본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

Nuclear power in jeopardy: The negative relationships between greenhouse gas/fine dust concerns and nuclear power acceptance in South Korea

노승국|Lee Jin Won
한국원자력학회 (Korean Nuclear Society)|2022.10|Nuclear Engineering and Technology|제54권 제10호|pp. 3695-3702|DOI 10.1016/j.net.2022.05.032

2

조회

0

다운로드

4

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

KoreaFine dustNuclear powerPublic communicationGreenhouse gasesPublic acceptanceEnvironmental value
주제분류원자력공학

초록

South Korea, a country that built a world-class nuclear power infrastructure, shifted to a nuclear phaseout during the previous government's reign. This shift was pursued as part of a larger task of electricity mix reform, and one of the integral motives for such reform is addressing greenhouse gas (GHG) and fine dust problems. Thus, verifying the relationships between the public's concerns about GHG/fine dust and their acceptance of nuclear power generation is essential for designing public communication strategies to revive nuclear power under the ongoing environmental regime. Our analysis using a nationwide survey sample of South Korea (N ¼ 1009, through proportionated quota sampling method) showed that the more people are concerned about GHG and fine dust, the less they accept nuclear power. These relationships held even after controlling for the effect of a third variabledenergy-related environmentalism. This finding means that despite past communication efforts positioning nuclear power as a generation source that can mitigate GHG/fine dust emissions and the widely accepted scientific evidence that supports such positioning, nuclear power in Korea is in jeopardy. Our finding provides implications for public communications and fundamental knowledge for research on the determinants of nuclear power acceptance

Abstract

South Korea, a country that built a world-class nuclear power infrastructure, shifted to a nuclear phaseout during the previous government's reign. This shift was pursued as part of a larger task of electricity mix reform, and one of the integral motives for such reform is addressing greenhouse gas (GHG) and fine dust problems. Thus, verifying the relationships between the public's concerns about GHG/fine dust and their acceptance of nuclear power generation is essential for designing public communication strategies to revive nuclear power under the ongoing environmental regime. Our analysis using a nationwide survey sample of South Korea (N ¼ 1009, through proportionated quota sampling method) showed that the more people are concerned about GHG and fine dust, the less they accept nuclear power. These relationships held even after controlling for the effect of a third variabledenergy-related environmentalism. This finding means that despite past communication efforts positioning nuclear power as a generation source that can mitigate GHG/fine dust emissions and the widely accepted scientific evidence that supports such positioning, nuclear power in Korea is in jeopardy. Our finding provides implications for public communications and fundamental knowledge for research on the determinants of nuclear power acceptance

참고문헌 (77)

  1. "Nuclear Power Reactors in the World"[URL]
  2. Q. Li, "Segmenting the South Korean public according to their preferred direction for electricity mix reform", Sustainability, 12, pp.9053~ (2020)
  3. S. Ha, "A study on the limitations of South Korea's National Roadmap for Greenhouse Gas Reduction by 2030 and suggestions for improvement", Sustainability, 11, pp.3969~ (2019)
  4. A. Maennel, "Comparison of greenhouse gas reduction potential through renewable energy transition in South Korea and Germany", Energies, 11, pp.206~ (2018)
  5. "South Korea looks to nuclear expansion in bid to meet climate targets" (2022)[URL]
  6. "Controversies rising: we don't use any more because it's dangerous, but we recommend to you?" (2017)[URL]
  7. J. -B. Chung, "Public deliberation on the national nuclear energy policy in KoreaeSmall successes but bigger challenges", Energy Pol, 145, pp.111724~ (2020)
  8. H. Kim, "Structural changes to nuclear energy industries and the economic effects resulting from energy transition policies in South Korea", Energies, 13, pp.1806~ (2020)
  9. E. Lim, "South Korea's nuclear dilemmas", Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament, 2, pp.297~318 (2019)
  10. "Can nuclear energy power South Korea’s future?" (2022)[URL]
  11. N. C. Bronfman, "Understanding social acceptance of electricity generation sources", Energy Pol, 46, pp.246~252 (2012)
  12. J. J. Cohen, "Re-focussing research efforts on the public acceptance of energy infrastructure : a critical review", Energy, 76, pp.4~9 (2014)
  13. 임은옥, "Study on the policy literacy of the Republic of Korea regarding nuclear and new-renewable energy", Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 54(2), pp.741~748 (2022), 한국원자력학회[DOI]
  14. "The 9th Basic Plan for Long-Term Electricity Supply and Demand (written in Korean)"[URL]
  15. D. Shindell, "Climate and air-quality benefits of a realistic phase-out of fossil fuels", Nature, 573, pp.408~411 (2019)
  16. 임길환, "The Cognitive and Economic Value of a Nuclear Power Plant in Korea", Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 49(3), pp.609~620 (2017), 한국원자력학회
  17. 강동묵, "Fine, Ultrafine, and Yellow Dust: Emerging Health Problems in Korea", Journal of Korean Medical Science, 29(5), pp.621~622 (2014), 대한의학회
  18. "Smog becomes a political issue in South Korean election, The Washington Post" (2017)[URL]
  19. S. Lee, "Korea’s new comprehensive plan on fine dust and its implications for policy and research", Research in Brief, 29, pp.1~7 (2018)
  20. M. Park, "Assessment of future renewable energy scenarios in South Korea based on costs, emissions and weather-driven hourly simulation", Renew. Energy, 143, pp.1388~1396 (2019)
  21. "Comparison of Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Various Electricity Generation Sources"[URL]
  22. R. Dones, "Life cycle inventories for the nuclear and natural gas energy systems, and examples of uncertainty analysis", Int. J. Life Cycle Assess, 10, pp.10~23 (2005)
  23. B. Van der Zwaan, "The role of nuclear power in mitigating emissions from electricity generation", Energy Strategy Rev, 1, pp.296~301 (2013)
  24. T. -S. Chan, "Concerns for environmental issues and consumer purchase preferences : a two-country study", J. Int. Consum. Market, 9, pp.43~55 (1996)
  25. A. Kollmuss, "Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?", Environ. Educ. Res, 8, pp.239~260 (2002)
  26. I. Ajzen, "The theory of planned behavior", Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process, 50, pp.179~211 (1991)
  27. B. Meng, "Volunteer tourism(VT)traveler behavior : merging norm activation model and theory of planned behavior", J. Sustain. Tourism, 28, pp.1947~1969 (2020)
  28. J. -B. Chung, "Public perception of energy transition in Korea: nuclear power, climate change, and party preference", Energy Pol, 116, pp.137~144 (2018)
  29. A. Spence, "Public perceptions of energy choices : the influence of beliefs about climate change and the environment", Energy Environ, 21, pp.385~407 (2010)
  30. A. Vainio, "Weighing the risks of nuclear energy and climate change: trust in different information sources, perceived risks, and willingness to pay for alternatives to nuclear power", Risk Anal, 37, pp.557~569 (2017)
  31. B. D. Haig, "What is a spurious correlation?", Understand. Stat, 2, pp.125~132 (2003)
  32. A. Ward, "Spurious correlations and causal inferences", Erkenntnis, 78, pp.699~712 (2013)
  33. A. Corner, "Nuclear power, climate change and energy security: exploring British public attitudes", Energy Pol, 39, pp.4823~4833 (2011)
  34. G. Perlaviciute, "The influence of values on evaluations of energy alternatives", Renew. Energy, 77, pp.259~267 (2015)
  35. J. J. Kim, "Merging the norm activation model and the theory of planned behavior in the context of drone food delivery services: does the level of product knowledge really matter?", J. Hospit. Tourism Manag, 42, pp.1~11 (2020)
  36. M. H. Le, "Integrating the theory of planned behavior and the norm activation model to investigate organic food purchase intention : evidence from vietnam", Sustainability, 14, pp.816~ (2022)
  37. H. Han, "Drivers of customer decision to visit an environmentally responsible museum : merging the theory of planned behavior and norm activation theory", J. Trav. Tourism Market, 34, pp.1155~1168 (2017)
  38. Danish, "Testing the pollution haven hypothesis on the pathway of sustainable development: Accounting the role of nuclear energy consumption", Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 53(8), pp.2746~2752 (2021), 한국원자력학회[DOI]
  39. X. Hu, "Effects of information strategies on public acceptance of nuclear energy", Energy, 231, pp.120907~ (2021)
  40. N. F. Pidgeon, "Climate change or nuclear powerdNo thanks! A quantitative study of public perceptions and risk framing in Britain", Global Environ. Change, 18, pp.69~85 (2008)
  41. P. C. Stern, "The value basis of environmental concern", J. Soc. Issues, 50, pp.65~84 (1994)
  42. P. C. Stern, "A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements : the case of environmentalism", Hum. Ecol. Rev, 6, pp.81~97 (1999)
  43. P. Stern, "Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior", J. Soc. Issues, 56, pp.407~424 (2000)
  44. A. M. Nordlund, "Effects of values, problem awareness, and personal norm on willingness to reduce personal car use", J. Environ. Psychol, 23, pp.339~347 (2003)
  45. A. M. Nordlund, "Value structures behind proenvironmental behavior", Environ. Behav, 34, pp.740~756 (2002)
  46. Y. Zhang, "Predicting residents' proenvironmental behaviors at tourist sites: the role of awareness of disaster's consequences, values, and place attachment", J. Environ. Psychol, 40, pp.131~146 (2014)
  47. A. C. Landon, "Modeling the psychological antecedents to tourists' pro-sustainable behaviors : an application of the valuebelief-norm model", J. Sustain. Tourism, 26, pp.957~972 (2018)
  48. E. M. Ghazali, "Pro-environmental behaviours and Value-Belief-Norm theory : assessing unobserved heterogeneity of two ethnic groups", Sustainability, 11, pp.3237~ (2019)
  49. S. C. Whitfield, "The future of nuclear power : value orientations and risk perception", Risk Anal, 29, pp.425~437 (2009)
  50. J. I. De Groot, "Morality and nuclear energy: perceptions of risks and benefits, personal norms, and willingness to take action related to nuclear energy", Risk Anal, 30, pp.1363~1373 (2010)
  51. L. Steg, "Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies : a test of VBN theory", J. Environ. Psychol, 25, pp.415~425 (2005)
  52. D. Bidwell, "The role of values in public beliefs and attitudes towards commercial wind energy", Energy Pol, 58, pp.189~199 (2013)
  53. D. L. Paulhus, "Two replicable suppressor situations in personality research", Multivariate Behav. Res, 39, pp.303~328 (2004)
  54. B. Hidalgo, "Multivariate or multivariable regression?", Am. J. Publ. Health, 103, pp.39~40 (2013)
  55. V. H. Visschers, "Find the differences and the similarities: relating perceived benefits, perceived costs and protected values to acceptance of five energy technologies", J. Environ. Psychol, 40, pp.117~130 (2014)
  56. R. McNamee, "Regression modelling and other methods to control confounding", Occup. Environ. Med, 62, pp.500~506 (2005)
  57. D. P. MacKinnon, "Equivalence of the mediation, confounding and suppression effect", Prev. Sci, 1, pp.173~181 (2000)
  58. "Hyundai Research Institute"[URL]
  59. R. Iliyasu, "Comparison of quota sampling and stratified random sampling", Biom. Biostat. Int. J. Rev, 10, pp.24~27 (2021)
  60. J. Wang, "Comparative analysis of public attitudes toward nuclear power energy across 27 European countries by applying the multilevel model", Sustainability, 10, pp.1518~ (2018)
  61. S. Roh, "Differentiated influences of benefit and risk perceptions on nuclear power acceptance according to acceptance levels : evidence from Korea", J. Nucl. Sci. Technol, 54, pp.830~836 (2017)
  62. C. Z. Mooney, "Bootstrapping: a Nonparametric Approach to Statistical Inference" (1993), Sage Publications
  63. W. Ascher, "Bringing in the Future", pp.213~228 (2009), University of Chicago Press
  64. R. J. Lewicki, "Framing Matters: Perspectives on Negotiation Research and Practice in Communication", pp.110~135 (2011), Peter Lang Publishing
  65. 노승국, "Big Data Analysis of Public Acceptance of Nuclear Power in Korea", Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 49(4), pp.850~854 (2017), 한국원자력학회
  66. "Nuclear Energy, Society and Nuclear Energy: Towards a Better Understanding, Nuclear Energy Agency of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)"[URL]
  67. Y. -K. Lee, "Sustainability of nuclear energy in Korea : from the users’ perspective", Energy Pol, 147, pp.111761~ (2020)
  68. V. H. M. Visschers, "Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations : investigating an explanatory model", Energy Pol, 39, pp.3621~3629 (2011)
  69. K. Bickerstaff, "Constructing responsibilities for risk : negotiating citizendstate relationships", Environ. Plann, 40, pp.1312~1330 (2008)
  70. Lihong Peng, "Policy implication of nuclear energy’s potential for energy optimization and CO2 mitigation: A case study of Fujian, China", Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 51(4), pp.1154~1162 (2019), 한국원자력학회[DOI]
  71. L. Cummings, "The"trust"heuristic : arguments from authority in public health", Health Commun, 29, pp.1043~1056 (2014)
  72. S. -J. Yun, "Nuclear power for climate mitigation? Contesting frames in Korean newspapers", Asia Eur. J, 10, pp.57~73 (2012)
  73. T. Kalinowski, "The politics of climate change in a neo-developmental state : the case of South Korea", Int. Polit. Sci. Rev, 42, pp.48~63 (2020)
  74. Ardvin Kester S. Ong, "Investigating the acceptance of the reopening Bataan nuclear power plant: Integrating protection motivation theory and extended theory of planned behavior", Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 54(3), pp.1115~1125 (2022), 한국원자력학회[DOI]
  75. S. Roh, "Differentiated effects of risk perception dimensions on nuclear power acceptance in South Korea", Energy Pol, 122, pp.727~735 (2018)
  76. Yanling He, "Moderating effect of regulatory focus on public acceptance of nuclear energy", Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 51(8), pp.2034~2041 (2019), 한국원자력학회[DOI]
  77. S. Roh, "Positioning of major energy sources in Korea and its implications", Int. J. Energy Res, 41, pp.2421~2429 (2017)

관련 논문AI추천

Differentiated influences of perceived benefit types of nuclear power on its acceptance: Evidence from South Korea노승국, Lee Jin Won, Zhang Hailin한국원자력학회 · Nuclear Engineering and Technology2025 · 제57권 제2호National and local acceptance of nuclear power: A closer look at environmental benefit perception노승국, Lee Jin Won한국원자력학회 · Nuclear Engineering and Technology2025 · 제57권 제11호The Knowledge of Radiation and Radioactive Waste and the Public Acceptance of Nuclear Power Generation배영, 우병득한국사회과학협의회 · Korean Social Science Journal2022 · 제49권 제2호The relationship between public acceptance of nuclear power generation and spent nuclear fuel reuse: Implications for promotion of spent nuclear fuel reuse and public engagement김동욱, 노승국한국원자력학회 · Nuclear Engineering and Technology2022 · 제54권 제6호Social acceptance of small modular reactor (SMR): Evidence from a contingent valuation study in South Korea이주용, 조은정한국원자력학회 · Nuclear Engineering and Technology2025 · 제57권 제1호Public Deliberation on Nuclear Energy Policy in Korea: The Impact of Trust in Information Provider유지성한국비교정부학회 · 한국비교정부학보2021 · 제25권 제2호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (33건)

Development of a distributed high-speed data acquisition and monitoring system based on a special data packet format for HUST RF negative ion sourceZuo Chen, Chen Dezhi, Li Dong, Yin Ling, Wang Saipp. 3587-3594Optimization of preventive maintenance of nuclear safety-class DCS based on reliability modelingXu Biao, Zhang Xu, Peng Hao, Wang Yuanbing, Hu Qingrenpp. 3595-3603The development of EASI-based multi-path analysis code for nuclear security system with variability extensionSetiadipura Topan, Su'ud Zaki, Purqon Acep, Andiwijayakusuma Dinanpp. 3604-3613Measurement of the ICRH antenna phasing using antenna strap probe based diagnostic system in EAST tokamakLiang Q.C., Zhang X.J., Yang H., Yuan S., Mao Y.Z., Zhang W., Zhu G.H., Wang L., Qin C.M., Zhao Y.P., Cheng Y., Zhang K., Liu L.N.pp. 3614-3619Consistency check algorithm for validation and re-diagnosis to improve the accuracy of abnormality diagnosis in nuclear power plants이승준, 김근희, 김재민, 신지현pp. 3620-3630
원문 보기