Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.02.005

Examination of different socioeconomic factors that contribute to the public acceptance of nuclear energy  

Nguyen, Viet Phuong (Department of Nuclear and Quantum Engineering, KAIST)
Yim, Man-Sung (Department of Nuclear and Quantum Engineering, KAIST)
Publication Information
Nuclear Engineering and Technology / v.50, no.5, 2018 , pp. 767-772 More about this Journal
Abstract
Public acceptance is a major issue that will determine the future of nuclear energy. In this article, we review relevant studies and identify several common patterns of nuclear public acceptance. Based on these patterns and four categories of factors, we propose hypotheses on the impact of different socioeconomic factors on the public opinion of nuclear energy. These factors were demographic and social influences, politico-economic, energy conditions, and nuclear accidents and natural risks. We tested these hypotheses using a data set including survey results on public opinion of nuclear energy in 59 countries from 1987 to 2014. Results of the regression analysis generally verified the proposed hypotheses, especially regarding the positive impact of education or geological suitability and the negative effect of improved living standards and democracy on nuclear acceptance. We propose policy recommendations, including a better focus on education and communication and a thorough consideration of the social and geological conditions a country needs to make before deciding to go nuclear. Potential weaknesses of this study are also discussed, including the possible causal relation between independent variables and the binary nature of the dependent variable.
Keywords
Nuclear Acceptance; Quantitative Analysis; Risk Perception;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 A.M. Weinberg, Social institutions and nuclear energy-II, J. Nucl. Sci. Technol. 32 (1995) 1071-1080.   DOI
2 A.M. Weinberg, The most serious question now facing nuclear energy is its acceptance by the public, Am. Sci. 64 (1976) 16-21.
3 S. Jasanoff, S.H. Kim, Sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea, Minerva 47 (2009).
4 F. Bazile, Social impacts and public perception of nuclear power, in: A. Alonso (Ed.), Infrastructure and Methodologies for the Justification of Nuclear Power Programmes, Woodhead Publishing Limited, 2012.
5 P. Slovic, Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: surveying the riskassessment battlefield, Risk Anal. 19 (1999) 689-701.
6 B. Fischhoff, P. Slovic, S. Lichtenstein, S. Read, B. Barbara, How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits, Policy Sci. 9 (1978) 127-152.   DOI
7 S. Ansolabehere, D.M. Konisky, Public attitudes toward construction of new power plants, Public Opin. Q. 73 (2009) 566-577.   DOI
8 V.H.M. Visschers, M. Siegrist, How a nuclear power plant accident influences acceptance of nuclear power: results of a longitudinal study before and after the Fukushima disaster, Risk Anal. 33 (2013) 333-347.   DOI
9 P.C. Stern, T. Dietz, L. Kalof, Value orientations, gender, and environmental concern, Environ. Behav. 25 (1993) 322-348.   DOI
10 J. Mervis, Politics doesn't always rule: ideology is just one factor shaping views on science issues, Science 349 (2015) 16.   DOI
11 R.P. Barke, H.C. Jenkins-Smith, Politics & scientific expertise: scientists, risk perception, and nuclear waste policy, Risk Anal. 13 (1993).
12 J. Palfreman, A tale of two fears: exploring media depictions of nuclear power and global warming, Rev. Policy Res. 23 (2006).
13 J. Flynn, P. Slovic, C.K. Mertz, Gender, race, and perception of environmental health risks, Risk Anal. 14 (1994) 1101-1108.   DOI
14 M.S. Yim, P.A. Vaganov, Effects of education on nuclear risk perception and attitude: theory, Prog. Nucl. Energy 42 (2003).
15 E. Yamamura, Effect of free media on views regarding nuclear energy after the Fukushima accident, Kyklos 65 (2012) 132-141.   DOI
16 O. Renn, Public responses to the Chernobyl accident, J. Environ. Psychol. 10 (1990) 151-167.   DOI
17 P. Slovic, Perceived risk, trust, and democracy, Risk Anal. 13 (1993) 675-682.   DOI
18 P.A. Groothuis, G. Miller, Locating hazardous waste facilities: the influence of NIMBY beliefs, Am. J. Econ. Sociol. 53 (1994).
19 C.C. Lee, Y.B. Chiu, Nuclear energy consumption, oil prices, and economic growth: evidence from highly industrialized countries, Energy Econ. 33 (2011) 236-248.   DOI
20 L. Rinkevicius, Public risk perceptions in a 'Double-Risk' society: the case of the ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania, Innov.: Eur. J. Soc. Sci. Res. 13 (2000) 279-289.   DOI
21 D.M. Reiner, T.E. Curry, M.A. De Figueiredo, H.J. Herzog, S.D. Ansolabehere, K. Itaoka, F. Johnsson, M. Odenberger, American exceptionalism? Similarities and differences in national attitudes toward energy policy and global warming, Environ. Sci. Technol. 40 (2006) 2093-2098.   DOI
22 C.J.H. Midden, B. Verplanken, The stability of nuclear attitudes after Chernobyl, J. Environ. Psychol. 10 (1990) 111-119.   DOI
23 C. De Boer, I. Catsburg, The impact of nuclear accidents on attitudes toward nuclear energy, Public Opin. Q. 52 (1988) 254-261.   DOI
24 P. Hogselius, Spent nuclear fuel policies in historical perspective: an international comparison, Energy Policy 37 (2009) 254-263.   DOI
25 Z. Csereklyei, Measuring the impact of nuclear accidents on energy policy, Ecol. Econ. 99 (2014) 121-129.   DOI
26 A. Sundstrom, A.M. McCright, Women and nuclear energy: examining the gender divide in opposition to nuclear power among Swedish citizens and politicians, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 11 (2016) 29-39.   DOI
27 V.P. Nguyen, M.S. Yim, Post-Cold War civilian nuclear cooperation and implications for nuclear nonproliferation, Prog. Nucl. Energy 93 (2016) 246-259.   DOI
28 Q. Li, M. Fuhrmann, B.R. Early, A. Vedlitz, Preferences, knowledge, and citizen probability assessments of the terrorism risk of nuclear power, Rev. Policy Res. 29 (2012) 207-227.   DOI
29 R.M. O'Brien, A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors, Qual. Quant. 41 (2007) 673-690.   DOI
30 E. Latre, T. Perko, P. Thijssen, Public opinion change after the Fukushima nuclear accident, Energy Policy 104 (2017).
31 M.V. Ramana, Nuclear power and the public, Bull. At. Sci. 67 (2011) 43-51.   DOI
32 S. Grano, Perception of risk towards nuclear energy in Taiwan and Hong Kong, Taiwan Comp. Perspect. 5 (2014) 60-78.