IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v116y2013i2p389-409.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who has become more open to nuclear power because of climate change?

Author

Listed:
  • Heather Truelove
  • Michael Greenberg

Abstract

Even in the face of the March 2011 accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan, nuclear power is being promoted in the U.S. as a necessary response to global climate change. Conducted prior to the Fukushima accident, the present study used a nation-wide telephone survey of 2751 U.S. residents to assess the factors that influence whether a person has become more open to nuclear power because of global climate change rather than supportive or opposed to nuclear power. Results showed that belief that climate change is a risk and is human-caused, belief that nuclear energy contributes to climate change, environmental support, cultural worldviews, and selected socio-demographics consistently predicted openness to nuclear power because of climate change. Implications of the current results and avenues for additional research on this topic are discussed. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Heather Truelove & Michael Greenberg, 2013. "Who has become more open to nuclear power because of climate change?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 389-409, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:116:y:2013:i:2:p:389-409
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-012-0497-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10584-012-0497-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-012-0497-2?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bulte, Erwin & Gerking, Shelby & List, John A. & de Zeeuw, Aart, 2005. "The effect of varying the causes of environmental problems on stated WTP values: evidence from a field study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 330-342, March.
    2. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Keller, Carmen & Siegrist, Michael, 2011. "Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations: Investigating an explanatory model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3621-3629, June.
    3. Dan M. Kahan & Hank Jenkins-Smith & Donald Braman, 2011. "Cultural cognition of scientific consensus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 147-174, February.
    4. מחקר - ביטוח לאומי, 2006. "Summary for 2005," Working Papers 29, National Insurance Institute of Israel.
    5. Michael R. Greenberg & Frank J. Popper & Heather Barnes Truelove, 2012. "Are LULUs still enduringly objectionable?," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(6), pages 713-731, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Anshelm, Jonas & Simon, Haikola, 2016. "Power production and environmental opinions – Environmentally motivated resistance to wind power in Sweden," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1545-1555.
    2. Wang, Yu & Gu, Jibao & Wu, Jianlin, 2020. "Explaining local residents’ acceptance of rebuilding nuclear power plants: The roles of perceived general benefit and perceived local benefit," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    3. Ladenburg, Jacob & Kim, Jiwon & Zuch, Matteo & Soytas, Ugur, 2024. "Taking the carbon capture and storage, wind power, PV or other renewable technology path to fight climate change? Exploring the acceptance of climate change mitigation technologies – A Danish national," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    4. Korkmaz YILDIRIM & Musa GÜN, 2016. "Public Attitude to Nuclear Energy from Climate Change and Energy Security Perspectives in Turkey," Journal of Social and Administrative Sciences, KSP Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 141-160, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Paul R. Hindsley & O. Ashton Morgan, 2022. "The Role of Cultural Worldviews in Willingness to Pay for Environmental Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(2), pages 243-269, February.
    2. Anshelm, Jonas & Simon, Haikola, 2016. "Power production and environmental opinions – Environmentally motivated resistance to wind power in Sweden," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1545-1555.
    3. John C. Besley & Sang‐Hwa Oh, 2014. "The Impact of Accident Attention, Ideology, and Environmentalism on American Attitudes Toward Nuclear Energy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(5), pages 949-964, May.
    4. Kuhika Gupta & Joseph T. Ripberger & Hank C. Jenkins‐Smith & Carol L. Silva, 2020. "Exploring Aggregate vs. Relative Public Trust in Administrative Agencies that Manage Spent Nuclear Fuel in the United States," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(4), pages 491-510, July.
    5. Nicolás C. Bronfman & Luis Abdón Cifuentes & Michael L. deKay & Henry H. Willis, 2007. "Accounting for Variation in the Explanatory Power of the Psychometric Paradigm: The Effects of Aggregation and Focus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 527-554, June.
    6. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Siegrist, Michael, 2012. "Fair play in energy policy decisions: Procedural fairness, outcome fairness and acceptance of the decision to rebuild nuclear power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 292-300.
    7. MacCarty, Nordica A. & Bryden, Kenneth Mark, 2016. "An integrated systems model for energy services in rural developing communities," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 536-557.
    8. Björn Vollan & Karla Henning & Deniza Staewa, 2017. "Do campaigns featuring impact evaluations increase donations? Evidence from a survey experiment," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(4), pages 500-518, October.
    9. Jaeyoung Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2021. "Can Political Trust Weaken the Relationship between Perceived Environmental Threats and Perceived Nuclear Threats? Evidence from South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-13, September.
    10. Bhalotra, Sonia & Clarke, Damian & Mühlrad, Hanna & Palme, Mårten, 2021. "Health and Labor Market Impacts of Twin Birth : Evidence from a Swedish IVF Policy Mandate," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1391, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    11. N. N., 2005. "60th Euroconstruct Conference: The Prospects for the European Construction Market 2006-2008. Summary Report," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 25838, April.
    12. Lei Jin & Nicholas Chrisatakis, 2009. "Investigating the mechanism of marital mortality reduction: The transition to widowhood and quality of health care," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 46(3), pages 605-625, August.
    13. Ankit Gupta & Hemant Bherwani & Sneha Gautam & Saima Anjum & Kavya Musugu & Narendra Kumar & Avneesh Anshul & Rakesh Kumar, 2021. "Air pollution aggravating COVID-19 lethality? Exploration in Asian cities using statistical models," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 6408-6417, April.
    14. Bureau for Food and Agricultural Policy, 2015. "The South African Sunflower Complex," BFAP Reports 279776, Bureau for Food and Agricultural Policy (BFAP), BFAP Reports.
    15. Craig E. Landry & John A. List, 2007. "Using Ex Ante Approaches to Obtain Credible Signals for Value in Contingent Markets: Evidence from the Field," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(2), pages 420-429.
    16. Lu, Xi & Mo, Hongming & Deng, Yong, 2015. "An evidential opinion dynamics model based on heterogeneous social influential power," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 98-107.
    17. Bulte, Erwin H. & Gerking, Shelby & List, John A. & de Zeeuw, Aart, 2004. "Do causes of environmental problems affect Hicksian equivalent surplus? Evidence from the field," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 157-162, November.
    18. Hermann Donfouet & Ephias Makaudze & Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & Eric Malin, 2011. "The determinants of the willingness-to-pay for community-based prepayment scheme in rural Cameroon," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 209-220, September.
    19. Hristovska, Tatjana & Watkins, K. Bradley & Anders, Merle M., 2012. "An Economic Risk Analysis of No-till Management for the Rice-Soybean Rotation System used in Arkansas," 2012 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2012, Birmingham, Alabama 119676, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    20. Benno Torgler & Bruno S. Frey & Clevo Wilson, 2007. "Environmental and Pro-Social Norms: Evidence from 30 Countries," Working Papers 2007.84, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:climat:v:116:y:2013:i:2:p:389-409. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.