Nuclear power and the public

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Volumn 67, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 43-51

  Ramana, M V ^a  

^a PRINCETON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Climate change; Dread; NIMBY; Nuclear power; Public opposition; Risk; Stigma

Indexed keywords

EID: 80051880217     PISSN: 00963402     EISSN: 19383282     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0096340211413358     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Bickerstaff K, Lorenzoni I, Pidgeon NF, Poortinga W, and Simmons P (2008) Reframing nuclear power in the UK energy debate: Nuclear power, climate change mitigation and radioactive waste. Public Understanding of Science 17(2): 145-169.
2. Bolsen T and Cook FL (2008) Public opinion on energy policy: 1974-2006. Public Opinion Quarterly 72(2): 364-388.
3. Buffery V (2011) Majority of French want to drop nuclear energy-poll. Reuters, April 13. Available at: http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/ idAFLDE73C0ZI20110413.
4. Burningham K (2000) Using the language of NIMBY: A topic for research, not an activity for researchers. Local Environment 5(1): 55-67. (Pubitemid 30172535)
5. Chugoku Newspaper (1992) Exposure: Victims of radiation speak out. Translated by Kirsten Mcivor. Tokyo: Kodansha International.
6. CooperMand Sussman D (2011) Nuclear power loses support in new poll. New York Times, March 22. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/ 23/us/23poll.html.
7. Craighill PM and Cohen J (2011) Slim majority of Americans see nuclear plants as safe energy sources, poll finds. Washington Post, April 20. Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ politics/slim-majority-of-americans-see- nuclearplants- as-safe-energy-sources-poll-finds/2011/04/19/AFRnZG9D-story.html.
8. EC (2002) Eurobarometer 56.2: Europeans and radioactive waste. Brussels. Available at: http://ec.euro pa.eu/public-opinion/archives/ebs/ebs-165-en.pdf.
9. Flynn J and Slovic P (1995) Yucca Mountain: A crisis for policy: Prospects for America's high-level nuclear waste program. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 20(1): 83-118.
10. Fowler J (2011) Public increasingly opposed to HidroAys-n, nuclear power-Ipsos-Chile. Business News Americas, April 13. Available at: http://news.reportlinker.com/n09604356/ Public-increasingly-opposed-to- HidroAysennuclear- power-Ipsos.html.
11. Freudenburg WR and Pastor SK (1992) NIMBYs and LULUs: Stalking the syndromes. Journal of Social Issues 48(4): 39-61.
12. GlobeScan (2005) Global public opinion on nuclear issues and the IAEA. Final report from 18 countries: London. Available at: http://www.iaea.org/ Publications/Reports/gponi-report2005.pdf.
13. Green J (2011) After Fukushima: Nuclear less popular than ever. Green Left Weekly, April 10. Available at: http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/47302.
14. Greenberg M (2009) Energy sources, public policy, and public preferences: Analysis of US national and site-specific data. Energy Policy 37(8): 3242-3249.
15. Gregory R, Flynn J, and Slovic P (1995) Technological stigma. American Scientist 83(3): 220-223.
16. Gregory RS and Satterfield TA (2002) Beyond perception: The experience of risk and stigma in community contexts. Risk Analysis 22(2): 347-358. (Pubitemid 34533262)
17. HeimanM(1990) From 'Not in My Backyard!' to 'Not in Anybody's Backyard!' Journal of the American Planning Association 56(3): 359-362.
18. Ito S (2011) Nuclear stigma adds to Japan's pain. Agence France-Presse, May 12. Available at: http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Nuclear-stigma-adds-to- Japans-pain-999.html.
19. Johnson RJ and Scicchitano MJ (2000) Uncertainty, risk, trust, and information: Public perceptions of environmental issues and willingness to take action. Policy Studies Journal 28(3): 633-647. (Pubitemid 32203339)
20. Kraft ME and Clary BB (1991) Citizen participation and the nimby syndrome: Public response to radioactive waste disposal. Western Political Quarterly 44(2): 299-328.
21. Kyodo News (2011) 60-70% of public backs higher taxes for disaster recovery: Media polls. Japan Today, April 10. Available at: http://www. japantoday. com/category/politics/view/60-70-ofpublic- backs-higher-taxes-for- disaster-recoverymedia- polls.
22. Levi DJ and Holder EE (1988) Psychological factors in the nuclear power controversy. Political Psychology 9(3): 445-457.
23. McNeillD(2011) Fukushima village on way to becoming ghost town. The Japan Times, May 13. Available at: http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgibin/ nn20110513f1.html.
24. NRC (2011)NRCin communication with Japanese regulators. NRC News, March 12. Available at: http:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/ 2011/11-044.pdf.
25. Onishi N and Belson K (2011) Culture of complicity tied to stricken nuclear plant. New York Times, April 26. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/ 2011/04/27/world/asia/27collusion.html.
26. OTA (1984) Nuclear Power in an Age of Uncertainty. Washington, DC. Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress, OTA-E-216. Available at: http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ota/Ota-4/ DATA/1984/8421.PDF.
27. Pidgeon NF, Lorenzoni I, and Poortinga W (2008) Climate change or nuclear power-No thanks! A quantitative study of public perceptions and risk framing in Britain. Global Environmental Change 18(1): 69-85. (Pubitemid 351232231)
28. PoortingaWand Pidgeon NF (2004) Trust, the asymmetry principle, and the role of prior beliefs. Risk Analysis 24(6): 1475-1486. (Pubitemid 40076071)
29. Rosa EA and Dunlap RE (1994) Nuclear power: Three decades of public opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly 58(2): 295-324.
30. Shivakumar C (2008) Kalpakkam's forgotten people have a tale to tell. Indian Express, October 20. Available at: http://www.sacw.net/article134.html.
31. Slovic P (1993) Perceived risk, trust and democracy. Risk Analysis 13(6): 675-682.
32. Slovic P (1994) Perception of risk and the future of nuclear power. Physics and Society 23(1). Available at: http://www.aps.org/units/fps/ newsletters/ 1994/january/ajan94.html.
33. Slovic P (1996) Perception of risk from radiation. Radiation Protection Dosimetry 68(3/4): 165-180. (Pubitemid 27010944)
34. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, and Lichtenstein S (1982) Why study risk perception? Risk Analysis 2(2): 83-93.
35. Slovic P, Flynn J, and LaymanM(1991) Perceived risk, trust, and the politics of nuclear waste. Science 254(5038): 1603-1607. (Pubitemid 21917497)
36. Stoett P (2003) Toward renewed legitimacy? Nuclear power, global warming, and security. Global Environmental Politics 3(1): 99-116.
37. Tuler S and Kasperson R (2010) Social distrust: Implications and recommendations for spent fuel and high level radioacitve waste management. Available at: http://brc.gov/library/commissioned-papers/BRC.Social-Trust. 17Feb11.pdf.
38. Unistar (2011) Issue briefs. Available at: http:// www.unistarnuclear. com/IB-home.html (accessed 18 May 2011).
39. Van der Zee B (2011) Japan nuclear crisis puts UK public off new power stations. Guardian, March 22. Available at: http://www.guardian. co.uk/environment/2011/mar/22/japan-nuclearcrisis- uk-power-stations.
40. Wald M (2011) Disaster plan problems found at U.S. nuclear plants. New York Times, May 12. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/13/business/ energy-environment/13nuke.html.
41. Wallace R (2011) Japan wants to keep N-power. The Australian, April 5. Available at: http:// www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/japanwants- to-keep-n-power/story-e6frg6so- 1226033592631.
42. Weinberg AM (1976) The maturity and future of nuclear energy. American Scientist 64: 16-21.
43. Whitfield SC, Rosa EA, Dan A, and Dietz T (2009) The future of nuclear power: Value orientations and risk perception. Risk Analysis 29(3): 425-437.
44. WolsinkM(2006) Invalid theory impedes our understanding: A critique on the persistence of the language of NIMBY. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 31(1): 85-91.
45. Yamada T (2011) Public split on nuclear energy, but long-time warning deserves serious debate. The Mainichi Daily News, April 26. Available at: http://mdn.mainichi.jp/perspectives/column/ archive/news/2011/04/ 20110426p2a00m0na0010 00c.html.