4.7 Article

Acceptance in progress: Navigating the transition of nuclear power perception from a long-term study in China

期刊

ENERGY RESEARCH & SOCIAL SCIENCE
卷 107, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2023.103350

关键词

Public acceptance; Nuclear power; Transitions; China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study explores the transitions in public acceptance of a new nuclear power plant during different construction phases and identifies the influencing factors. The results show that public acceptance increases over time and the factors influencing acceptance vary in different phases.
The Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan in 2011 substantially undermined global nuclear development, making public acceptance a particularly crucial influential factor worldwide. Although ample studies have identified factors shaping public acceptance, few researchers have paid attention to transitions in public acceptance and perception over the long term, and consistent observations of public acceptance across different periods of the same nuclear power plant (NPP) are particularly lacking. In this study we aim to fill this gap by exploring the transitions in public acceptance of a new NPP during construction phases including before licensing, during licensing, and during construction as well as differences in the influencing factors in each phase. We build up a unique dataset obtained from three rounds of surveys over 7 years in Huizhou City, China. The results reveal that public acceptance rises over time, and that underlying factors vary along with the development of NPPs and public relations campaigns at different phases. Perceived general benefits, government trust, and knowledge of a new local NPP continuously rise with public acceptance, and public perceived health risks continuously decrease over time. As a result, it is key for the government to understand the transition to public acceptance and per-ceptions of nuclear power and choose different communication strategies according to different phases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据