IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v55y2016ip1p11-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Changes in risk perceptions before and after nuclear accidents: Evidence from Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Nishikawa, Masashi
  • Kato, Takaaki
  • Homma, Toshimitsu
  • Takahara, Shogo

Abstract

We quantitatively analyzed changes in residents’ perceptions of the net benefits derived from the Kashiwazaki–Kariwa nuclear power station (KK) before and after the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi plant (FD) following the Great East Japan Earthquake on March 11, 2011. Employing data from two surveys—conducted in January 2010 and December 2011 before and after FD accident, respectively—we found that KK's perceived net benefits declined after the FD accident. This decline resulted from changes in respondents’ relative weightings of KK's costs and benefits rather than heightened expectations of future nuclear accidents. We also found that residents living near nuclear facilities are more concerned about health risks from nuclear accidents than the likelihood of such accidents caused by human error. We suggest that a more effective policy entails changing people's relative weighting of nuclear facilities’ costs and benefits by protecting lives through enhanced evacuation planning and post-disaster support for rehabilitation, although Japan's current nuclear power policy aims to assuage people's risk perceptions by reducing the probability of nuclear accidents to zero.

Suggested Citation

  • Nishikawa, Masashi & Kato, Takaaki & Homma, Toshimitsu & Takahara, Shogo, 2016. "Changes in risk perceptions before and after nuclear accidents: Evidence from Japan," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(P1), pages 11-19.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:55:y:2016:i:p1:p:11-19
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.08.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S146290111530068X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.08.015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vladimir M. Cvetković & Adem Öcal & Yuliya Lyamzina & Eric K. Noji & Neda Nikolić & Goran Milošević, 2021. "Nuclear Power Risk Perception in Serbia: Fear of Exposure to Radiation vs. Social Benefits," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    2. Huang, Lei & He, Ruoying & Yang, Qianqi & Chen, Jin & Zhou, Ying & Hammitt, James K. & Lu, Xi & Bi, Jun & Liu, Yang, 2018. "The changing risk perception towards nuclear power in China after the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 294-301.
    3. Wang, Lingling & Watanabe, Tsunemi, 2019. "Effects of environmental policy on public risk perceptions of haze in Tianjin City: A difference-in-differences analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 199-212.
    4. Geng, Liuna & Liu, Ting & Zhou, Kexin & Yang, Genmao, 2018. "Can power affect environmental risk attitude toward nuclear energy?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 87-93.
    5. Wu, Yican, 2017. "Public acceptance of constructing coastal/inland nuclear power plants in post-Fukushima China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 484-491.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:55:y:2016:i:p1:p:11-19. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.