• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Risk analysis >Perceived Risk and Benefit of Nuclear Waste Repositories: Four Opinion Clusters
【24h】

Perceived Risk and Benefit of Nuclear Waste Repositories: Four Opinion Clusters

机译：核废料储存库的感知风险和利益：四个观点群

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Local public resistance can block the site-selection process, construction, and operation of nuclear waste repositories. Social science has established that the perception of risks and benefits, trust in authorities, and opinion on nuclear energy play important roles in acceptance. In particular, risk and benefit evaluations seem critical for opinion formation. However, risks and benefits have rarely been studied independently and, most often, the focus has been on the two most salient groups of proponents and opponents. The aim of this exploratory study is to examine the often-neglected majority of people holding ambivalent or indifferent opinions. We used cluster analysis to examine the sample (N = 500, mailed survey in German-speaking Switzerland) in terms of patterns of risk and benefit perception. We reveal four significantly different and plausible clusters: one cluster with high-benefit ratings in favor of a repository and one cluster with high-risk ratings opposing it; a third cluster shows ambivalence, with high ratings on both risk and benefit scales and moderate opposition, whereas a fourth cluster seems indifferent, rating risks and benefits only moderately compared to the ambivalent cluster. We conclude that a closer look at the often neglected but considerable number of people with ambivalent or indifferent opinions is necessary. Although the extreme factions of the public will most probably not change their opinion, we do not yet know how the opinion of the ambivalent and indifferent clusters might develop over time.
机译：当地公众的抵制可能会阻碍选址过程，核废料处置库的建设和运营。社会科学已经确定，风险和利益的感知，对权威的信任以及对核能的看法在接受中起着重要的作用。特别是，风险和收益评估对于形成意见至关重要。但是，很少对风险和收益进行独立研究，并且通常将重点放在支持者和反对者这两个最重要的群体上。这项探索性研究的目的是检验持偏执或冷漠意见的经常被忽视的大多数人。我们使用聚类分析对样本（N = 500，瑞士德语区的邮寄调查）进行了风险和收益感知方式方面的研究。我们揭示了四个明显不同且合理的集群：一个集群具有对存储库有利的高收益评级，另一个集群对立于其中的高风险评级；第三个集群表现出矛盾性，在风险和收益规模上都具有很高的评级，并且有中等程度的反对，而第四个集群则显得无动于衷，与矛盾的集群相比，对风险和收益的评级仅为中等。我们得出结论，有必要对那些经常被人忽视但意见相左或无所谓的人进行仔细研究。尽管公众的极端派系很可能不会改变他们的观点，但我们尚不知道随着时间的流逝，矛盾和冷漠群体的观点将如何发展。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Risk analysis》 |2013年第6期|1038-1048|共11页
  • 作者

    Roman Seidl; Corinne Moser; Michael Stauffacher; Pius Kruetli;

  • 作者单位

    ETH Zurich, Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED), CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland Address correspondence to Roman Seidl, ETH Zurich, insti¬tute for Environmental Decisions (IED), Universitaetstrasse 22, CHN J74.1, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland;

    ETH Zurich, Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED), CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland;

    ETH Zurich, Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED), CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland;

    ETH Zurich, Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED), CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    Ambivalence; nuclear waste; opinion; risk and benefit perception;

    机译：矛盾核废料;意见;风险和收益感知;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号