Public risk perception of nuclear waste

Nuclear waste has emerged as a very salient issue in the nuclear power debate. In the present study, a broad range of risk perception and attitude dimensions concerned with nuclear waste was investigated. It was found that most respondents from the general public were not willing to accept a local high-level nuclear waste repository in their home region. Nuclear waste was seen, by the public, as a very important issue. Regression analysis of perceived nuclear waste risk yielded a high level of explained variance (about 65%). Fear of radiation appeared to be an important determinant of the perceived risk and so was attitude to nuclear power, risk sensitivity and a pooled measure of the traditional psychometric dimensions of risk perception. A structural equations model of acceptance of a local repository was quite successful in explaining acceptance.

[1]  L. Sjöberg.  Explaining Individual Risk Perception: The Case of Nuclear Waste , 2004 .

[2]  K. McComas.  Public Meetings About Local Waste Management Problems: Comparing Participants to Nonparticipants , 2001, Environmental Management.

[3]  L. Sjöberg,et al.  Lifestyles, and Risk Perception Consumer Behavior , 2005 .

[4]  John Eyles,et al.  Risky Business: An Analysis of Claimsmaking in the Development of an Ontario Drinking Water Objective for Tritium , 1999 .

[5]  Lennart Sjöberg,et al.  The Different Dynamics of Personal and General Risk , 2003 .

[6]  M. O'Connor,et al.  Prospects for public participation on nuclear risks and policy options: innovations in governance practices for sustainable development in the European Union. , 2001, Journal of hazardous materials.

[7]  James Flynn,et al.  3. Perceived risk, trust, and nuclear waste: lessons from yucca mountain , 2020, Public Reactions to Nuclear Waste.

[8]  Herbert Inhaber,et al.  YARD SALE: Society Should Bid for the Right to Site Its Prisons and Its Dumps , 1992 .

[9]  Etienne Mullet,et al.  Risk Perception and Energy Production , 1998 .

[10]  L. Sjöberg,et al.  Physical and Managed Risk of Nuclear Waste , 1997 .

[11]  Leroy C. Gould,et al.  Public Perceptions of the Risks and Benefits of Technology1 , 1989 .

[12]  A Biel,et al.  Risk perception and the location of a repository for spent nuclear fuel. , 1995, Scandinavian journal of psychology.

[13]  Howard Kunreuther,et al.  Public Attitudes Toward Siting a High‐Level Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada , 1990 .

[14]  L Sjöberg,et al.  Specifying factors in radiation risk perception. , 2000, Scandinavian journal of psychology.

[15]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits , 1978 .

[16]  Lennart Sjöberg,et al.  Explaining risk perception: an empirical evaluation of cultural theory , 1997 .

[17]  L. Milbrath,et al.  Citizen Surveys as Citizen Participation Mechanisms , 1981, Public Involvement and Social Impact Assessment.

[18]  H. Peters.  Risiko-Kommunikation: Kernenergie , 1991 .

[19]  L. F. Molerio-Leon,et al.  Survey Methods , 2011 .

[20]  M. Douglas,et al.  Risk and Culture , 1983 .

[21]  L. Sjöberg,et al.  Risk Perception by Politicians and the Public , 2008 .

[22]  Howard Kunreuther,et al.  7. Perceived risk and attitudes toward nuclear wastes: national and Nevada perspectives , 2020, Public Reactions to Nuclear Waste.

[23]  George O. Rogers,et al.  Siting potentially hazardous facilities: what factors impact perceived and acceptable risk? , 1998 .

[24]  Robin Gregory,et al.  Stigma Happens: Social Problems in the Siting of Nuclear Waste Facilities , 1994 .

[25]  Paul Slovic,et al.  One Hundred Centuries of Solitude , 1995 .

[26]  Susan Hunter,et al.  Beyond NIMBY. Explaining Opposition to Hazardous Waste Facilities , 1995 .

[27]  Anthony F. Heath,et al.  THE 1992 BRITISH ELECTION: THE FAILURE OF THE POLLS , 1993 .

[28]  Lennart Sjöberg,et al.  Distal factors in risk perception , 2003 .

[29]  Lennart Sjöberg,et al.  World Views, Political Attitudes and Risk Perception , 1998 .

[30]  P. Slovic,et al.  The Role of Affect and Worldviews as Orienting Dispositions in the Perception and Acceptance of Nuclear Power1 , 1996 .

[31]  Lennart Sjöberg,et al.  Risk Perception and New Age Beliefs , 2002, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[32]  L. Sjöberg.  The Methodology of Risk Perception Research , 2000 .

[33]  Kent W. Smith,et al.  Survey Responses: An Evaluation of Their Validity , 1993 .

[34]  Eugene A. Rosa,et al.  Public reactions to nuclear waste : citizens' views of repository siting , 1994 .

[35]  James Flynn,et al.  Yucca Mountain: A Crisis for Policy: Prospects for America's High-Level Nuclear Waste Program , 1995 .

[36]  Eugene A. Rosa,et al.  THE POLLS—POLL TRENDS: NUCLEAR POWER: THREE DECADES OF PUBLIC OPINION , 1994 .

[37]  B. Drottz-Sjöberg,et al.  Public reaction to radiation: fear, anxiety, or phobia? , 1993, Health physics.

[38]  James Flynn,et al.  Risk Perception, Trust, and Nuclear Waste: Lessons from Yucca Mountain , 1991 .

[39]  Lennart Sj.  Local Acceptance of a High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository , 2004 .

[40]  K. Larsen.  Attitudes toward the Transportation of Nuclear Waste: The Development of a Likert-Type Scale , 1994 .

[41]  Lennart Sjöberg,et al.  Specifying Factors in Radiation Risk Perception1 , 2000 .

[42]  Tapio Litmanen.  Cultural approach to the perception of risk: analysing concern about the siting of a high-level nuclear waste facility in Finland , 1999 .

[43]  Lennart Sjöberg,et al.  A Discussion of the Limitations of the Psychometric and Cultural Theory Approaches to Risk Perception , 1996 .

[44]  Richard G. Kuhn,et al.  SOCIAL AND POLITICAL ISSUES IN SITING A NUCLEAR-FUEL WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY IN ONTARIO, CANADA , 1998 .

[45]  Lennart Sj.  Are Received Risk Perception Models Alive and Well , 2002 .

[46]  P Slovic,et al.  Perceived risks of radioactive waste transport through Oregon: results of a statewide survey. , 1994, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[47]  Lennart Sjöberg,et al.  Political decisions and public risk perception , 2001, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[48]  H. Wold.  Systems Analysis by Partial Least Squares , 1983 .

[49]  R Kemp,et al.  Why Not in My Backyard? A Radical Interpretation of Public Opposition to the Deep Disposal of Radioactive Waste in the United Kingdom , 1990 .

[51]  Peter V. Miller,et al.  Web Survey Methods Introduction , 2008 .

[52]  P Slovic,et al.  Perceived risk, stigma, and potential economic impacts of a high-level nuclear waste repository in Nevada. , 1991, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[53]  Howard Kunreuther,et al.  The Dilemma of Siting a High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository , 1995 .

[54]  C. Mills.  Situated Actions and Vocabularies of Motive , 1940 .

[55]  J. H. Frey,et al.  Risk perceptions associated with a high‐level nuclear waste repository , 1993 .

[56]  Lennart Sjöberg,et al.  Fairness, risk and risk tolerance in the siting of a nuclear waste repository , 2001 .