Browse > Article

An essay on the relationship between the risk communication and scientific citizenship of nuclear power in Korea  

Kang, Yun Jae (동국대학교, 다르마칼리지)
Publication Information
Journal of Science and Technology Studies / v.15, no.1, 2015 , pp. 45-67 More about this Journal
Abstract
This essay aims to search for the reason of why, even after Fukushima nuclear disaster, Korean citizens did not try to seek out the possibility of another energy option. Firstly, we single two counter-concepts, the configuration of risk communication and scientific citizenship, out from the measure of frequency of co-occurrence key-terms and the analysis of survey on the citizens' scientific perception each. Secondly, we try to interpret the meaning of qualitative data, and finally, we draw out the result as follow. Korean government have driven out the pro-nuclear policy, and in this course have made full use of the discourse of there-is-no-alternative-option. We need to take an attention to the reason of why the discourse can circulate freely in society. From one data, we find out that the configuration of risk communication guarantee government's success. But we also should look at the another side, the scientific citizenship. From another data, we find out that the upstream scientific citizenship, the momentum of preparing alternative, has not been mature, and it is reason of why the discourse have an strong influence.
Keywords
Scientific citizenship; Risk communication; Nuclear governance; Expertise and Democracity;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 강윤재 (2011), 원전사고와 민주적 위험 거버넌스의 필요성, 경제와 사회, 제91호, pp. 12-39.
2 강윤재 (2012), 원전사고와 위험커뮤니케이션, 전문성의 정치: 후쿠시마 원전사고를 중심으로, 공학교육연구, 제15권 제1호, pp. 35-44.   과학기술학회마을
3 김서용, 임채홍, 정주용, 왕재선, 박천희 (2014), 후쿠시마 원전사고 이후 원전사고와 원자력에 대한 위험판단 분석 : 위험지각패러다임과 위험소통모형의 통합 적용을 통해, 한국행정연구, 제23권 제4호, pp. 113-143.
4 김종영 (2011), 대항지식의 구성 : 미 쇠고기 수입반대 촛불운동에서의 전문가들의 혼성적 연대와 대항논리의 형성, 한국사회학 제45권 제1호, pp. 109-152.
5 오현철 (2010), 촛불집회와 집합지성 - 토의민주주의적 해석, 민주주의와 인권 제10권 제1호, pp. 167-196.
6 이영희 (2012), 전문성의 정치와 사회운동: 의미와 유형, 경제와 사회, 제93호, 13-41.
7 이영희 (2014), 과학기술 시티즌십의 두 유형과 전문성의 정치: 과학기술 대중화 정책과 '차일드세이브'의 활동을 중심으로, 동향과 전망, 제92호, pp. 174-211.
8 이필렬 (1999), 에너지 대안을 찾아서, 창작과 비평사.
9 홍성태 (2007), 원자력문화재단의 활동과 문제, 시민과 세계, 11호, 300-322.
10 Callon, M., Courtial, J., Turner, W., & Bauin, S. (1983), "From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis." Social Science Information, 22/2, 191-235.   DOI
11 Kasperson, J, Kasperson R., Pidegon, N., & Slovic, P. (2003), "The social amplification of risk: assessing fifteen years of research and theory," in Pidgeon, N., Kasperson, R., & Slovic, P. (eds.) (2003), The Social Amplification of Risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12 Renn, O. (1992), "The social arena concept of risk debates", in Krimsky, S & Golding, D. (eds.), Social Theories of Risk, London: Praeger, pp. 179-196.
13 Renn, O. (2008), Risk Governance: Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World. London: Earthscan.
14 Slovic, P. (2000), The perception of risk. London: Earthscan.
15 동아사이언스 (2013.10.14.), "원전 확대정책 포기하면 대안 있을까?: 석탄, LNG, 풍력, 태양광 등 거론…아직은 장점보다 단점 많아".