IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v23y2013icp1-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public participation and trust in nuclear power development in China

Author

Listed:
  • He, Guizhen
  • Mol, Arthur P.J.
  • Zhang, Lei
  • Lu, Yonglong

Abstract

Rapid expansion of nuclear power in China requires not only increasing institutional capacity to prevent and adequately cope with nuclear risks, but also increasing public trust in governmental agencies and nuclear enterprises managing nuclear risks. Using a case study on Haiyang nuclear power plant in Shandong province, public participation, communication, information disclosure and trust regarding nuclear policy and industry are investigated among Chinese citizens living close to nuclear facilities. The results show that development and decision-making on nuclear power are dominated by an ‘iron nuclear triangle’ of national governmental agencies, nuclear industries, and research organizations. The public, media and NGOs are neither informed nor involved. In contrast to low levels of public trust in governmental authorities advocating nuclear energy in western countries after Fukushima (Japan), Chinese respondents have still high levels of trust in governmental authorities (but not in state-owned nuclear power companies) regarding nuclear information provision, emergency response to nuclear accidents, and decision making on the country's nuclear future. A proven record in risk management and lack of alternative information sources explains this trust. As overall trust and credibility in China's governmental authorities is waning, and absence of transparency and public scrutiny proved fatal in Fukushima, the Chinese government has to develop a strategy for public involvement and information disclosure in nuclear power development in the post-Fukushima era.

Suggested Citation

  • He, Guizhen & Mol, Arthur P.J. & Zhang, Lei & Lu, Yonglong, 2013. "Public participation and trust in nuclear power development in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 1-11.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:23:y:2013:i:c:p:1-11
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2013.02.028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032113001305
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2013.02.028?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. Zhou, Yun & Rengifo, Christhian & Chen, Peipei & Hinze, Jonathan, 2011. "Is China ready for its nuclear expansion?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 771-781, February.
    2. Greenberg, Michael & Truelove, Heather, 2010. "Right answers and right-wrong answers: Sources of information influencing knowledge of nuclear-related information," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 130-140, September.
    3. Wouter Poortinga & Nick F. Pidgeon, 2003. "Exploring the Dimensionality of Trust in Risk Regulation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5), pages 961-972, October.
    4. Wang, Qiang & Chen, Xi, 2012. "Regulatory transparency—How China can learn from Japan's nuclear regulatory failures?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 3574-3578.
    5. Michael Siegrist & Heinz Gutscher & Timothy C. Earle, 2005. "Perception of risk: the influence of general trust, and general confidence," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 145-156, March.
    6. Arthur P. J. Mol & Guizhen He & Lei Zhang, 2011. "Information Disclosure in Environmental Risk Management: Developments in China," Journal of Current Chinese Affairs - China aktuell, Institute of Asian Studies, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg, vol. 40(3), pages 163-192.
    7. Wang, Qiang, 2009. "China needing a cautious approach to nuclear power strategy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2487-2491, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lam, J. & Li, V. & Reiner, D. & Han, Y., 2018. "Trust in Government and Effective Nuclear Safety Governance in Great Britain," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1827, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    2. Guo, Xiaopeng & Guo, Xiaodan, 2016. "Nuclear power development in China after the restart of new nuclear construction and approval: A system dynamics analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 999-1007.
    3. Roh, Seungkook & Choi, Jae Young & Chang, Soon Heung, 2019. "Modeling of nuclear power plant export competitiveness and its implications: The case of Korea," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 157-169.
    4. Strazzera, Elisabetta & Meleddu, Daniela & Atzori, Rossella, 2022. "A hybrid choice modelling approach to estimate the trade-off between perceived environmental risks and economic benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    5. Chi, Cheryl S.F. & Chen, Ling, 2012. "The sources of divergent practices in China's nuclear power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 348-357.
    6. Rui Jiang & Rongrong Li, 2017. "Decomposition and Decoupling Analysis of Life-Cycle Carbon Emission in China’s Building Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    7. Miguel Ángel López-Navarro & Jaume Llorens-Monzonís & Vicente Tortosa-Edo, 2013. "The Effect of Social Trust on Citizens’ Health Risk Perception in the Context of a Petrochemical Industrial Complex," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.
    8. Teun Terpstra, 2011. "Emotions, Trust, and Perceived Risk: Affective and Cognitive Routes to Flood Preparedness Behavior," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(10), pages 1658-1675, October.
    9. Chung, William & Yeung, Iris M.H., 2013. "Attitudes of Hong Kong residents toward the Daya Bay nuclear power plant," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1172-1186.
    10. Ling Jia & Queena K. Qian & Frits Meijer & Henk Visscher, 2020. "Stakeholders’ Risk Perception: A Perspective for Proactive Risk Management in Residential Building Energy Retrofits in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-25, April.
    11. Kazuya Nakayachi & George Cvetkovich, 2010. "Public Trust in Government Concerning Tobacco Control in Japan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 143-152, January.
    12. Hsiao, Cody Yu-Ling & Chen, Hsing Hung, 2018. "The contagious effects on economic development after resuming construction policy for nuclear power plants in Coastal China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 291-302.
    13. Contu, Davide & Strazzera, Elisabetta, 2022. "Testing for saliency-led choice behavior in discrete choice modeling: An application in the context of preferences towards nuclear energy in Italy," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    14. Ramana, M.V. & Saikawa, Eri, 2011. "Choosing a standard reactor: International competition and domestic politics in Chinese nuclear policy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 6779-6789.
    15. Wang, Qiang & Chen, Xi, 2012. "Regulatory failures for nuclear safety – the bad example of Japan – implication for the rest of world," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 2610-2617.
    16. Sun, Chuanwang & Zhu, Xiting, 2014. "Evaluating the public perceptions of nuclear power in China: Evidence from a contingent valuation survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 397-405.
    17. Michael Greenberg & Heather Barnes Truelove, 2011. "Energy Choices and Risk Beliefs: Is It Just Global Warming and Fear of a Nuclear Power Plant Accident?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 819-831, May.
    18. Wang, Qiang & Chen, Xi, 2012. "Regulatory transparency—How China can learn from Japan's nuclear regulatory failures?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 3574-3578.
    19. 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).
    20. T. Terpstra & R. Zaalberg & J. de Boer & W. J. W. Botzen, 2014. "You Have Been Framed! How Antecedents of Information Need Mediate the Effects of Risk Communication Messages," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(8), pages 1506-1520, August.

    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:rensus:v:23:y:2013:i:c:p:1-11. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    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.