Tokyo Electric Power and the Disaster at Fukushima Daiichi Question Answer 2022

Running head: TOKYO ELECTRIC POWER AND THE DIASTER AT FUKISHIMA
Tokyo Electric Power and the disaster at Fukishima Daiichi
Name of the student:
Name of the organization:
Name of the Author:

1
TOKYO ELECTRIC POWER AND THE DIASTER AT FUKISHIMA
Question 1:
On 11th March Japan was hit by an earthquake of a magnitude of 9.0 and was later
hit by a tsunami of 45 foot tall which caused a lot of damage to the residential buildings of Japan
as well as it damaged a nuclear power station which was under the Tokyo Electric Power
Company(TEPCO) (Utz,Schultz & Glocka,2013). Though TEPCO could not have predicted the
mishap but it could have been prepared for it in the right places. With the looks of the damage
there seems to be a major setbacks in the analysis, the design as well as the approval process.
TEPCO has faced a lot of low key nuclear accidents in the past but it has never implemented
board level committee for overseeing the risk management of the enterprise. Due to the low
number of independent directors in the board the enterprise suffered from having diversity of
opinions in the board room which might have pointed out the company’s exposure to the risk.
Only 2 out of the 20 members in the board are independent and the Risk Management
Committee of the company only comprises of the company executives (Lipscy,Kushida &
Incerti,2013). TEPCO has never implemented the globally recognized best practices in the field
of corporate governance and board enterprises. This disaster shows that the potential risk which
is associated with the style of the management in TEPCO is due to the reason of the power being
centrally located in the hands of the management and the outside voice of experts is generally
negated.
Question 2:
The website of TEPCO clearly states that the corporate governance policies of the
company and the practices which has been established by the government is just a showcase
which is only present to be shown to the government that the company is following the policies
and a structured culture of corporate governance. In reality the company never actually has
followed their statements in the website. There is a bad reputation of the company in the past for