No abstract

The importance of social and institutional issues in the siting of nuclear waste facilities has been recognized in recent years. Limited evidence from a survey of rural Wisconsin residents in 1980 indicates that incentives may help achieve the twin goals of increasing local support and decreasing local opposition to nosting nuclear waste facilities. Incentives are classified according to functional categories (i.e., mitigation, compensation, and reward) and the conditions which may be prerequisites to the use of incentives are outlined (i,e., guarantee of public health and safety, some measure of local control, and a legiti mation of negotiations during siting). Criteria for evaluating the utility of incentives in nuclear waste repository siting are developed. Incentive packages may be more useful than single incentives, and non monetary incentives, such as independent monitoring and access to credi ble information, may be as important in eliciting support as monetary incentives. Without careful attention to prerequisites in the siting process it is not likely that incentives will facilitate the siting process. vi LIST OF TABLES Fa"orability to siting a nuclear waste facility in the respondent's community after exposure to incentives ... 9 Distribution of. persons who changed their position to accept a waste repository in their community by type of incentive package Distribution of the acceptance of incentives to site a nuclear waste repository among Wisconsin residents .... Distribution of persons who changed their position to accept a waste repository in their community by type of incentive package Favorability to siting a nuclear waste facility in the respondent's community after exposure to incentives by selected demographic and social characteristics Favorability to siting a nuclear waste facility in the respondent's community after exposure to incentives by community setting v11

No abstract

No abstract

Support vs. o p p o s i t i o n and r a t i n g s of s e r v i c e s. 8.2.2 Support z. o p p o s i t i o n and perceived c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f neighborhoods. .. .. .. . 8.2.3 Support vs. o p p o s i t i o n and general e v a l u a t i o n s o f t h e q u a l i t y o f l i f e. .. .. .. .. .. . .