|
|
|
Perception of people for the risk of Tianwan
nuclear power plant |
| Lei HUANG,Jun BI,Bing ZHANG,Fengying LI,Changsheng QU, |
| State Key Laboratory
of Pollution Control & Resource Reuse, School of Environment,
Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China; |
|
|
|
|
Abstract A questionnaire survey of residents’ risk perceptions related to Taiwan nuclear power plant in China was carried out to explore the determining factors that affect individual risk perception. This study proposed to pursue a more comprehensive understanding of factors that affected individual risk perception to nuclear power plants. Covariance structure analysis was conducted using risk perceptions of nuclear power as dependent variable and including interest and knowledge levels of nuclear power, acceptability, benefit perception, trust in nuclear power operation, and trust in government as independent variables. The use of the hypothesis of Elaboration likelihood model (ELM) was also proposed. The results showed that persons with higher levels of interest and knowledge of nuclear power had their own perceptions of risk closely associated with acceptability and potential benefits of nuclear power. In contrast, persons with no interest in and knowledge of nuclear power would have risk perceptions related to their trust in nuclear operation and the government, which partially supported the ELM hypothesis. All these results indicated that the government in China plays an important role in rational risk perceptions, and well-designed communication of risks will help the public to be involved in risk management and improve people’s rational acceptance of risk.
|
| Keywords
nuclear power
risk perception
public involvement
covariance structure analysis
China
|
|
Issue Date: 05 March 2010
|
|
|
Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Litenstein S, Read S, Combs B. How safe is safe enough? A psychometricstudy of attitudes toward technological risks and benefits. Policy Science, 1978, 9: 127–152
doi: 10.1007/BF00143739
|
|
Sjoberg L. Local acceptance of a high-level nuclear waste repository. Risk Analysis, 2004, 24(3), 737–749
doi: 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00472.x
|
|
Purvis-Roberts K L, Werner C A, Frank I. Perceived risks from radiation and nuclear testing nearSemipalatinsk, Kazakhstan: A comparison between physicians, scientists,and the public. Risk Analysis, 2007, 27(2): 291–302
doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00882.x
|
|
Slovic P, Finucane M, Peters E, MacGregor D G. Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect,reason, risk and rationality. Risk Analysis, 2004, 24(2): 311–323
doi: 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00433.x
|
|
Siegrist M, Keller C, Cousin M. Implicit attitudes toward nuclear power and mobile phonebase stations: Support for the effect heuristic. Risk Analysis, 2006, 26(4): 1021–1029
doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00797.x
|
|
Gould L, Gardner G, DeLuca D, Sauther M L.Acceptions of Technological Risks and Benefits. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1988
|
|
Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Litenstein S. Images of disaster: Perception and acceptance of risksfrom nuclear power. In: Goodman G, RoweW D, eds. Energy Risk Management. New York: Academic Press, 1979
|
|
Sjoberg D B, Sjoberg L. Risk perception and worriesafter the Chernobyl accident. Journal ofEnvironmental Psychology, 1990, 10: 135–149.
doi: 10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80124-0
|
|
Tsunoda K. Difference in the formation of attitude toward nuclear power. Political Psychology, 2002, 23(1): 191–201.
doi: 10.1111/0162-895X.00277
|
|
Shimooka H. Process of public attitudes toward nuclear power generation. Journal of the Atomic Energy Society of Japan, 1993, 35: 115–123
|
|
Bickerstaff K. Risk perception research: Socio-cultural perspectives on the publicexperience of air pollution. EnvironmentInternational, 2004, 30: 827–840
doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2003.12.001
|
|
Chaiken S, Liberman A, Early A H. Heuristic and systematic information processing withinand beyond the persuasion context. In: UlemanJ S, Bargh J A, eds. Unintended Thought. New York: Guiford, 1989
|
|
Petty R E, Cacioppo J T. Attitudes and persuasion:Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, IA: Brown, 1981
|
|
Petty R E, Cacioppo J T. The elaboration likelihoodmodel of persuasion. Advances in ExperimentalSocial Psychology, 1986, 19: 123–205
doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2
|
|
Chaiken S, Maheswaran D. Heuristic processing canbias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argumentambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1994, 66: 460–473
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.66.3.460
|
|
Xie X F, Wang M, Xu L. What risks are Chinese people concerned about? Risk Analysis, 2003, 23(4): 685–695
doi: 10.1111/1539-6924.00347
|
|
Flynn J, Kasperson R, Kunreuther H, Slovic P. Time to rethinknuclear waste storage. Science Technology, 1992, 7: 42–48
|
|
Tsunoda K. Publicresponse to the Tokai nuclear accident. Risk Analysis, 2001, 21(6): 1039–1046
doi: 10.1111/0272-4332.216172
|
|
Flynn J, Burns W, Mertz C K, Slovic P. Trust as adeterminant of opposition to a high-level radioactive waste repository:Analysis of a structural model. Risk Analysis, 1992, 12: 417–429
doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb00694.x
|
|
Nyland L G. Risk perception in Brazil and Sweden. Risk Research Report No. 15. Rhizion: Center for Risk Research,Stockholm School of Economics Press, 1993
|
|
Siegrist M. The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on theacceptance of gene technology. Risk Analysis, 2000, 20(2): 195–203
doi: 10.1111/0272-4332.202020
|
|
Chebat C, Filiatrault P, Perrien J. Limits of credibility: The case of political persuasion.Journal of Social Psychology, 1999, 130: 157–167
|
|
Lior N. Energy resources and use: The present situation and possible pathsto the future. Energy, 2008, 33(6): 842–857
doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2007.09.009
|
|
Cha Y J. An analysis of nuclear risk perception: With focus on developingeffective policy alternatives. InternationalReview of Public Administration, 2004, 8(2): 33–47
|
|
Viewed |
|
|
|
Full text
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
|
Cited |
|
|
|
|
| |
Shared |
|
|
|
|
| |
Discussed |
|
|
|
|
