The purpose of this study was to provide a review of the publications of the risk perceptions or anxiety regarding radiation among people living in Japan after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear power plant accident. Two database (MEDLINE and PsycINFO) and hand-searched the references in identified publications were searched. For each identified publication, the measurements and time related-change of risk perception and anxiety regarding radiation were summarized. Twenty-four publications were identified. Quantitative measures of risk perception or anxiety were roughly divided into two types: single-item Likert scales that measure anxiety about radiation; and theoretical, or model-based measures. Rates of Fukushima residents with radiation-related anxiety decreased from 2012 to 2015. Factors governing risk perception or radiation-related anxiety were summarized by demographics, disaster-related stressors, trusted information, and radiation-related variables. The effects of risk perception or anxiety regarding radiation were summarized as severe distress, intention to leave employment or not to return home, or other dimensions. This review provides summary of current findings on risk perception or anxiety regarding radiation in Japan after the accident. Further researches are needed about detailed statistical analysis for time-related change and causality among variables.

Since the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident, tremendous resources have been devoted to recovery, and the Japanese Government is gradually lifting evacuation orders. However, public concerns remain prevalent, affecting some people’s return to a normal life and threatening their well-being. This study reviews government reports, academic papers, newspaper articles and conference presentations with the aim of obtaining a better understanding of issues which relate to radiation concerns in the recovery process in the aftermath of the accident. It looks extensively at: (1) the current status of the post-accident operations and existing radiation issues in Fukushima, and (2) approaches taken to engage the public during recovery from five previous comparable nuclear and radiological events: Three Mile Island, Buenos Aires (RA-2 facility), Chernobyl, Goiânia and Tokai-mura. The findings indicate that the limitations and emerging challenges of the current recovery operations cause concerns about radiation exposure in various aspects of day-to-day life. Past experiences suggest that long-term management that take a holistic and cohesive approach is critical for restoration of sustainable livelihoods and for social re-integration. Not only actual risks but also public perceptions of risks should be carefully assessed and addressed in the process of environmental remediation.

The high levels of public worry and distrust of authorities, especially as associated with nuclear energy and radioactive waste, are well established in the literature and in the experience of risk communicators dealing with the general public. Though much of the experience with the heightened sense of worry that accompanies planned exposure situations associated with proposed radioactive/nuclear facilities (e.g., radioactive waste repositories, nuclear power plants, yet to be approved or built), there are also examples of existing exposure situations such as those following radiological accidents (e.g., Chernobyl or Fukushima). Some risk perception factors (e.g., trust, dread) are common to both planned and existing exposure situations, whereas others (e.g., volition, controllability) may be more prevalent in post‐accident exposure situations. Specific risk perceptions held by a given population and its various subgroups must be acknowledged and incorporated into successful risk communication and public engagement strategies. Post‐accident recovery programs and remediation projects, while in many countries requiring stakeholder and public acceptance to proceed, often fail to incorporate the specific risk perceptions held by the various affected groups in their risk communication and public involvement strategies. Such failures can foster a skeptical or angry public reaction, and hamper recovery in terms of both primary measures (radiological risk reduction interventions) and secondary measures (aiming at “return to normal life,” removal of stigmatization, health and well‐being, etc.). Existing exposure situations and the corresponding mitigations are often approached as local or national scale issues, but by their nature of following radiological emergencies or nuclear accidents, issues of multinational risk perceptions may also arise. Confronting risk perceptions featuring high levels of uncertainty, issue complexity, distrust, information asymmetry, and so forth, requires more interactive forms of governance and adaptive approaches to securing public acceptance. A suggestion is made to deploy an iterative continuous improvement model for incorporating specific risk perceptions into risk communication programs in concert with mutual‐gains‐based public engagement mechanisms.

The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident caused enormous damage in terms of not only the mental status of affected people, but also the cohesiveness of entire communities in Fukushima Prefecture. Regarding individual mental health, many psychiatric issues became apparent after the accident, including, but not limited to, posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, and alcohol or another type of substance abuse.Widespread rumors and damaged reputations caused anxiety among residents and evacuees, eliciting various disparities such as risk perception factors related to compensation or the effects of radiation exposure. As a result, a decrease in community resilience was observed. Additionally, evacuees were frequently exposed to public stigmas resulting from the negative stories regarding compensation issues or the possible genetic effects of radiation exposure. To address these multidimensional mental health problems, several new and unique care facilities were established after the disaster with the aim of providing active interventions for and improving the current well-being of affected people, including evacuees. While a certain level of effectiveness in the provision of outreach services has been seen, issues such as burnout and exhaustion among health care staff working for different care resources have also been observed. In contrast to natural disasters, nuclear disasters tend to have long-term psychosocial consequences on affected people. Therefore, support care resources that could play important roles, especially in the post-disaster phase in affected areas, should be 2 supported by national and local governments on a long-term basis.

Nuclear power remains one of the most accessible choices in addressing environmental and social concerns due to the continuously increasing energy needs around the world. While it remains an excellent source of energy due to its low price and low level of emissions, potential accidents remain a serious problem. An example of such is the most recent accident in the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (2011), which reminded the world of the potential risks of nuclear energy and the consequences of which continue to have a lasting effect. There is no nuclear power plant in Serbia, but there are about 15 nuclear power stations scattered within its neighboring countries. Therefore, the Serbian Government decided to study how the Serbian public perceives the risks related to the potential construction of nuclear power stations in the country, nuclear energy in general, and its possible benefits and risks. The objective of this paper is to present the results of this assessment along with a literature overview on the (environmental) risk of nuclear power. A pilot study consisted of a series of 270 randomized face-to-face interviews that took place in the public square of Belgrade in March 2019. Logistic regression was used to examine the cumulative effects of the different risk factors. The results showed that the majority of the respondents are skeptical and do not support the construction of nuclear power stations in Serbia. Furthermore, this research identified several additional important correlations that have a significant impact on the public perception of risk.