The current study examines how renewable energy is perceived by the Philippine public through the use of an online survey. As a developing economy with limited fossil fuel resources but huge potential for renewable energy (RE), and as a signatory of the Kyoto Protocol and other international environmental agreements, RE should be central to the government’s energy policy. However, at the time of the survey, RE provided less than 25% of electricity capacity, placing it below the ASEAN average, despite its ambitious public announcements and being the first to adopt a legal framework explicitly intended to support RE expansion. The study corroborates other research that finds a high level of awareness and concern for the climate crisis amongst the Philippine public. Given that RE is often locally and community based, public knowledge and support would greatly facilitate the expansion of RE. The research found that 86.2% of the participants supported the expansion of RE and 80.8% expressed willingness to install RE on their property if it was affordable, but there was also continued support for traditional fossil fuels among 45.0% of the participants. Regression analysis found that claimed knowledge of RE was found to have a largely positive correlation with support for RE, and just over 50% saw cooperation between local and central governments as necessary for RE expansion to succeed.
This study analyzes survey responses of those affected by the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear power plant accidents, evaluating issues such as recovery, compensation policy, decontamination, welfare, and overall government response. We apply an ordinal logit model to the issues of compensation, decontamination, and repatriation. We found that the people of Bryansk Oblast and those with ongoing health problems were more likely to support continued compensation and victim support programs. Another key finding was the perceived inadequacy of the Japanese government’s reconstruction policy for Fukushima. Monitoring and forestry safety measures were considered insufficient, and agricultural safety measures were particularly disappointing for those with children. More generally, there was support for planting rapeseed as a biofuel and for opening up the site as a tourist spot. Mega-solar farms or nature reserves were also seen as feasible alternatives to agricultural activities. Those who continued to see nuclear energy as a viable energy source supported the construction of waste treatment and storage facilities. Among the Chernobyl respondents, some supported a return to agricultural land use, citing scientific reports suggesting it was safe. Many said that there should be further investment in scientific research in the area. Fukushima respondents viewed social welfare provision and improved information for victims and residents as important issues. A key lesson for the Japanese government from the Chernobyl experience is the legal regime that was established there, clearly defining the affected areas and people and clarifying the measures required.
This study examines the results of an online survey of Fukushima residents on their impressions of the reconstruction process ten years after the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake. It aims to gauge the levels of approval and satisfaction that participants have with support for survivors, housing and community reconstruction, industrial and livelihood regeneration, efforts to decontaminate “difficult to return” zones, measures taken to counter harmful rumors, and the use of the reconstruction budget. The key findings are that many participants found little to be satisfied with after the disaster and that the most critical groups were those who had been directly affected by the disaster and older people. Actions that were seen as successful included provision of public emergency housing, the use of the media in counteracting rumors, the opening of major transport links, and efforts to restore agricultural activities. Going forward, the participants were most concerned about whether support for isolated elderly people would continue and whether long-term medical, emotional, and financial support would continue for survivors.
The Hanford Site in Washington State is the most contaminated area in the United States and is one of the biggest decontamination efforts in the world. During the Cold War, the area was shrouded by secrecy, including denials of any dangers to the environment, workers, and local communities downwind of the site. Efforts to regenerate neighboring areas are ongoing, including establishing the area as a national park and national monument, investing in local communities, plans to re-establish a town, encouraging viticulture and other agricultural activities, and encouraging the return of spawning salmon to the Columbia River. Rising costs and delays have hampered efforts in the clean-up process. Through an online survey, this study examines the local people’s attitudes toward these various efforts at urban and agricultural regeneration, their attitude toward information from the authorities, and budgeting for decontamination. It was found that there is widespread support for the establishment of park status for the site and that organic certification of produce has had a positive impact on purchasing intentions. However, there remains a degree of skepticism about the information about the decontamination process, and support for budgeting plans falls largely along partisan lines.
This paper statistically analyzes residents’ understanding of problems related to radioactively contaminated water discharged from nuclear power and nuclear reprocessing plants. Moreover, this paper examines their impact on the surrounding fisheries by using the cases of La Hague, Sellafield, and Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Survey data shows that more than 60% respondents disagree with the release of contaminated water, and this sentiment is particularly strong among both British and French respondents. Regarding seafood caught in the vicinity of the nuclear power and nuclear reprocessing plants, although British respondents noted that they hold it in high regard, many people do not purchase this seafood. In contrast, many Japanese respondents reported that they were less concerned, and thus, willingly purchase seafood caught off the coast of Fukushima Prefecture. In all three countries, many people did not trust government information on the release of contaminated water. Compensation to the affected people was provided by the central government, companies involved, and local governments, in that order. Japanese and British respondents reported higher expectation for compensation as compared to French respondents. Japanese and French respondents noted that they have knowledge of radioactive materials and contaminated water, and many of them purchased seafood caught in the vicinity of the nuclear power and reprocessing plants. British respondents were the most opposed to the release of contaminated water, whereas Japanese respondents were the least reliant on government information about the release of contaminated water. Finally, among those who trusted information from the government and retailers, French respondents were the least concerned about contamination. French respondents were also the least likely to expect any compensation for the fishermen affected by contamination. Both British and French residents around the affected plants expected the central government to compensate the affected fishermen, whereas those who did not reside around the affected plants did not expect the fishermen to be compensated. French respondents were more likely to expect compensation from the local governments; affluent respondents were more likely to expect the compensation to be funded by taxation, whereas less affluent respondents expected them to be funded by donations. Respondents who were more skeptical of government information wanted the companies involved to compensate the fishermen. British respondents reported a tendency for wanting the companies involved to provide this compensation, and did not support the concept of compensation provided through donations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.