Perceptions of Nuclear and Other Risks in Japan and the United States

Hinman, G.; Rosa, Eugene A.; Kleinhesselink, Randall R.; Lowinger, Thomas C.

doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb00745.x

Cited by 64 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results were similar to the findings of other international comparative risk studies (Hinman et al, 1993;Kanda et al, 2012), which suggested that people's beliefs about the unknown risk and potentially catastrophic outcomes drove their increasing risk perception and opposition toward nuclear power (Slovic et al, 2000;Visschers et al, 2007). As indicated by Kanda and her colleagues (Kanda et al, 2012), public risk perception of nuclear power was constantly high in their longitudinal surveys.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Perceived environmental and health risks of nuclear energy in Taiwan after Fukushima nuclear disaster

Lee

Kao

et al. 2014

Environment International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Perceived environmental and health risks of nuclear energy in Taiwan after Fukushima nuclear disaster

Lee

Kao

et al. 2014

Environment International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The present result confirms previous study findings from Japan, which showed that the Japanese were highly concerned with nuclear safety even before the occurrence of Fukushima nuclear disaster. 8,20 The Fukushima nuclear disaster triggered a change of "post-Fukushima" energy policy in Japan. The nuclear share of electricity production dropped from 29.2% (2010) to 18.1% (2011), and further approached zero (2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Perception of Nuclear Power Plants Among University Students in Northeast Asia After the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster

Ieong

Lee

et al. 2014

Asia Pac J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…According to the psychometric framework, nuclear reactor accidents, radioactive waste, and other associated radioactive risks are classified as highly dreaded [51]. Hinman et al [52] also report high levels of public concern and dread about the potential for catastrophic accidents and storage of waste products. More recently, Corner et al [7] in a survey showed that only a minority of people expressed unconditional acceptance of nuclear power and the population remained divided over its acceptability.…”

Section: Socio-environmental Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling Socio-Environmental Sensitivities: How Public Responses to Low Carbon Energy Technologies Could Shape the UK Energy System

Jay

Howard

Hughes

et al. 2014

The Scientific World Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Low carbon energy technologies are not deployed in a social vacuum; there are a variety of complex ways in which people understand and engage with these technologies and the changing energy system overall. However, the role of the public's socio-environmental sensitivities to low carbon energy technologies and their responses to energy deployments does not receive much serious attention in planning decarbonisation pathways to 2050. Resistance to certain resources and technologies based on particular socio-environmental sensitivities would alter the portfolio of options available which could shape how the energy system achieves decarbonisation (the decarbonisation pathway) as well as affecting the cost and achievability of decarbonisation. Thus, this paper presents a series of three modelled scenarios which illustrate the way that a variety of socio-environmental sensitivities could impact the development of the energy system and the decarbonisation pathway. The scenarios represent risk aversion (DREAD) which avoids deployment of potentially unsafe large-scale technology, local protectionism (NIMBY) that constrains systems to their existing spatial footprint, and environmental awareness (ECO) where protection of natural resources is paramount. Very different solutions for all three sets of constraints are identified; some seem slightly implausible (DREAD) and all show increased cost (especially in ECO).

show abstract

Perceptions of Nuclear and Other Risks in Japan and the United States

Cited by 64 publications

References 8 publications

Perceived environmental and health risks of nuclear energy in Taiwan after Fukushima nuclear disaster

Perceived environmental and health risks of nuclear energy in Taiwan after Fukushima nuclear disaster

Risk Perception of Nuclear Power Plants Among University Students in Northeast Asia After the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster

Modelling Socio-Environmental Sensitivities: How Public Responses to Low Carbon Energy Technologies Could Shape the UK Energy System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About