How does trust affect acceptance of a nuclear power plant (NPP): A survey among people living with Qinshan NPP in China

Xiao, Qingnong; Liu, Huijun; Feldman, Marcus W.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0187941

Cited by 37 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a cross-cultural investigation of 23 activities and technological hazards, trust in regulatory organizations is found to be directly and indirectly linked with public acceptance, and perceived benefit plays a more important role than perceived risk in mediating the trust-acceptability casual chain [58]. Regarding nuclear power plants (NPPs), goodwill trust improves acceptance of NPPs by decreasing risk perception, while competence trust improves the acceptance by increasing benefit perception [59]. However, these findings are challenged by the associationist model of trust (AMT), which asserts that acceptance drives both trust and risk perception [60,61].…”

Section: Trust and Fairnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Social Acceptance of Waste-to-Energy Incinerators in China: Role of Place Attachment, Trust, and Fairness

Hou

Chen

et al. 2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globally, acceptance among the general public of waste-to-energy (WtE) incinerators is a crucial factor in implementing national waste-to-energy policies. This study aims to shed light on the acceptance of WtE incinerators, with a focus on anti-incinerator sentiment and the influence and interactions of place-, trust-, and fairness-based factors, with a case study in China. A total of 338 residents in the Asuwei area in North Beijing completed a survey on a proposed WtE incinerator in the vicinity. Hierarchical regression analyses indicate that place attachment positively enhances anti-incinerator sentiment through direct effects, as well as moderation and mediation effects between risk perception and opposing willingness. Furthermore, institutional trust negatively moderates the impact of perceived risk on anti-incinerator sentiment, in addition to directly reducing perceived risk. Trust also influences anti-incinerator sentiment via risk perception, attesting to the effectiveness of a casual model of trust. Likewise, fairness perception acts as another determinant of opposing sentiment, similarly to trust. These findings demonstrate the importance of using a range of instrumental and more effective strategies to promote the acceptance of renewable energy infrastructure.

show abstract

Section: Trust and Fairnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Social Acceptance of Waste-to-Energy Incinerators in China: Role of Place Attachment, Trust, and Fairness

Hou

Chen

et al. 2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To identify the determinants of the public's WTP for replacing nuclear power, it is necessary to first consider the covariates which should be included in the model. Existing studies found that a variety of psychological, emotional, and socio-demographic factors influence the acceptance of nuclear power [14][15][16][17][18][19], and we select a few covariates with reference to these studies. Table 3 summarizes the basic statistics of the covariates included in Model 2.…”

Section: Estimation Results: Public Acceptance For Reducing Nppsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since 2010, related studies have been rapidly increasing and have introduced diverse perspectives on the issue. Examples include; proposing new indicators that quantify public acceptance of nuclear power [7], analyzing the impact of the Fukushima disaster on the acceptance of nuclear power [8][9][10][11], identifying public attitude on nuclear power using social media data [12], suggesting an international comparison of public acceptance of nuclear energy [13], and identifying the determinants of acceptance of nuclear power [14][15][16][17][18][19].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financial Feasibility and Social Acceptance for Reducing Nuclear Power Plants: A Contingent Valuation Study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social acceptance of nuclear power has become a decisive factor in framing a sustainable energy policy. This study examines social acceptance for cancelling the construction of planned nuclear power plants (NPPs) and replacing them with other energy sources. The contingent valuation method (CVM) and cost–benefit analysis (CBA) are used to access the social acceptance and financial feasibility of such projects. Empirical analysis is based on the case of South Korea, where a similar policy is in progress under the new government. The CVM results show that a Korean household was willing to pay an additional KRW 1922.45/month (USD 1.80/month) for replacing seven 1-Gigawatt NPPs with other energy sources, which is about 3.5% of a household’s current electricity bill. The CBA suggests that the annual costs of replacing this amount of nuclear power capacity with renewables or liquefied natural gas is KRW 1291.40 billion (USD 1.21 billion) or KRW 1180.38 billion (USD 1.11 billion) larger than its benefits, which amounts to about 3% of total annual electricity generation costs in South Korea. As the additional costs of nuclear power replacement cannot be fully covered by the mean willingness-to-pay of the current acceptance level, moderate levels of social resistance are expected if all the additional costs are passed on to the end-users.

show abstract

“…This causal model has been widely used to explain public acceptance in a variety of technological domains, such as gene technology [ 18 , 39 , 40 , 41 ], financial technology [ 42 , 43 ], nanotechnology [ 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 ], renewable energy [ 32 , 50 , 51 , 52 ], unmanned aircraft [ 53 ], and automated driving technology [ 54 , 55 ]. The present study is also based on Siegrist’s causal model.…”

Section: Research Hypotheses and Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies have found that these two types of social trust have different antecedents. The level of trust in public organizations depends on their abilities and competence, and the level of trust in industrial organizations depends on their intentions, honesty, and integrity [ 31 , 32 ]. At the same time, some studies found that public trust in these two types of trustees differ: people have more trust in public organizations than in industrial organizations [ 33 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Epistemic Trust and Social Trust on Public Acceptance of Genetically Modified Food: An Empirical Study from China

Liu

Wei

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most studies exploring the public acceptance of genetically modified food (GMF) are based on social trust and the establishment of a causal model. The underlying premise is that social trust indirectly affects public acceptance of GMF through perceived risks and perceived benefits. The object of social trust is trust in people, organizations, and institutions. Different from the social trust, epistemic trust refers to people’s trust in scientific knowledge behind the technology of concern. It has been shown that epistemic trust, like social trust, is also an important factor that affects the public perception of applicable risks and benefits. Therefore, it is necessary to incorporate epistemic trust into the causal model to derive a more complete explanation of public acceptance. However, such work has not been conducted to date. The causal model proposed in this paper integrated epistemic trust and social trust and divided social trust into trust in public organizations and trust in industrial organizations. A representative questionnaire survey (N = 1091) was conducted with Chinese adults. The model was analyzed by the partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) method. Three major findings were obtained: First, epistemic trust is an important antecedent of perceived risks and perceived benefits and exerts a significant indirect effect on the acceptance of GMF. Secondly, trust in industrial organizations negatively impacts perceived risks, while trust in public organizations positively impacts perceived benefits. Thirdly, contrary to the common opinion, trust in industrial organizations did not exert a significant direct effect on perceived benefits, and trust in public organizations did not demonstrate a significant direct effect on perceived risks. Therefore, trust in industrial organizations and trust in public organizations utilize different influence paths on GMF acceptance. This study enriches the understanding of the influence path of trust with regard to the acceptance of emerging technologies and is of great significance to relevant risk-management practices.

show abstract

How does trust affect acceptance of a nuclear power plant (NPP): A survey among people living with Qinshan NPP in China

Cited by 37 publications

References 44 publications

Improving Social Acceptance of Waste-to-Energy Incinerators in China: Role of Place Attachment, Trust, and Fairness

Improving Social Acceptance of Waste-to-Energy Incinerators in China: Role of Place Attachment, Trust, and Fairness

Financial Feasibility and Social Acceptance for Reducing Nuclear Power Plants: A Contingent Valuation Study

The Effects of Epistemic Trust and Social Trust on Public Acceptance of Genetically Modified Food: An Empirical Study from China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About