Changes in Risk Perception of Seoul National University Students in Nuclear Power under Opposing Government Policy

Abstract

This study examined how the perceptions of the risks from nuclear power have changed as the government policy has changed from nuclear-friendly to nuclear phase-out. In 2009, the concern about climate change was growing, and the government's new policy of "low carbon green growth" received wide public support (KNEA, 2014). In 2018, however, the present government is promoting a nuclear phase-out policy. Specifically, this study surveyed Seoul National University students in 2009 and 2018 in order to find similarities and differences in their perceptions of nuclear power risks and to suggest policy implications. The results of 2018 show that the perceptions of nuclear power risks increased, while that of the benefits decreased from 2009 under the opposing government policy. Specifically, the survey examined how the public support for nuclear power changed under the potential for climate-change and energy security in both 2009 and 2018. The negative perceptions of nuclear power were dramatically increased in 2018, however, and the preference for nuclear power was related more to energy security than climate change. The policy to expand or reduce nuclear power and renewable energy by imposing a new condition can be implemented only when the public acceptance of those energy sources has improved. Therefore, the government needs to define the objective reality of the risks and benefits that derive from each energy source, instead of managing the public acceptance by imposing a new condition. Also, the government needs to enhance the publicity about the public's acceptance of technology developments and government policy through consensus building with the related stakeholders.

The Effects on the Satisfaction and Behavioral Intention for Beauty Service Quality Risk Perception Factors of MZ Generation

“…여 소비자가 구매시점에서 심리적으로 느끼는 위험을 칭하는 개념으로 소비자들이 선택하는 상황에서 그 결과에 대하여 느 끼는 일종의 불안이나 불확실함을 말한다 (Jacoby & Kaplan, 1972;Lim, 2001;Park & Chang, 2002). 이와 같은 위험지각에 대한 개념은 학자들 간에 의견이 분분하나, 일반적으로 구매결 과에 대한 불확실성으로 이해해야 한다는 관점과 구매결과에 대한 손실의 기대치로 이해해야 한다는 관점이다 (Kim, 1993;Lim, 2001). (Engel et al, 1986;Kim & Sin, 2000).…”

Extending the Coverage of the Trust–Acceptability Model: The Negative Effect of Trust in Government on Nuclear Power Acceptance in South Korea under a Nuclear Phase-Out Policy

“…In line with this significance of public acceptance of a generation source or technology, the determinants of this acceptance have received considerable research attention. One of the widely adopted approaches for these determinants is the benefit-risk framework [2,[35][36][37][38]. Studies have found that the benefits and risks individuals perceive regarding a generation source predict their acceptance of that generation source positively and negatively, respectively.…”

Effects of Rank-Ordered Feature Perceptions of Energy Sources on the Choice of the Most Acceptable Power Plant for a Neighborhood: An Investigation Using a South Korean Nationwide Sample

“…However, drawing conclusions from the findings requires cautious consideration of the other contexts in which we conducted the investigation. First, the five features (i.e., safety, affordability, eco-friendliness, contribution to economic development, and job creation) for which we incorporated competitive contexts were mainly based on the benefit-risk framework, a widely-used approach for modeling people's evaluations of technologies (e.g., References [45][46][47]), including energy technologies (e.g., References [1,[48][49][50][51]). Previous studies applying this framework to energy acceptance have found that the benefits and risks individuals perceive from an energy source are positive and negative predictors, respectively, of their acceptance of that energy source.…”