IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v104y2017icp124-133.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public opinion change after the Fukushima nuclear accident: The role of national context revisited

Author

Listed:
  • Latré, Edwin
  • Perko, Tanja
  • Thijssen, Peter

Abstract

This study explores how national context moderated change in support for nuclear energy after the Fukushima accident. The following national contextual variables are tested: geographical distance, nuclear energy production status, freedom of the press, and the building of new nuclear reactors. The results illustrate that previous research has misunderstood the moderating role of national context on opinion change after the Fukushima accident. A survey conducted shortly after the accident with more than 23,000 respondents from 41 countries has shown that geographical distance from the accident mattered: Contradicting a previous study, the decrease in support for nuclear energy was stronger in countries closer to Fukushima. In addition, support for nuclear energy decreased more in countries where new nuclear reactors were under construction. The country's nuclear energy production status and press freedom did not determine opinion change after the Fukushima accident. The non-effect of freedom of the press on opinion change contradicts the role of media after a focusing event as described in the literature. Overall results demonstrate a limited effect of national context on opinion change following a focusing event. Hence, national context provides only limited information to policy makers on how to respond to a nuclear accident.

Suggested Citation

  • Latré, Edwin & Perko, Tanja & Thijssen, Peter, 2017. "Public opinion change after the Fukushima nuclear accident: The role of national context revisited," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 124-133.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:104:y:2017:i:c:p:124-133
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.01.027
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142151730037X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.01.027?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. Robert Brulle & Jason Carmichael & J. Jenkins, 2012. "Shifting public opinion on climate change: an empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the U.S., 2002–2010," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 169-188, September.
    2. Michael A. Clemens, 2017. "The Meaning Of Failed Replications: A Review And Proposal," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 326-342, February.
    3. Michael Clemens, 2015. "The Meaning of Failed Replications: A Review and Proposal - Working Paper 399," Working Papers 399, Center for Global Development.
    4. Poortinga, Wouter & Aoyagi, Midori & Pidgeon, Nick F., 2013. "Public perceptions of climate change and energy futures before and after the Fukushima accident: A comparison between Britain and Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1204-1211.
    5. Fischhoff, Baruch & Gonzalez, Roxana M. & Small, Deborah A. & Lerner, Jennifer S., 2003. "Judged Terror Risk and Proximity to the World Trade Center," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 26(2-3), pages 137-151, March-May.
    6. Page, Benjamin I. & Shapiro, Robert Y. & Dempsey, Glenn R., 1987. "What Moves Public Opinion?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 81(1), pages 23-43, March.
    7. Kim, Younghwan & Kim, Minki & Kim, Wonjoon, 2013. "Effect of the Fukushima nuclear disaster on global public acceptance of nuclear energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 822-828.
    8. Mu, Ruimin & Zuo, Jian & Yuan, Xueliang, 2015. "China's approach to nuclear safety — From the perspective of policy and institutional system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 161-172.
    9. William R. Lowry & Mark Joslyn, 2014. "The Determinants of Salience of Energy Issues," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 31(3), pages 153-172, May.
    10. Siegrist, Michael & Visschers, Vivianne H.M., 2013. "Acceptance of nuclear power: The Fukushima effect," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 112-119.
    11. Brouard, Sylvain & Guinaudeau, Isabelle, 2015. "Policy beyond politics? Public opinion, party politics and the French pro-nuclear energy policy," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 137-170, April.
    12. Brambor, Thomas & Clark, William Roberts & Golder, Matt, 2006. "Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analyses," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 63-82, January.
    13. Renn, Ortwin & Marshall, Jonathan Paul, 2016. "Coal, nuclear and renewable energy policies in Germany: From the 1950s to the “Energiewende”," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 224-232.
    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. Soni, Anmol, 2018. "Out of sight, out of mind? Investigating the longitudinal impact of the Fukushima nuclear accident on public opinion in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 169-175.
    2. Ediger, Volkan Ş. & Kirkil, Gokhan & Çelebi, Emre & Ucal, Meltem & Kentmen-Çin, Çiğdem, 2018. "Turkish public preferences for energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 492-502.
    3. Humphrey, Uguru Edwin & Khandaker, Mayeen Uddin, 2018. "Viability of thorium-based nuclear fuel cycle for the next generation nuclear reactor: Issues and prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 259-275.
    4. Kang, Jia-Ning & Wei, Yi-Ming & Liu, Lan-Cui & Han, Rong & Yu, Bi-Ying & Wang, Jin-Wei, 2020. "Energy systems for climate change mitigation: A systematic review," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    5. Teisl, Mario F. & Noblet, Caroline L. & Corey, Richard R. & Giudice, Nicholas A., 2018. "Seeing clearly in a virtual reality: Tourist reactions to an offshore wind project," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 601-611.
    6. Wang, Jing & Li, Yazhou & Wu, Jianlin & Gu, Jibao & Xu, Shuo, 2020. "Environmental beliefs and public acceptance of nuclear energy in China: A moderated mediation analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    7. Behling, Noriko & Williams, Mark C. & Behling, Thomas G. & Managi, Shunsuke, 2019. "Aftermath of Fukushima: Avoiding another major nuclear disaster," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 411-420.
    8. Kosai, Shoki & Yamasue, Eiji, 2019. "Recommendation to ASEAN nuclear development based on lessons learnt from the Fukushima nuclear accident," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 628-635.
    9. Liam F. Beiser-McGrath & Thomas Bernauer & Jaehyun Song & Azusa Uji, 2021. "Understanding public support for domestic contributions to global collective goods," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-20, 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. Soni, Anmol, 2018. "Out of sight, out of mind? Investigating the longitudinal impact of the Fukushima nuclear accident on public opinion in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 169-175.
    2. Wang, Jing & Li, Yazhou & Wu, Jianlin & Gu, Jibao & Xu, Shuo, 2020. "Environmental beliefs and public acceptance of nuclear energy in China: A moderated mediation analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    3. Gupta, Kuhika & Nowlin, Matthew C. & Ripberger, Joseph T. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L., 2019. "Tracking the nuclear ‘mood’ in the United States: Introducing a long term measure of public opinion about nuclear energy using aggregate survey data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    4. Okubo, Toshihiro & Narita, Daiju & Rehdanz, Katrin & Schröder, Carsten, 2020. "Preferences for Nuclear Power in Post-Fukushima Japan: Evidence from a Large Nationwide Household Survey," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(11).
    5. Contu, Davide & Strazzera, Elisabetta & Mourato, Susana, 2016. "Modeling individual preferences for energy sources: The case of IV generation nuclear energy in Italy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 37-58.
    6. Uji, Azusa & Prakash, Aseem & Song, Jaehyun, 2021. "Does the “NIMBY syndrome” undermine public support for nuclear power in Japan?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(PA).
    7. Kazuya Nakayachi, 2015. "Examining Public Trust in Risk‐Managing Organizations After a Major Disaster," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(1), pages 57-67, January.
    8. Lam, Jacqueline C.K. & Cheung, Lawrence Y.L. & Han, Yang & Wang, Shanshan, 2022. "China's response to nuclear safety pre- and post-Fukushima: An interdisciplinary analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    9. Norifumi Tsujikawa & Shoji Tsuchida & Takamasa Shiotani, 2016. "Changes in the Factors Influencing Public Acceptance of Nuclear Power Generation in Japan Since the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 98-113, January.
    10. Lam, J. & Cheung, L. & Han, Y. & Wang, S., 2018. "China’s Response to Nuclear Safety Post-Fukushima: Genuine or Rhetoric?," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1866, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    11. Lee, You-Kyung, 2020. "Sustainability of nuclear energy in Korea: From the users’ perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    12. Isaiah Andrews & Maximilian Kasy, 2019. "Identification of and Correction for Publication Bias," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(8), pages 2766-2794, August.
    13. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    14. Yukiko Omata & Hajime Katayama & Toshi. H. Arimura, 2017. "Same concerns, same responses? A Bayesian quantile regression analysis of the determinants for supporting nuclear power generation in Japan," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 19(3), pages 581-608, July.
    15. Eszter Czibor & David Jimenez‐Gomez & John A. List, 2019. "The Dozen Things Experimental Economists Should Do (More of)," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 371-432, October.
    16. Ocelík, Petr & Osička, Jan & Zapletalová, Veronika & Černoch, Filip & Dančák, Břetislav, 2017. "Local opposition and acceptance of a deep geological repository of radioactive waste in the Czech Republic: A frame analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 458-466.
    17. Chuanwang Sun & Nan Lyu & Xiaoling Ouyang, 2014. "Chinese Public Willingness to Pay to Avoid Having Nuclear Power Plants in the Neighborhood," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(10), pages 1-27, October.
    18. Maren Duvendack & Richard Palmer-Jones & W. Robert Reed, 2017. "What Is Meant by "Replication" and Why Does It Encounter Resistance in Economics?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 46-51, May.
    19. Nicolas Vallois & Dorian Jullien, 2017. "Replication in experimental economics: A historical and quantitative approach focused on public good game experiments," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-01651080, HAL.
    20. Hsiao, Chih-Tung & Liu, Chung-Shu & Chang, Dong-Shang & Chen, Chun-Cheng, 2018. "Dynamic modeling of the policy effect and development of electric power systems: A case in Taiwan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 377-387.

    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:enepol:v:104:y:2017:i:c:p:124-133. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.