1 / 8

Public Participation in Decision Making on Nuclear ( Research ) Installations

Public Participation in Decision Making on Nuclear ( Research ) Installations. Catrinel Turcanu , Tanja Perko Institute for Environment, Health and Safety Belgian Nuclear Research Centre SCK•CEN cturcanu@sckcen.be. 13th International IRPA Congress,13-18 May 2012, Glasgow, Scotland

miron
Download Presentation

Public Participation in Decision Making on Nuclear ( Research ) Installations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Public Participation in Decision Making on Nuclear (Research) Installations CatrinelTurcanu, Tanja Perko Institutefor Environment, Health and Safety BelgianNuclear Research Centre SCK•CEN cturcanu@sckcen.be 13th International IRPA Congress,13-18 May 2012, Glasgow, Scotland TS4b: Processes, Methodologies and Tools in Stakeholder Engagement

  2. Outline • We all know that public & stakeholder involvement is important …. however • Motivating people to participate in public involvement activities is a major challenge • Who wants to be involved? • What are the reasons behind (non)participation? • What can be improved?

  3. The Theory of Planned Behaviour & extensions Behavioural beliefs Attitude towards behaviour Moralnorm Behaviour Intention Normative beliefs Subjective norm Descriptive norm Actual behavioural control Perceived behavioural control Control beliefs After I. Ajzen (2006)

  4. Study of participation behaviour - Method • Data • National survey in the Belgian population: (N>1000) • Sample representative for Belgian 18+ population • Computer Assisted Personal Interviews (35 to 45 min at respondent’s home) • Model • Predictors based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour (ext) + • Socio demographic (gender, age); past behaviour • Attitude towards nuclear • Risk perception & confidence in authorities

  5. Level of involvement

  6. Results (1) • Model 1: sample split in two categories • No involvement at all vs. some degree of involvement • Results • Most influential: Attitude towards participation and moral norms • Also significant: subjective norms and time constraints • Financial benefits and risk perception: inconsequential

  7. Results (2) • Model 2: only people who would like to be involved • Results • Strongest predictors: attitude towards participation, moral norms and time constraints • Also significant: descriptive norms and general attitude towards nuclear energy; subjective norms less influential • Weak influence: past participationand gender • As before, financial benefits and risk perception are inconsequential

  8. Conclusions Most people (70%) would like to get involved to a certain degree; and to be able to at least express their opinion (52%) For higher degrees of involvement: convince people that participation is worthwhile and brings benefits to the decision-making process Citizens’ culture plays an important role Time constraints are recognized as a challenge, but financial benefits are inconsequential Long term programmes of stakeholder involvement are necessary, with early involvement at the outset of the process

More Related