119
© The Author(s) 2020
T. Mino, S. Kudo (eds.), Framing in Sustainability Science,
Science for Sustainable Societies, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9061-6_6
Chapter 6
Role in Framing in Sustainability
Science — The Case of Minamata Disease
Motoharu Onuki
Abstract This chapter discusses multiple framings employed in Mainamata disease. Minamata disease is one of the major health problems caused by industrial
pollution during Japan’s high economic growth in the 1950s and 1960s. By conducting a historical review of Minamata disease, this chapter discusses typical framings applied in sustainability discourses in Japan, which have been led by pollution
discourses. Two typical interpretations of Minamata disease are identified. One is
that Minamata disease is a past event in Japanese history. It was a bitter experience,
however thanks to this experience, the once-damaged Japanese environment became
clean as environmental governance became stricter, regulations were established,
and new environmental technologies were developed. Thus, one framing to
Minamata disease is a historic event that Japan has learned lessons from the event,
and something can be proud of how quickly Japan has recovered from such disaster.
In contrast, even today, large-scale health examinations to understand the overall
picture of methylmercury-derived health damage and to discover people with unrecognized symptoms continue. Therefore, Minamata disease remain unresolved and
the local and national governments as well as Japanese society ignore the potentially hidden victims. The gap between these two framings is widening as the majority of the general public is unaware of the existence of the latter and some even
believe that such humanitarian-conscious people are exaggerating their claims in an
effort to obtain excessive compensation. To move forward, it is necessary to careful
examine which part of framings people agree and disagree. By doing so, the essential nature of Minamata disease becomes clearer and collaboration among the people having different views may be possible. The ability to elicit and understand the
true feelings of different stakeholders, the ability to apply different types of framings, and the ability to connect the people with different views, are critical when
discussing a sustainability challenge that can be framed in diverse ways.
M. Onuki (*)
Graduate Program in Sustainability Science - Global Leadership Initiative,
Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
e-mail: onuki@k.u-tokyo.ac.jp
© The Author(s) 2020
T. Mino, S. Kudo (eds.), Framing in Sustainability Science,
Science for Sustainable Societies, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9061-6_6
Chapter 6
Role in Framing in Sustainability
Science — The Case of Minamata Disease
Motoharu Onuki
Abstract This chapter discusses multiple framings employed in Mainamata disease. Minamata disease is one of the major health problems caused by industrial
pollution during Japan’s high economic growth in the 1950s and 1960s. By conducting a historical review of Minamata disease, this chapter discusses typical framings applied in sustainability discourses in Japan, which have been led by pollution
discourses. Two typical interpretations of Minamata disease are identified. One is
that Minamata disease is a past event in Japanese history. It was a bitter experience,
however thanks to this experience, the once-damaged Japanese environment became
clean as environmental governance became stricter, regulations were established,
and new environmental technologies were developed. Thus, one framing to
Minamata disease is a historic event that Japan has learned lessons from the event,
and something can be proud of how quickly Japan has recovered from such disaster.
In contrast, even today, large-scale health examinations to understand the overall
picture of methylmercury-derived health damage and to discover people with unrecognized symptoms continue. Therefore, Minamata disease remain unresolved and
the local and national governments as well as Japanese society ignore the potentially hidden victims. The gap between these two framings is widening as the majority of the general public is unaware of the existence of the latter and some even
believe that such humanitarian-conscious people are exaggerating their claims in an
effort to obtain excessive compensation. To move forward, it is necessary to careful
examine which part of framings people agree and disagree. By doing so, the essential nature of Minamata disease becomes clearer and collaboration among the people having different views may be possible. The ability to elicit and understand the
true feelings of different stakeholders, the ability to apply different types of framings, and the ability to connect the people with different views, are critical when
discussing a sustainability challenge that can be framed in diverse ways.
M. Onuki (*)
Graduate Program in Sustainability Science - Global Leadership Initiative,
Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
e-mail: onuki@k.u-tokyo.ac.jp