Risk Perception of Nuclear Energy After Fukushima: Stability and Change in Public Opinion in Switzerland

Kristiansen, Svein; Bonfadelli, Heinz; Kovic, Marko

doi:10.1093/ijpor/edw021

Cited by 20 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, different findings have also been reported; Kristiansen et al [3] analyzed the evolution of public opinion about nuclear energy in Switzerland from 2012 to 2014. They reported that public attitudes toward nuclear energy became slightly more positive as time passed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Trust Matter? Analyzing the Impact of Trust on the Perceived Risk and Acceptance of Nuclear Power Energy

Ryu

Kim

2018

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Recently, trust has been in vogue in the social sciences. However, in risk studies, there have been few causal models of trust. This study proposes and tests a causal model of trust in which (1) source credibility influences trust and (2) two kinds of trust-i.e., trust in government and trust in regulation-affect the perceived risk and acceptance of nuclear energy. Based on survey data with a sample of 1014 local residents living near a nuclear power station, we tested a causal model using structural equation modeling. As for the results of the analysis: first, we confirmed the validity of the proposed causal model of trust. Second, on the causal path, credibility directly influenced trust in government and trust in regulation and indirectly affected the perceived risk and acceptance of nuclear power. Third, the two kinds of trust had (in)direct impacts on perceived risk and acceptance. Trust in regulation had more power to explain perceived risks and acceptance than trust in government. Trust is important, but the kind of trust is more important.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Trust Matter? Analyzing the Impact of Trust on the Perceived Risk and Acceptance of Nuclear Power Energy

Ryu

Kim

2018

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…geographical proximity (Bird, Haynes, van den Honert, McAneney, & Poortinga, 2014;Kristiansen et al, 2016) have been found to shape public support for nuclear energy. In the UK, although the general public perceive nuclear energy as risky, many of them accept the technology conditionally as a way to mitigate climate change (Pidgeon, Henwood, Parkhill, Venables, & Simmons, 2008), and public opinion remains rather consistent even after the Fukushima nuclear incident (Jones, Elgueta, & Eiser, 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Debates over Nuclear Energy: Media, Communication, and the Public

Kristiansen

2019

Environmental Communication

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental debates over nuclear energy often center around two polarized sets of argumentsthe potential benefits of nuclear energy as a clean way of producing energy, helping to mitigate climate change and the concerns over the possibility of ionizing radiation release and nuclear waste contamination of the environment. As a form of clean energy, the environmental benefits of nuclear energy can be attributed to its low carbon emission (International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA], 2014;Lovelock, 2004;Monbiot, 2009). On the other hand, previous nuclear accidents have triggered concerns about the possibility of ionizing radiation leaks and nuclear waste contamination to the environment (IAEA, 2014). The debates over nuclear energy are further compounded by arguments over other potential benefits of nuclear energy such as reliable energy production, economic competitiveness and stable electricity prices, and the potential adverse effects of nuclear energy such as the possible proliferation of nuclear weapons and the high upfront costs of nuclear power plants (IAEA, 2014). In the aftermath of the 2011 Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear incident in Japan, many nations such as Germany, Belgium, and Switzerland decided to phase out nuclear power, but nations such as China, India, Finland, the UK, and the US are planning or already building new nuclear energy plants Li et al., 2016). For example, analysis of news media coverage in the aftermath of these nuclear accidents showed that the low carbon emission benefit of nuclear energy in mitigating climate change was greatly deemphasized in the media, while the potential threat of ionizing radiation from nuclear power plants to human health and the environment were given the heavy spotlight (Friedman, 2011;Kristiansen, 2017). These eventdriven studies collectively point to how a nuclear energy accident triggers the mass media to devote heavy attention to nuclear energy and its detrimental potential.A large body of research has also looked at the general public as a key stakeholder, analyzing how various social, psychological, and demographic factors shape public perceptions of nuclear energy. Generally, these studies, mostly based in North America and Europe, have shown that key factors including benefit perceptions

show abstract

“…The proposal was finally rejected by 54.2 percent of voters that participated in the November 2016 ballot. The rejection of a ballot proposition is not surprising per se, but the latter outcome is puzzling because studies that assessed public opinion about nuclear power after Fukushima consistently showed that a majority of Swiss citizens were opposed to the technology (Kristiansen, Bonfadelli, & Kovic, 2016;Siegrist, Sütterlin, & Keller, 2014;Visschers & Siegrist, 2013;WIN-Gallup International, 2011) and were in favour of phasing out nuclear power, precisely according to the plan proposed by the Green Party (Swiss Electoral Studies 2015, 2017. Even six to eight weeks before the vote, the ballot proposition was supported by almost 60 percent of the electorate (Gfs.bern, 2016).…”

Section: The Case Of Swiss Nuclear Power Politicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Business Power in Noisy Politics: An Exploration Based on Discourse Network Analysis and Survey Data

Rinscheid

2020

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study links voter-centred and interest group perspectives to assess the role structurally powerful businesses can play in contested political issues. Revisiting the literature on business influence in politics, incumbent businesses are theorised to strategically use their structural power to influence voters’ preferences. The conceptual framework is illustrated with a case study of a direct democratic vote related to Swiss energy policy. To empirically trace the role incumbent businesses played in the run-up to the vote, the study employs a two-step approach. First, it uses Discourse Network Analysis (DNA) to examine arguments and actor coalitions in the public debate preceding the vote. Second, the DNA results inform a statistical analysis of survey data on voting behaviour. The findings suggest that incumbent businesses can use their structural power strategically to shape voting behaviour. The study stimulates the discussion about political power relationships in societies and enriches the nascent debate about phasing out unsustainable energy infrastructure. Importantly, it opens up ways to combine DNA with other methods, an avenue that shows promise for use and further refinement in future applications.

show abstract

Risk Perception of Nuclear Energy After Fukushima: Stability and Change in Public Opinion in Switzerland

Cited by 20 publications

References 48 publications

Does Trust Matter? Analyzing the Impact of Trust on the Perceived Risk and Acceptance of Nuclear Power Energy

Does Trust Matter? Analyzing the Impact of Trust on the Perceived Risk and Acceptance of Nuclear Power Energy

Environmental Debates over Nuclear Energy: Media, Communication, and the Public

Business Power in Noisy Politics: An Exploration Based on Discourse Network Analysis and Survey Data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About