Understanding the Societal Challenges Facing Nuclear Power Proceedings of a Workshop (2022) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2 Lessons from the Social and Decision Sciences
2 Lessons from the Social and Decision Sciences
Pages 17-28
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 17... ...
NUCLEAR DECISIONS Baruch Fischhoff, Carnegie Mellon University Fischhoff studies science communication, especially pertaining to risk (Fischhoff et al. 1980, 1981; Fischhoff 2011, 2013, 2018; Fischhoff and Kadvany 2011; Fischhoff and Davis 2014)
|
From page 18... ...
. PUBLIC RISK PERCEPTIONS AND NUCLEAR ENERGY IN BRITAIN Nick Pidgeon, Cardiff University Pidgeon discussed the evolution of public views toward nuclear power and lessons from community engagement experiences, particularly in the United Kingdom.
|
From page 19... ...
2000s, proponents in the United Kingdom and the United States sought to reframe nuclear power as important for fighting climate change and achieving energy security, arguing that nuclear energy could be a path to self-sufficiency, reliability, and sustainability (Bickerstaff et al. 2008; Greenberg and Truelove 2010; Corner et al.
|
From page 20... ...
survey research suggests that there may be a recent rise in support for existing nuclear plants and small modular reactors (SMRs) , although the level of support can fluctuate during extreme weather events, polarizing geopolitics, or energy shortages (see Figure 2-3)
|
From page 21... ...
FIGURE 2-3 Fluctuations in public support for nuclear energy over time. SOURCE: Gupta and Jenkins-Smith 2021.
|
From page 22... ...
However, engaging the public in a meaningful, deliberate process may improve acceptance, even in the face of broader unresolved questions of what types of energy society wants. Tuler discussed how experiences in nuclear waste siting decisions shed light on effective strategies for meaningful public engagement.
|
From page 23... ...
For example, the process Tuler described could be used to ask the public if they want SMRs co-located or distributed, Fischhoff suggested. Effective science communication is possible, but requires strong leadership to help communities grapple with difficult issues, create a culture of respectful collaboration, and build a strong, trusted social infrastructure.
|
From page 24... ...
Distributional equity refers to how risks and benefits are distributed across a community, and process equity reflects the degree to which the decision-making process addresses community concerns. Seeing decision makers take ownership of risk could make a difference for public perceptions of fairness and justice; he noted that in focus groups about SMRs, people frequently comment that if these facilities are truly safe, they should be located near the
|
From page 25... ...
Both examples underscore the importance of designing communication strategies for specific audiences, Gogan said. She suggested that an awareness of environmental justice should be incorporated into best practices for science communication, and that the nuclear establishment should also look at other controversial issues such as marriage equality, where successful public engagement built trust and contributed to decision making.
|
From page 26... ...
2019. "Chains of Trust: Energy Justice, Public Engagement, and the First Offshore Wind Farm in the United States." Energy Research and Social Science 47:166–176.
|
From page 27... ...
2010. "Reversing Nuclear Opposi tion: Evolving Public Acceptance of a Permanent Nuclear Waste Disposal Facility." Risk Analysis 31(4)
|
From page 28... ...
2009. "Living with Nuclear Power: A Q-method Study of Local Community Perceptions." Risk Analysis 29(8)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.