Nuclear power threats, public opposition and green electricity adoption: Effects of threat belief appraisal and fear arousal

Energy Policy

Volumn 62, Issue , 2013, Pages 1366-1376

  Hartmann, Patrick ^a   Apaolaza, Vanessa ^a   D'Souza, Clare ^b   Echebarria, Carmen ^a   Barrutia, Jose M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE BASQUE COUNTRY UPV EHU   (Spain)

^b LA TROBE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Green electricity adoption; Nuclear power threats; Public opposition

Indexed keywords

EXTENDED PARALLEL PROCESSING MODELS; FUKUSHIMA ACCIDENTS; GREEN ELECTRICITY; MODEL-BASED OPC; NUCLEAR POWER POLICY; PROTECTION MOTIVATION THEORY; PUBLIC OPPOSITION; THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK;

ELECTRICITY;

NUCLEAR ENERGY;

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY; ENERGY POLICY; NUCLEAR POWER; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; RESIDENTIAL ENERGY; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION;

FUKUSHIMA; HONSHU; JAPAN; TOHOKU;

EID: 84884983530     PISSN: 03014215     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.07.058     Document Type: Article

References (95)

1. Adamantiades A., Kessides I. Nuclear power for sustainable development: current status and future prospects. Energy Policy 2009, 37:5149-5166.
2. Arthur D., Quester P. Who's afraid of that Ad? Applying segmentation to the protection motivation model. Psychology and Marketing 2004, 21:671-696.
3. Bagozzi R.P., Gopinath M., Nyer P.U. The role of emotions in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1999, 27:184-206.
4. Baldassare M., Katz C. The personal threat of environmental problems as predictor of environmental practices. Environment and Behavior 1992, 24:602-615.
5. Batley S.L., Colbourne D., Fleming P.D., Urwin P. Citizen versus consumer: challenges in the UK green power market. Energy Policy 2001, 29:479-487.
6. Berger I.E., Corbin R.M. Perceived consumer effectiveness and faith in others as moderators of environmentally responsible behaviors. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 1992, 11:79-89.
7. Böhm G. Emotional reactions to environmental risks: consequentialist versus ethical evaluation. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2003, 23:199-212.
8. Bronfman N.C., Jiménez R.B., Arévalo P.C., Cifuentes L.A. Understanding social acceptance of electricity generation sources. Energy Policy 2012, 46:246-252.
9. Brook B.W. Could nuclear fission energy, etc., solve the greenhouse problem? The affirmative case. Energy Policy 2012, 42:4-8.
10. Cauberghe V., De Pelsmacker P., Dens N. Fear, threat and efficacy in threat appeals: message involvement as a key mediator to message acceptance. Accident Analysis and Prevention 2009, 41:276-285.
11. Clark C.F., Kotchen M.J., Moore M.R. Internal and external influences on proenvironmental behaviour: participation in a green electricity program. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2003, 23:237-246.
12. Corner A., Venables D., Spence A., Poortinga W., Demski C., Pidgeon N. Nuclear power, climate change and energy security: exploring British public attitudes. Energy Policy 2011, 39:4823-4833.
13. De Groot J.I.M., Steg L. Morality and nuclear energy: perceptions of risks and benefits, personal norms, and willingness to take action related to nuclear energy. Risk Analysis 2010, 30:1363-1373.
14. Diaz-Rainey I., Ashton J.K. Stuck between a ROC and a hard place? Barriers to the take up of green energy in the UK. Energy Policy 2008, 36:3053-3061.
15. Dillard J.P. Rethinking the study of fear appeals: an emotional perspective. Communication Theory 1994, 4:295-323.
16. Dillard J.P., Anderson J.W. The role of fear in persuasion. Psychology and Marketing 2004, 21:909-926.
17. Ek K. Public and private attitudes towards "green" electricity: the case of Swedish wind power. Energy Policy 2005, 33:1677-1689.
18. Ellen P.S., Wiener J.L., Cobb-Walgren C. The role of perceived consumer effectiveness in motivating environmentally conscious behaviors. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 1991, 10:102-117.
19. Ertör-Akyazi P., Adaman F., Özkaynak B., Zenginobuz U. Citizens' preferences on nuclear and renewable energy sources: evidence from Turkey. Energy Policy 2012, 47:309-320.
20. Esteban M., Zhang Q., Longarte-Galnares G. Cost-benefit analysis of a green electricity system in Japan considering the indirect economic impacts of tropical cyclones. Energy Policy 2012, 43:49-57.
21. Eurobarometer, 2007. Attitudes on Issues Related to EU Energy Policy. The Gallup Organization.
22. Faiers A., Cook M., Neame C. Towards a contemporary approach for understanding consumer behaviour in the context of domestic energy use. Energy Policy 2007, 35(8):4381-4390.
23. Fischer G.W., Morgan M.G., Fischhoff B., Nair I., Lave L.B. What risks are people concerned about?. Risk Analysis 1991, 11:303-314.
24. Floyd D.L., Prentice-Dunn S., Rogers R.W. A meta-analysis of research on protection motivation theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 2000, 30:407-429.
25. Goodfellow M.J., Williams H.R., Azapagic A. Nuclear renaissance, public perception and design criteria: an exploratory review. Energy Policy 2011, 39:6199-6210.
26. Greenberg M., Truelove H.B. Energy choices and risk beliefs: is it just global warming and fear of a nuclear power plant accident?. Risk Analysis 2011, 31:819-831.
27. Greenpeace, 2011. Annual Report 2011. Available from: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/Global/international/publications/greenpeace/2012/AnnualReport2011.pdf, (accessed 09.12).
28. Hansla A., Gamble A., Juliusson A., Gärling T. The relationships between awareness of consequences, environmental concern, and value orientations. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2008, 28:1-9.
29. Hartmann P., Apaolaza-Ibáñez V. Consumer attitude and purchase intention toward green energy brands: the roles of psychological benefits and environmental concern. Journal of Business Research 2012, 65:1254-1263.
30. Hass J.W., Bagley G.S., Rogers R.W. Coping with the energy crisis: effects of fear appeals upon attitudes toward energy consumption. Journal of Applied Psychology 1975, 60:754-756.
31. Henthorne T.L., LaTour M.S., Nataraajan R. Fear appeals in print advertising: an analysis of arousal and ad response. Journal of Advertising 1993, 22:59-68.
32. Hine D.W., Gifford R. Fear appeals, individual differences, and environmental concern. Journal of Environmental Education 1991, 23:36-41.
33. Holbrook M.B., Batra R. Assessing the role of emotions as mediators of consumer responses to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research 1987, 14:404-420.
34. Ipsos Mori, 2011. Global Citizen Reaction to the Fukushima Nuclear Plant Disaster. Ipsos Global @dvisor Wave 20 June 2011. Available from: (accessed 09.12). http://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/ipsos-global-advisor-nuclear-power-june-2011.pdf.
35. Ito N., Takeuchi K., Tsuge T., Kishimoto A. Applying threshold models to donations to a green electricity fund. Energy Policy 2010, 38:1819-1825.
36. Janis I.L. Effects of fear arousal on attitude change: recent developments in theory and experimental research. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 1967, vol. 3:166-255. Academic Press, New York.
37. Kaenzig, J., Heinzle, S.L., Wüstenhagen, R., 2013. Whatever the customer wants, the customer gets? Exploring the gap between consumer preferences and default electricity products in Germany. Energy Policy 53, 311-322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.10.061.
38. Keller P.A., Block L.G. Increasing the persuasiveness of fear appeals: the effect of arousal and elaboration. Journal of Consumer Research 1996, 22:448-459.
39. Kessides I.N. The future of the nuclear industry reconsidered: risks, uncertainties, and continued promise. Energy Policy 2012, 48:185-208.
40. Köpke R. Auf Rekordkurs. Energie und Management 2011, 15:9-12.
41. Kraeusel J., Möst D. Carbon capture and storage on its way to large-scale deployment: social acceptance and willingness to pay in Germany. Energy Policy 2012, 49:642-651.
42. Laes E., Meskens G., Van der Sluijs J.P. On the contribution of external cost calculations to energy system governance: the case of a potential large-scale nuclear accident. Energy Policy 2011, 39:5664-5673.
43. Laros F.J.M., Steenkamp J.-B.E.M. Importance of fear in the case of genetically modified food. Psychology and Marketing 2004, 21:889-908.
44. LaTour M.S., Rotfeld H.J. There are threats and (maybe) fear-caused arousal: theory and confusions of fear appeals to fear and fear arousal itself. Journal of Advertising 1997, 26:45-59.
45. LaTour M.S., Tanner J.F. Radon: appealing to our fears. Psychology and Marketing 2003, 20:377-394.
46. Leventhal H. Findings and theory in the study of fear communications. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 1970, vol. 5:111-186. Academic Press, New York.
47. Leventhal H. Fear appeals and persuasion: the differentiation of a motivational construct. American Journal of Public Health 1971, 61:1208-1224.
48. Lima M.L. On the influence of risk perception on mental health: living near an incinerator. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2004, 24:71-84.
49. Maddux J.E., Rogers R.W. Protection motivation and self-efficacy: a revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1983, 19:469-479.
50. Manchandra R.V., Frankenberger K.D., Dahl D.W. Does it pay to shock? Reactions to shocking and nonshocking advertising content among university students. Journal of Advertising Research 2003, 43:268-280.
51. Mez L. Nuclear energy-any solution for sustainability and climate protection?. Energy Policy 2012, 48:56-63.
52. Obermiller C. The baby is sick/the baby is well: a test of environmental communication appeals. Journal of Advertising 1995, 24:55-70.
53. Oliver H., Volschenk J., Smit E. Residential consumers in the Cape Peninsula's willingness to pay for premium priced green electricity. Energy Policy 2011, 39:544-550.
54. Pahl S., Harris P.R., Todd H.A., Rutter D.R. Comparative optimism for environmental risks. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2005, 25:1-11.
55. Paladino A., Pandit A.P. Competing on service and branding in the renewable electricity sector. Energy Policy 2012, 45:378-388.
56. Pedersen E., Johansson M. Wind power or uranium mine: appraisal of two energy-related environmental changes in a local context. Energy Policy 2012, 44:312-319.
57. Peters E., Slovic P. The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 1996, 26:1427-1453.
58. Peters E., Slovic P. Affective asynchrony and the measurement of the affective attitude component. Cognition and Emotion 2007, 21:300-329.
59. Pidgeon N.F., Lorenzoni I., Poortinga W. Climate change or nuclear power-No thanks! A quantitative study of public perceptions and risk framing in Britain. Global Environmental Change 2008, 18:69-85.
60. Prasad M., Munch S. State-level renewable electricity policies and reductions in carbon emissions. Energy Policy 2012, 45:237-242.
61. Richins M.L. Measuring emotions in the consumption experience. Journal of Consumer Research 1997, 24:127-146.
62. Roe B., Teislb M.F., Levyc A., Russell M. US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity. Energy Policy 2001, 29:917-925.
63. Rogers R.W. A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied 1975, 91:93-114.
64. Rogers R.W. Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: a revised theory of protection motivation. Social Psychophysiology 1983, 153-176. Guilford Press, New York. J.T. Cacioppo, R.E. Petty (Eds.).
65. Roseman I.J. Appraisal determinants of discrete emotions. Cognition and Emotion 1991, 5:161-200.
66. Roser C., Thompson M. Fear appeals and the formation of active publics. Journal of Communication 1995, 45:103-122.
67. Russell J.A. A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1980, 39:1161-1178.
68. Salmela S., Varho V. Consumers in the green electricity market in Finland. Energy Policy 2006, 34:3669-3683.
69. Siegrist, M., Visschers, V.H.M., 2013. Acceptance of nuclear power: the Fukushima effect. Energy Policy 59, 112-119 (accessed 18.08.12). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.07.051.
70. Sjöberg L. Precautionary attitudes and the acceptance of a local nuclear waste repository. Safety Science 2009, 47:542-546.
71. Slovic P., Flynn J.H., Layman M. Perceived risk, trust, and the politics of nuclear waste. Science 1991, 254:1603-1607.
72. Slovic P., Layman M., Flynn J.H. Risk perception, trust, and nuclear waste: lessons from Yucca mountain. Environment 1991, 33:6-11.
73. Srinivasan, T.N., Rethinaraj, T.S., 2013. Fukushima and thereafter: reassessment of risks of nuclear power. Energy Policy 52, 726-736. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.10.036.
74. Tanner J.F., Hunt J.F., Eppright D.R. The protection motivation model: a normative model of fear appeals. Journal of Marketing 1991, 55:36-45.
75. Teravainen T., Lehtonen M., Martiskainen M. Climate change, energy security and risk-debating nuclear new building in Finland, France and the UK. Energy Policy 2011, 39:3434-3442.
76. Thomas S. What will the Fukushima disaster change?. Energy Policy 2012, 45:12-17.
77. Truelove H.B. Energy source perceptions and policy support: image associations, emotional evaluations, and cognitive beliefs. Energy Policy 2012, 45:478-489.
78. Venables D., Pidgeon N., Simmons P., Henwood K., Parkhill K. Living with nuclear power: a Q-method study of local community perceptions. Risk Analysis 2009, 29:1089-1104.
79. Venables D., Pidgeon N.F., Parkhill K.A., Henwood K.L., Simmons P. Living with nuclear power: sense of place, proximity, and risk perceptions in local host communities. Environmental Psychology 2012, 32:287-428.
80. Viklund M. Energy policy options-from the perspective of public attitudes and risk perceptions. Energy Policy 2004, 32:1159-1171.
81. Visschers V.H.M., Keller C., Siegrist M. Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations: investigating an explanatory model. Energy Policy 2011, 39:3621-3629.
82. Watson D., Clark L.A., Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1988, 54:1063-1070.
83. Whitehill King K., Reid L.N. Fear arousing anti-drinking and driving PSAs: do physical injury threats influence young adults?. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising 1990, 12:155-175.
84. Wiser R.H., Fowlie M., Holt E.A. Public goods and private interests: understanding non-residential demand for green power. Energy Policy 2001, 29:1085-1097.
85. Wiser R.H., Pickle S., Goldman C. Renewable energy policy and electricity restructuring: a California case study. Energy Policy 1998, 26:465-475.
86. Witte K. Putting the fear back into fear appeals: the extended parallel processing model. Communication Monographs 1992, 59:329-349.
87. Witte K. Fear control and danger control: a test of the extended parallel process model (EPPM). Communication Monographs 1994, 61:113-134.
88. Witte K. Fear as motivator, fear as inhibitor: using the extended parallel processing model to explain fear appeal successes and failures. Handbook of Communication and Emotion: Research, Theory, Application, and Contexts 1998, 423-450. Academic Press, CA, San Diego. P.A. Andersen, L.K. Guerrero (Eds.).
89. Wüstenhagen R., Bilharz M. Green energy market development in Germany: effective public policy and emerging customer demand. Energy Policy 2006, 34:1681-1696.
90. Wüstenhagen R., Markard J., Truffer B. Diffusion of green power products in Switzerland. Energy Policy 2003, 31:621-632.
91. Wüstenhagen R., Wolsink M., Bürer M.J. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: an introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 2007, 35:2683-2691.
92. Yoo S-H., Kwak S-Y. Willingness to pay for green electricity in Korea: a contingent valuation study. Energy Policy 2009, 37:5408-5416.
93. Zelenika-Zovko I., Pearce J.M. Diverting indirect subsidies from the nuclear industry to the photovoltaic industry: energy and financial returns. Energy Policy 2011, 39:2626-2632.
94. Zhang L., Wu Y. Market segmentation and willingness to pay for green electricity among urban residents in China: the case of Jiangsu Province. Energy Policy 2012, 51:514-523.
95. Zorić J., Hrovatin N. Household willingness to pay for green electricity in Slovenia. Energy Policy 2012, 47:180-187.