Risk Perception in an Interest Group Context: An Examination of the TMI Restart Issue

Human response to environmental hazards and risks has been the subject of considerable research by social scientists. Work has traditionally focused on either individual response to the risks of an ongoing or future threat (hazards research), or group and organizational response to a specific disaster event (disaster research). As part of a larger investigation of the restart of the Unit 1 reactor at Three Mile Island (TMI), we examined the response of interest groups active in the restart issue to the continued threat of TMI and to future risks due to restart. After reviewing the restart issue in general, the paper examines the local dimensions of the restart issue from interest group perspectives. A method for defining appropriate issues at the community level is reviewed. We then discuss differences in the perceived local impacts of alternative decisions, and systems of beliefs associated with differing perceptions. Finally, we discuss the implications of interest group versus individual perceptions of local issues for decision making about TMI, in particular, and about technological hazards management, in general. Associated implications for determining socially acceptable risk levels are identified. Our research led us to three major conclusions: (1) in contrast to other types of hazards, interest groups are a critical unit of analysis for understanding how beliefs and behaviors form in response to the presence of technological hazards; (2) the divergence of positions between groups, even though they may have shared the same physical experience, is understandable if not always predictable, (3) the resolution of policy debates where risks are a major focus of the arguments should recognize the legitimacy of these divergent positions by allowing participation of the various interest groups in the decision process. Such participation helps ensure that the decision strategy is responsive to local concerns, thereby increasing the likelihood of acceptance of the ultimate decision and thus producing a publicly acceptable level of risk.