fukushima? Discuss strategic approaches these entrepreneurs can
employ to rebuild trust and restore their reputation within the affected community and beyond.
(50marks)

ii. Explore how entrepreneurial visionaries, characterized by their innovative thinking and
risk-taking mindset, can utilize Mendelow's Matrix to assess stakeholder relationships and
prioritize actions following a corporate crisis, using the Fukushima nuclear accident as a case
study. (50marks).

(100marks)

4
 Instructions

1. 1. Due date Wednesday, 28th February, 2024..No extension

2. Submission: Both Hard copy (for marking) and soft copy (for checking plagiarism percentage)
3. Referencing Harvard referencing style
4. Use Times Roman 12
5. Spacing 1.5
6. Similarity Index less than 30%
7. Number of words 2,000 excluding references
8. Presentation of work Approach should comply either of the following
presentation style
i. IRAC - Issue, Rule, Application and Conclusion
ii. IPAC - Issue, Principle, Application and Conclusion
9. Any work without adequate citations/references will automatically be
marked at 50%.
10. Minimum citations/references 20 references.
Note: extension will not be given further from the date above.

DUE DATE: Wednesday, 28th February, 2024..No extension