Exploring the differences and influencing factors between top-down and opinion-reflective approaches regarding public acceptance of final disposal of soils removed after the Fukushima nuclear accident.

Autor:	Murakami M; Division of Scientific Information and Public Policy, Center for Infectious Disease Education and Research, Osaka University, 2-8, Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan., Takada M; Research Institute for Geo-Resources and Environment, Geological Survey of Japan, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, 1-1-1 Higashi, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8567, Japan., Shibata Y; Department of Behavioral Science, Faculty of Humanities and Human Sciences, Hokkaido University, Kita 10, Nishi 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido, 060-0810, Japan., Shirai K; Research Institute for Geo-Resources and Environment, Geological Survey of Japan, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, 1-1-1 Higashi, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8567, Japan., Ohnuma S; Department of Behavioral Science, Faculty of Humanities and Human Sciences, Hokkaido University, Kita 10, Nishi 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido, 060-0810, Japan., Yasutaka T; Research Institute for Geo-Resources and Environment, Geological Survey of Japan, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, 1-1-1 Higashi, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8567, Japan.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Radiation protection dosimetry [Radiat Prot Dosimetry] 2024 Nov 13; Vol. 200 (16-18), pp. 1514-1518.
DOI:	10.1093/rpd/ncae017
Abstrakt:	The final disposal of the soils removed from the area affected by the Fukushima nuclear accident will be carried out by 2045. This study investigated how acceptance of final disposal differed between top-down, opinion-aggregative, and opinion-reflective approaches to the decision outcome, and what factors influenced these differences. In 2022, a survey of 3000 randomly selected participants living outside Fukushima Prefecture was conducted using the postal method, with responses obtained from 871 consenting participants. The proportions of respondents who agreed to accept the final disposal were 22.6, 37.6 and 56.9% for the top-down, opinion-aggregative, and opinion-reflective approaches, respectively. The preferences for both opinion-aggregative and opinion-reflective approaches showed significant positive associations with interest in final disposal and social benefits, and significant negative associations with intergenerational expectations and age. This study highlights the importance of procedural fairness in determining final disposal sites, and identifies factors that contribute to greater acceptance through this process. (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu