The Chernobyl Accident and the Resultant Long-Term Relocation of People

Abstract

Following the Chernobyl accident, large areas of the former USSR with populations in the millions were polluted, to varying extent, with long-lived radionuclides. Within the framework of the USSR state legislation still in force in the newly-formed independent states of Belorussia, Russia, and Ukraine, relocation of nearly one million people from these areas was prescribed to avoid exposure to low levels of irradiation; this measure was obviously groundless, both medically and socially. Additionally, four million people from the three affected states were needlessly included in post-Chernobyl legislation; their exposure did not exceed the natural background levels characteristic of many inhabited regions around the world. Finally, these millions of people were falsely identified as the major victims of the accident. This evoked worldwide concern and played an important role in limiting the development of nuclear power production in a number of countries. This article focuses on the social aspects of the Chernobyl aftermath that ordinarily escape scientific attention. In particular, it considers the public health-related realities of "pre-Chernobyl" and "post-Chernobyl, Soviet society, both political and psychological, that not only blocked implementation of proper radiation protection measures, but also put inappropriate measures into action.

From Chernobyl to Fukushima: an interdisciplinary framework for managing and communicating food security risks after nuclear plant accidents

“…BStarting on May 2, 1986, about 50,000 cattle, 13,000 pigs, 3300 sheep, and 700 horses were evacuated together with the people^ (Fesenko et al 2006, 353). Some experts insist that resettlement often was excessive (Filyushkin 1996). Because the IAEA's rules require that radiation doses be as low as reasonably achievable, some IAEA and UN officials are motivated to downplay the potential harmful effects of actual radiation exposure.…”

“…Residents in a few distant areas received regular benefits even though radiation levels there were low (e.g., Boyarka). Some experts claim that people sometimes were falsely or intentionally (due to corrupt practices) identified as major victims of the disaster (Filyushkin 1996;Davies and Polese 2015). Nonetheless, the paid benefits still could have allowed them to improve their nutritional practices immediately after the disaster.…”

Chernobyl, Nuclear Wastes and Nature

“…by about 30% to 50% [8]. The evacuation was based on radiation limits recommended by International Commission for Radiological Protection (ICRP) for "the event of major radiation accidents" [16] and on recommendations for protection of general population [17,18], which were tens to hundreds of times lower than natural doses in many countries [19]. This was in conflict with recommendations of the Soviet scientists whose expertise in the field of radiation effects can be regarded as one of the best in the world [17].…”