After the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March 2011, an international review of nuclear safety indicated that two of the three nuclear power plants (NPPs) operating in Taiwan were listed as the most dangerous in the world. To understand the perception of NPP risks by the public in Taiwan and their attitudes regarding a planned fourth NPP after the Fukushima nuclear incident in 2011, a study was conducted in August 2011. A sample of 2819 individuals responded to the survey, with 66% perceiving that Taiwan's safety management of NPPs was inferior to Japan's, while 40% perceived a higher possibility of nuclear accidents like that in Japan. On average, a 'safe' distance of 94 km from an NPP was expected. 56% opposed the planned fourth NPP, with females (adjusted odd ratios (aOR) 2.03; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.71-2.41), residence near the planned fourth NPP (aOR/CI 13.90/7.79-24.80), distrust of safety management (aOR/CI 1.98/1.45-2.69) and emergency planning (aOR/CI 1.89/1.49-2.40) as the main determinants. Others included those who expected larger safe distances from an NPP (trend test, p < 0.001), perceived excess cancer risks of living within 30 km of an NPP (aOR/CI 2.74/2.02-3.71), and projection of no electric shortage without NPPs (aOR/CI 1.93/1.50-2.49). Given that Taiwan's large population lives close to the existing NPPs and long-term concerns about the safety of these nuclear plants, the Fukushima incident in Japan likely augmented public risk perceptions on nuclear power in general and on the planned fourth NPP.

After the nuclear disaster in Fukushima in Japan in 2011, a nation-wide survey using a standardized self-administered questionnaire was conducted in Taiwan, with a sample size of 2,742 individuals including the residents who live within and beyond 30 km from a nuclear power plant (NPP), to evaluate the participants' perceived nuclear risk in comparison with their perceived risks from selected environmental hazards and human behaviors. The three leading concerns of nuclear energy were "nuclear accidents (82.2%)," "radioactive nuclear waste disposal (76.9%)" and "potential health effects (73.3%)." Respondents (77.6%) perceived a higher relative risk of cancer incidence for those who live within 30 km from an NPP than those who live outside 30 km from an NPP. All the participants had a higher risk perception of death related to "nuclear power operation and nuclear waste" than cigarette smoking, motorcycling, food poisoning, plasticizer poisoning and traveling by air. Moreover, the residents in Gongliao where the planned fourth NPP is located had a significantly higher perceived risk ratio (PRR) of cancer incidence (adjusted odd ratio (aOR)=1.84, p value=0.017) and perceived risk of death (aOR=4.03, p value<0.001) related to nuclear energy. The other factors such as female gender (aOR/p value, 1.25/0.026 and 1.34/0.001 respectively), lower education levels (aOR/p value: 1.31/0.032; 2.03/<0.001) and the participants' concerns about nuclear accidents (aOR/p value: 1.33/0.022; 1.51/<0.001) and potential health effects (aOR/ p value: 2.95/ <0.001; 2.56/<0.001) were found to be commonly associated with the PRRs of "cancer incidence" and "perceived risk of death" related to nuclear energy, respectively. In addition, the respondents' concerns about nuclear waste disposal and possible eco-environmental damage made significant contributions (aOR/ p value: 1.39/ 0.001; 1.40/<0.001) to predict their perceived risk of death related to nuclear power. These factors are considered as important indicators and they can be used for suggesting future policy amendments and public referendum on the decision of the operation of the planned NPP.

To examine the perception of nuclear energy risks among Asian university students following the Fukushima nuclear disaster, a standardized questionnaire survey was conducted since July 2011 after the Fukushima disaster. A total of 1814 respondents from 18 universities in China, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan participated in this survey. It showed that students with the following characteristics had a higher preference for "a clear schedule to phase out nuclear power plant (NPP)": females (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.44-2.34), in Japan (aOR = 2.81, 95% CI = 2.02-3.90), in China (aOR = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.04-2.09), and with perceived relative risks of cancer incidence greaterthan 1 (aOR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.07-1.88). "If nuclear energy were phased out," the opinions on potential electricity shortage were as follows: Japan, aOR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.40-0.69; China, aOR = 2.46, 95% CI = 1.75-3.45; and associated with academic majors (science/technology, aOR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.31-0.59; medicine/health science, aOR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.49-0.84). The results carried essential messages for nuclear energy policy in East Asia.