• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.45-67
• /
• 2015

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.