Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Radiation risk perception and its associated factors among residents living near nuclear power plants: A nationwide survey in Korea

  • Sung, Hyoju (National Radiation Emergency Medical Center, Korea Institute of Radiological & Medical Sciences) ;
  • Kim, Jung Un (National Radiation Emergency Medical Center, Korea Institute of Radiological & Medical Sciences) ;
  • Lee, Dalnim (National Radiation Emergency Medical Center, Korea Institute of Radiological & Medical Sciences) ;
  • Jin, Young Woo (National Radiation Emergency Medical Center, Korea Institute of Radiological & Medical Sciences) ;
  • Jo, Hyemi (Department of Psychiatry, Korea University Guro Hospital) ;
  • Jun, Jae Kwan (National Cancer Control Institute, National Cancer Center) ;
  • Park, Sunhoo (National Radiation Emergency Medical Center, Korea Institute of Radiological & Medical Sciences) ;
  • Seo, Songwon (National Radiation Emergency Medical Center, Korea Institute of Radiological & Medical Sciences)
  • Received : 2021.07.16
  • Accepted : 2021.10.12
  • Published : 2022.04.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

There has been increased interest in researching risk perception of radiation to implement successful risk communication, particularly given the recent worldwide nuclear policy movement regarding nuclear energy. This study aimed to investigate characteristics of risk perception among residents living near normally operating nuclear power plants in South Korea by identifying factors associated with risk perception. A survey was conducted with face-to-face interviews for 1200 residents aged 20e84 years by gender- and age-stratified random sampling. Risk perception was associated with trust perception in nuclear safety, but was not highly correlated with benefit perception for utilizing nuclear power. Relatively high risk perception was observed in women, older age groups, and residents not having experience of nuclear-related education or work. This association remained after adjusting for other factors including benefit perception, trust perception, and psychological distress. In addition to these individual characteristics, risk perception was also associated with a residential district's own unique context, indicating that a strategy of risk communication should be developed differently for residents facing nuclear-related circumstances. Given that risk perception can be changed, depending on social values such as safety culture and economic setting, further studies are required to understand the changing characteristics of radiation risk perception.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

We thank the residents living near nuclear power plants who participated in this study. This study was supported by the Nuclear Safety Research Program through the Korea Foundation Of Nuclear Safety (KoFONS) and the Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences (KIRAMS), both of which were funded by the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission (NSSC) of the Republic of Korea (Nos. 1503008 and 50091-2021).

References

  1. OECD, OECD Reviews of Risk Management Policies: Trends in Risk Communication Policies and Practices, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264260467-en.
  2. IAEA, Communication with the Public in a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency, IAEA Publications, Vienna, 2012.
  3. K.M. Seong, T. Kwon, S. Seo, D. Lee, S. Park, Y.W. Jin, S.-S. Lee, Perception of low dose radiation risks among radiation researchers in Korea, PLoS One 12 (2) (2017), e0171777, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171777.
  4. Y. Lee, Y.Y. Choi, M. Yang, Y.W. Jin, K.M. Seong, Risk perception of radiation emergency medical staff on low-dose radiation exposure: knowledge is a critical factor, J. Environ. Radioact. 227 (2021), 106502, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvrad.2020.106502.
  5. M. Ha, Y.-S. Ju, W.J. Lee, S. Hwang, S.-C. Yoo, K.-H. Choi, E. Burm, J. Lee, Y.-K. Lee, S. Im, Cesium-137 contaminated roads and health problems in residents: an epidemiological investigation in Seoul, 2011, J. Kor. Med. Sci. 33 (9) (2018) e58, https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e58.
  6. Q. Xiao, H. Liu, M.W. Feldman, How does trust affect acceptance of a nuclear power plant (NPP): a survey among people living with Qinshan NPP in China, PLoS One 12 (11) (2017), e0187941, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187941.
  7. Y.W. Kang, Y.S. Ko, Y.J. Kim, K.M. Sung, H.J. Kim, H.Y. Choi, C. Sung, E. Jeong, Korea community health survey data profiles, Osong Public Health Res Perspect 6 (3) (2015) 211-217, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phrp.2015.05.003.
  8. Y. Takebayashi, Y. Lyamzina, Y. Suzuki, M. Murakami, Risk perception and anxiety regarding radiation after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear power plant accident: a systematic qualitative review, Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 14 (11) (2017) 1306, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14111306.
  9. H. Hori, M. Orita, Y. Taira, T. Kudo, N. Takamura, Risk perceptions regarding radiation exposure among Japanese schoolteachers living around the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant after the Fukushima accident, PLoS One 14 (3) (2019), e0212917, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212917.
  10. L. Huang, Y. Zhou, Y. Han, J.K. Hammitt, J. Bi, Y. Liu, Effect of the Fukushima nuclear accident on the risk perception of residents near a nuclear power plant in China, Proc Natl Acad Sci U. S. A. 110 (49) (2013) 19742-19747, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1313825110.
  11. M.R. Greenberg, D.F. Schneider, Gender differences in risk perception: effects differ in stressed vs. Non-stressed environments, Risk Anal. 15 (4) (1995) 503-511, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1995.tb00343.x.
  12. I.J. Chung, An empirical review of Korean perception for technological risks, J. Korean Surg. Soc. 22 (6) (2007) 91-97. https://www.koreascience.or.kr/article/JAKO200714357780562.page.
  13. M. Yoshida, R.D. Yanuaryska, R.R. Shantiningsih, M. Mudjosemedi, E. Honda, Comparison of radiation risk perception and knowledge of radiation between Indonesian and Japanese dental students, J. Environ. Radioact. 204 (2019) 104-110, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvrad.2019.04.005.
  14. P. Andrews-Speed, South Korea's nuclear power industry: recovering from scandal, J. World Energy Law Bus. 13 (1) (2020) 47-57, https://doi.org/10.1093/jwelb/jwaa010.
  15. J. Kang, S.-W. Kim, B.-C. Lee, Hot potato in South Korea: the spent nuclear fuel storage dilemma, B Atom Sci 71 (3) (2015) 76-83, https://doi.org/10.1177/0096340215582518.
  16. K.L. Cheung, P.M. ten Klooster, C. Smit, H. de Vries, M.E. Pieterse, The impact of non-response bias due to sampling in public health studies: a comparison of voluntary versus mandatory recruitment in a Dutch national survey on adolescent health, BMC Publ. Health 17 (1) (2017) 276, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4189-8.
  17. D. Lee, S. Seo, M.K. Song, H.K. Lee, S. Park, Y.W. Jin, Factors associated with the risk perception and purchase decisions of Fukushima-related food in South Korea, PLoS One 12 (11) (2017), e0187655, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187655.
  18. J.A. Lee, J.H. Park, M. Kim, Social and physical environments and self-rated health in urban and rural communities in Korea, Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 12 (11) (2015) 14329-14341. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph121114329