Analysis of Policy Alternatives on the Public Acceptance of Nuclear Power plant in Korea

1995 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 218-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Sung CHOI ◽  
Byong Whi LEE
Author(s):  
Zhang Xiaofeng ◽  
Zhao Feng ◽  
Zhu Rongxu ◽  
Yang Zongzhen ◽  
Shangguan Zhihong

With the development of public awareness on environmental protection, especially after the Fukushima nuclear accident, the opposition to nuclear power due to NIMBY (not in my back yard) effect begins to hinder the rapid development of Chinese nuclear industry. For example, in recent years several large-scale mass incidents with appealing to stop the siting and construction of nuclear facilities in China have put related projects (including nuclear power plant and nuclear fuel cycle facility) into termination, resulting in certain financial loss and unnecessary social unstabilization, thus causing more and more concern from administrative authority, research institution and nuclear industry. To strengthen public acceptance on nuclear power, related enterprises such as CGN and CNNC have made great efforts in information disclosure to eliminate mysterious feelings towards nuclear power and expect to build new impression as clean energy. Domestic institutions and universities carry out plenty of work on methods to help public correctly perceive nuclear risk and present strategies for effective public communication. Administrative authority also issued detailed guidance on public communication required to be fulfilled during plant’s siting phase, which provided explicit provisions on the responsibility and job content of different entities. Here we will take one public communication practice of one nuclear power project located in south Zhejiang region as an example. In this scenario, we face more difficulty than other projects, such as doubt from local government, complexity of public types, and large amount of stakeholders. In this paper, we will make summary on endeavors to improve public acceptance, such as large amount of NPP visits, comprehensive scientific popularization, direct communication with stakeholders and integration development between local society and nuclear industry. And we will discuss the feasibility of innovative practice, combining several similar tasks needed in different subjects, such as environmental impact assessment and social stabilization assessment, to fulfill at once. To achieve this goal, we design specific questionnaire and use it to survey the opinion of more than 800 people in the fairly large region across different provinces, covering 30km radius area of site, which gains satisfactory results. By comparing outcomes of opinion surveys carried out before and after the practice, we will put forward to the considerable effect of public communication in improving public acceptance to nuclear power, and analysis the pros and cons of this example. Moreover, we also expect the good experience in practice can be promoted to overall processes of nuclear power plant, including siting, construction, commission and life extension, helping nuclear power gain more public acceptance.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (29) ◽  
pp. 147-172
Author(s):  
Andrea Carolina Ávalos Salgado ◽  

Following the accident of Fukushima in 2011, nuclear facilities in Japan were shut down, and a new evaluation and restart process was developed. Despite the public safety concerns, the current administration expects nuclear energy to become a pillar for economic recovery in the coming years. This paper compares the historic context of restarting Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant before and after Fukushima. The evolution is analyzed through a series of interviews in 2012 and 2013 in the community and with government officers, as well as a close follow-up of the official statements by TEPCO and the government agencies up until the end of 2020. It tackles the development in the relation between TEPCO, local authorities, and local community of this nuclear plant, before and after Fukushima. This historic relation has shown to be the key element in the restart process, even above the legal process.


Kudankulam ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 171-197
Author(s):  
Raminder Kaur

Chapter 6 concentrates on a ‘secret’ public hearing that was held on 6 October 2006 with the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited in order to swiftly pass the construction of four more reactors at the plant with as little publicity as possible. It provides an exemplary occasion with which to consider the clash of epistemologies between the nuclear state and local residents. For the authorities, the public hearing was no more than a matter of paper protocol. For members of the public, the occasion was loaded with expectations of genuine consultation, justice, and recompense as a matter of an overdue and urgent entitlement—it being the first ever public hearing on the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant. After a look at the sovereignty of the nuclear state through its reliance on science and law, the author casts a lens on the preparations, processes and the aftermath of the public hearing, noting some of the direct, creative, and nuanced challenges to the nuclear state.


2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 1258-1287
Author(s):  
Akihiro Sakoda ◽  
Naoki Nomura ◽  
Yujiro Kuroda ◽  
Takahiko Kono ◽  
Wataru Naito ◽  
...  

Abstract Following the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident in 2011, many radiation experts directly experienced a vast gap between ideal and real public understanding (PU) of radiation in risk communication. Therefore, this study collated and reviewed information about PU activities for radiation and its risk that six Japanese academic societies—which seem to be socially neutral expert communities—related to radiation and radiation risk conducted before and after the accident. Activities these radiation-related societies provided to the general public were discussed from the following perspectives: (a) difficulties in two-way communication due to resources, motivation and public interest and concerns; (b) balance between academic research and PU activities; (c) academic societies’ building trust with the public while ensuring member experts’ neutrality and independence; and (d) discussions among academic societies to prepare for public engagement. We hope that this paper encourages experts and academic societies in radiation protection to hold more national and international discussions about their roles in public communication and outreach.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document