Measuring the social value of nuclear energy using contingent valuation methodology

被引:44
作者
Jun, Eunju [2 ]
Kim, Won Joon [1 ]
Jeong, Yong Hoon [3 ]
Chang, Soon Heung [3 ]
机构
[1] Korea Adv Inst Sci & Technol, Grad Sch Innovat & Technol Management, Taejon 305701, South Korea
[2] KAERI, Foreign Policy Team, Div Int Strategy, Taejon, South Korea
[3] Korea Adv Inst Sci & Technol, Dept Nucl & Quantum Engn, Taejon 305701, South Korea
关键词
Contingent valuation method; Social value; Nuclear energy; WILLINGNESS-TO-PAY; HEALTH;
D O I
10.1016/j.enpol.2009.11.028
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
As one of the promising energy sources for the next few decades, nuclear energy receives more attention than before as environmental issues become more important and the supply of fossil fuels becomes unstable. One of the reasons for this attention is based on the rapid innovation of nuclear technology which solves many of its technological constraints and safety issues. However, regardless of these rapid innovations, social acceptance for nuclear energy has been relatively low and unchanged. Consequently, the social perception has often been an obstacle to the development and execution of nuclear policy requiring enormous subsidies which are not based on the social value of nuclear energy. Therefore, in this study, we estimate the social value of nuclear energy-consumers' willingness-to-pay for nuclear energy-using the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) and suggest that the social value of nuclear energy increases approximately 68.5% with the provision of adequate information about nuclear energy to the public. Consequently, we suggest that the social acceptance management in nuclear policy development is important along with nuclear technology innovation. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1470 / 1476
页数:7
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
AABO S, 2000, P 11 ANN C CUL UNPUB
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2007, WORLD EN OUTL
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2002, A technology roadmap for generation iv nuclear energy systems
[4]  
Bateman I. J., 1996, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, V39, P21, DOI 10.1080/09640569612651
[5]  
Bergstrom J. C., 1985, Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, V17, P139
[6]  
BISHOP RC, 1983, NAT RESOUR J, V23, P619
[7]  
BRAVI M, 1998, P 10 INT C CULT EC B
[8]   EFFICIENT ESTIMATION METHODS FOR CLOSED-ENDED CONTINGENT VALUATION SURVEYS [J].
CAMERON, TA ;
JAMES, MD .
REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS, 1987, 69 (02) :269-276
[9]   Incentive and informational properties of preference questions [J].
Carson, Richard T. ;
Groves, Theodore .
ENVIRONMENTAL & RESOURCE ECONOMICS, 2007, 37 (01) :181-210
[10]   Contingent valuation and revealed preference methodologies: Comparing the estimates for quasi-public goods [J].
Carson, RT ;
Flores, NE ;
Martin, KM ;
Wright, JL .
LAND ECONOMICS, 1996, 72 (01) :80-99