Changes in Risk Perception Regarding Nuclear Power Following the Fukushima Nuclear Accident

김경신,; 조희선,

doi:10.15301/jepa.2015.23.3.145

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In that time period, the government framed nuclear energy as a solution to the ongoing climate change problem and an important contributor to the green-growth goal in order to promote nuclear-friendly policies and increase social acceptance of nuclear power plants. Similar studies have shown that the public's perception of nuclear power will change when new conditions are given in terms of nuclear energy in response to climate change and as an alternative to future stable energy sources [16]. In 2013, two years after the Fukushima accident, there was still a growing consensus in the UK to choose nuclear power as a response to climate change and as a stable source of energy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…However, it was thought that the relatively safe geographic conditions of the United Kingdom (UK) were unlikely to cause large nuclear accidents due to tsunamis or earthquakes [17]. There is a comparative study comparing the Japanese people's perception of nuclear energy before and after the Fukushima accident with the above analysis framework of the British case [16]. As in the UK, given new conditions, the support rate in Japan has increased slightly, but the distrust of the entire nuclear policy has increased significantly since the accident [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Kim

2018

Sustainability

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%