• Nuclear industry
• /
• v.37 no.7
• /
• pp.54-61
• /
• 2017

• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.107-144
• /
• 2012

Recently concerns on the energy future are rising in Korea after nuclear disaster of Fukushima in Japan last year. However, even after Fukushima disaster Korean government keeps on insisting nuclear oriented energy policy. Contrary to it, some of civil society's organizations(CSOs) including environment groups and progressive political parties are making strong voices for phase-out nuclear. As a way of phase-out nuclear activity researcher groups based on CSOs have presented several alternative energy scenarios against the official government scenario so that contest between the two senarios seems not to be avoided. This article aims to analyse the politics of expertise around energy scenarios in Korea by highlighting differences between two scenarios of government and CSOs in terms of epistemological and methodological base, value orientation, institutional foundation, and the socio-political contexts of scenarios. Our research shows that government's energy scenario is based on scientific-positivist epistemology, firm belief in value neutrality and forecasting method, and is built by neo-classical economists at government-sponsored research institutes in accordance with the 'Business As Usual' approach. In contrast, alternative scenarios of CSOs can be said to be based on epistemological constructivism, value oriented attitudes and backcasting method, and be built by collaboration of researchers and activists with different academic and social backgrounds after Fukushima nuclear disaster.