EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Public acceptance model for siting a repository of radioactive contaminated waste

Shoji Ohtomo, Yukio Hirose and Susumu Ohnuma

Journal of Risk Research, 2021, vol. 24, issue 2, 215-227

Abstract: The disposal of designated radioactive contaminated waste resulting from the Fukushima nuclear accident is a primary issue in Japan. However, residents often strongly oppose siting a repository of designated waste; therefore, a possible site remains undecided. The NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) aspect, whereby people refuse to build a repository in their hometown, has led to strong opposition. This study examined a public acceptance model for the siting investigation of a repository of designated waste. The model proposes that the antecedents of the three types of fairness, namely, procedural, distributive, and interpersonal fairness, determine public acceptance in addition to affecting evaluation of designated waste. The study investigated the differences of influences of the three types of fairness between residents in possible siting areas and in a non-siting area to compare the cognitive process toward the NIMBY issue. The respondents included 1016 residents in possible siting areas (Miyagi, Tochigi, Gunma, Ibaraki, and Chiba Prefectures), and 1006 residents in a non-siting area (the Tokyo metropolitan area). All respondents completed a web-based questionnaire. The results revealed that the influence of procedural fairness on public acceptance in the non-siting area was stronger than it was in the possible siting areas. Conversely, the influence of distributive fairness was stronger in the possible siting areas than it was in the non-siting area. Furthermore, affect evaluation through antecedents of fairness was more influential for public acceptance in the possible sites than it was in the non-siting area. Therefore, the findings suggest that the strong opposition due to the NIMBY aspect was caused by the differences between the process of fairness and the concept of fairness that people emphasize.

Date: 2021
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2020.1750457 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:24:y:2021:i:2:p:215-227

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RJRR20

DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2020.1750457

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Risk Research is currently edited by Bryan MacGregor

More articles in Journal of Risk Research from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-20
Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:24:y:2021:i:2:p:215-227