This article proposes and examines gender and life-stage factors as determinants of public worry and risk avoidance in a nuclear fallout scenario. Drawing on a survey (N 2,291) conducted in Sweden, the article demonstrates statistically significant results that women as well as parents with children at home are more likely to express high levels of worry for radiation exposure and have a preference to move away from a fallout area despite assurance of successful remediation. Moreover, a negative relationship is shown between age and both worry for radiation exposure and preference to move. These novel results from Northern Europe thus support a life-stage framing of public risk attitudes. As radiation physicists develop new methods showing that women and children are at higher risk of cancer than other groups at the same radiation exposure, we may actually see the precaution among women and parents as a regulating mechanism for the higher objective risk they face. The results are moreover in agreement with studies of public risk reactions in Japan, creating a strong knowledge base that human-induced radiation pollution is largely an intolerable risk to the public. Considering the public opinion, managing an intolerable risk through risk mitigation by remediation alone is likely insufficient in many cases. A viable strategy would offer a range of social support options that enable individual decision-making and the protection of risk groups.

A zero-carbon society requires dramatic change everywhere including in buildings, a large and politically sensitive sector. Technical possibilities exist but implementation is slow. Policies include many hard-to-evaluate regulations and may suffer from rebound mechanisms. We use dynamic econometric analysis of European macro data for the period 1990–2018 to systematically examine the importance of changes in energy prices and income on residential energy demand. We find a long-run price elasticity of −0.5. The total long-run income elasticity is around 0.9, but if we control for the increase in income that goes towards larger homes and other factors, the income elasticity is 0.2. These findings have practical implications for climate policy and the EU buildings and energy policy framework.

No abstract

Nuclear power plant (NPP) disasters are complex and dreaded scenarios. However, existing recovery plans presuppose that citizens will return to live in decontaminated areas following evacuation. Research on natural disasters has shown that high socioeconomic status (SES) influences people to continue living in their homes in recovery areas. This study examines the association between SES and citizens’ risk attitudes to a radiological emergency scenario and demonstrates instead that high SES implies a greater likeliness to move away from the accident-affected area. This is substantiated by survey data of Swedish citizens’ (N = 2,291) attitudes to a scenario where an NPP accident, evacuation, and remediation occur. More specifically, the study provides statistically significant results to show that high income is associated with less worry over ionizing radiation. Still, high-income individuals also appear to be more likely to move if their neighborhood is affected by radioactive fallout than low-income individuals. Moreover, the results for education show that low education is associated with remaining in the decontamination area, and the relation between education and worry over ionizing radiation provides some support for assumptions about the “anxious middle.” Overall, this study finds that decontamination is complicated by a majority of people preferring permanent relocation as well as by indications that more resourceful citizens are generally more likely to leave the area permanently, which may impede the fulfillment of state agencies’ plans for recovery.