Changes in the Factors Influencing Public Acceptance of Nuclear Power Generation in Japan Since the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster

Abstract

Public support for nuclear power generation has decreased in Japan since the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident in March 2011. This study examines how the factors influencing public acceptance of nuclear power changed after this event. The influence factors examined are perceived benefit, perceived risk, trust in the managing bodies, and pro-environmental orientation (i.e., new ecological paradigm). This study is based on cross-sectional data collected from two online nationwide surveys: one conducted in November 2009, before the nuclear accident, and the other in October 2011, after the accident. This study's target respondents were residents of Aomori, Miyagi, and Fukushima prefectures in the Tohoku region of Japan, as these areas were the epicenters of the Great East Japan Earthquake and the locations of nuclear power stations. After the accident, trust in the managing bodies was found to have a stronger influence on perceived risk, and pro-environmental orientation was found to have a stronger influence on trust in the managing bodies; however, perceived benefit had a weaker positive influence on public acceptance. We also discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.

Impact of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident on Belief in Rumors: The Role of Risk Perception and Communication

“…After the Fukushima nuclear accident, many studies found that the accident negatively affected attitudes toward nuclear power energy [1,3,4]. If there was a negative turn toward nuclear power, it can be logically deducted that the Fukushima accident increased both belief in rumors and other kinds of perception.…”

“…Moreover, these two variables have a larger explanatory power: the perceived benefits before Fukushima correlated with perceived benefits after the accident. In Japan, Tsujkawa et al [3] found that the perceived benefit had a weaker positive impact on public acceptance. Dread and fear might amplify rumors, while the positive benefits discount the negative effects of eroded belief.…”

“…Based on a longitudinal study (n = 790) in Switzerland, Visschers and Siegrist [4] showed that trust affects benefit and risk perceptions and that trust before a disaster relates to trust after the Fukushima accident. In Japan, Tsujkawa et al [3] indicated that after the Fukushima accident, trust in managing bodies, which depends on a pro-environmental orientation, influenced perceived risk. Moreover, Siegrist and Cvetkovich [41] verified that the role of trust depends on knowledge.…”

“…We set the five variables of the psychometric paradigm-perceived risk and benefit, knowledge, trust, and stigma-because these have been extensively investigated in risk studies on nuclear power energy. Perceived benefit [4], trust [4], and knowledge [38,39] increase acceptance of nuclear power energy, whereas perceived risk [2][3][4] and stigma [31,32] decrease it. We assumed that such structural relationships between five variables and acceptance applied to belief in rumor.…”

“…Tsujikawa et al [3] showed that public support for nuclear power decreased more in Japan than in other countries, with supportive opinions plummeting from 50% before the Fukushima accident to 37% after the event, and opposing opinions rising from 32% to 42%. Similar trends were observed in other countries.…”