PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE AND PUBLIC OPINION

Transcription

1 PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE AND PUBLIC OPINION Koichi Ogawa Department of Communications Tokai University, Japan Public Opinion and Public Acceptance in a Democratic Society One of the principles of a democratic society is that people s opinions must be reflected in the way that society is managed. People s opinions here refers to an aggregate of intentions and opinions expressed by the individual members of the society, and is generally defined as public opinion. In modern societies, public as in public opinion was first intended to mean a collectivity of rational individuals, who constitute a society. However, in contemporary societies, we have come to understand that human existence inevitably includes irrational, emotional aspects as well, and that the notion of public was a mere modern illusion. Contemporary society is thus defined as a mass society, and public opinion should therefore be called mass opinion. However, for the sake of convenience, in this paper I use the term public opinion as it is generally used. Politics in a contemporary democratic society is thus considered to be managed by public opinion. Public opinion is usually understood and expressed through forms such as election results, opinions communicated through mass media, and results of public opinion polls conducted by various institutions. Government officials are thus expected to conduct their duties according to such public opinion. In cases when a particular policy does not necessarily reflect public opinion but is deemed to be socially important or necessary, the government officials are responsible for explaining it to the members of the society to promote their understanding and acceptance. If legislated policy largely differs from, or completely ignores, public opinion, then such policy is regarded as anti-democratic and may not be accepted by the public or may even cause conflicts. In other words, now in a democratic society, all members are guaranteed participation in policy-decisions through the expression of their opinions. Furthermore, people attempt to achieve social equality by securing channels through which they can convey their opinions and thereby have influence on policy-making. Individuals opinions are expressed in a collective form as public opinion. In order for individuals to have their own opinion on a certain issue, it is necessary for them to be provided with information on which they can base their judgments. This idea, that all members need to have access to necessary information, is manifest in the principle of information disclosure. Well-presented information that is to say, information well-suited for a particular issue and which has high transparency enables people to form their own opinions, which together constitute a cohesive public opinion.

2 Public acceptance refers to the seeking of collective consensus from the members of society about a certain issue about a policy, for instance and it is premised upon their understanding of and support for the issue concerned. Thus public acceptance must reflect the public opinion and vice versa. Gaining public acceptance is not the final end, however, for once public acceptance is established, people must continue to watch whether the policy is being implemented as promised, and whether any problems arise. In today s democratic societies, because this task is too difficult to be carried out only by individuals, people inevitably depend on institutions such as civilian groups or mass media to conduct surveillance. Mass media, because it represents a form of public opinion, has come to have a surveillance function in democratic societies today. Thus, mass media, public opinion, and public acceptance can be said to be mutually-bound and interdependent. With the premises described above in mind, I would like to discuss the problems of public opinion and public acceptance in regard to nuclear power in Japan based on some of the results of my research, jointly carried out with my colleague, Professor Yasuo Tanaka. Japanese Public Opinion on Nuclear Power Interests in, the Necessity for, and the Safety of Nuclear Power According to one public opinion poll conducted by a governmental institution, the percentage of Japanese people interested in nuclear power is approximately 79%, a relatively high percentage (Figure 1). Other polls conducted by mass media and various institutions have shown a similar trend. From this we can say that most Japanese are interested in the issue of nuclear power. interested in nuclear energy Not interested in nuclear energy 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Figure 1 Are you interested in nuclear energy? (Source: Survey by Prime Minister s Office, Japan, 1991). In regard to its necessity, more than 60% of the people feel that nuclear power is necessary, and this percentage has been stable (Figure 2). In regard to the safety of nuclear power, however, Japanese public opinion is split (Figure 3). Apart from the less-than 10% of people who answered I don t know, the number of people who think nuclear power is safe and the number who think it is unsafe are about equal. If examined more closely and asked why they think it is safe or 88

3 unsafe, people give the following answers. Those who think it safe mainly point out their trust in nuclear power technology, and they also evaluate highly that there are few accidents (Figure 4). Those who think it unsafe, on the other hand, point out that actual accidents have in fact occurred in Japan and abroad, and the possibility for human errors (Figure 5). Definitely yes yes no Definitely no I don't know overall male female Figure 2 Is nuclear energy necessary? (Source: Survey by Prime Minister s Office, Japan, 1991). yes no I don't know 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Figure 3 Do you think that nuclear power is safe? (Source: Survey by Prime Minister s Office, Japan, 1991). Here, it is important to note what it is that people base their judgments upon when they evaluate the safety of nuclear power. Engineers, for example, base their evaluations simply upon technological safety, and such a way of thinking is common sense among them. However, for the general public, it is rather difficult to make judgments based upon technological safety. Therefore, they tend to base their judgments on other factors, that is to say, social and psychological factors. Such factors include, for 89

4 instance, their experiences of accidents that have actually occurred, as well as other people s opinions female male overall Japanese high technologies Japanese safety measures No serious accidents in Japan Fewer troubles than in foreign countries Just feel safe National surveillance others Figure For those who answered that nuclear energy is safe, Why do you think so? (Source: Survey by Prime Minister s Office, Japan, 1991). female male overall Actual accidents in Japan Actual accidents overseas Possible human errors Just feel not safe technologicall y incomplete others Figure 5 For those who answered that nuclear energy is NOT safe, Why do you think so? (Source: Survey by Prime Minister s Office, Japan, 1991). 90

5 Approval and Disapproval of Nuclear Power If we examine the way that the percentages of approval and disapproval for nuclear power in Japan change over time, we find that the Chernobyl accident was a significant turning point (Figure 6). Before Chernobyl, the percentage of approval had been higher than that of disapproval (although the disapproval percentage had been gradually increasing). After Chernobyl, these percentages reversed, and the disapproval percentage went up to twice that of approval. At present, the disapproval percentage is about 60% Approval Disapproval Dec-78 Dec-79 Dec-80 Dec-81 Dec-84 Dec-86 Sep-88 Figure 6 Trends of approval and disapproval for nuclear energy (Source: Survey by the Asahi Shimbun, Japan, 1988). However, if we look at changes in Japanese public opinion under the heading of the future direction/development of nuclear power, a seemingly contradictory trend emerges (Figure 7). The majority people think that the development of nuclear power should be proceeded with using caution, whereas the number of those who think that it should be actively promoted has gradually decreased. As well, those who think that nuclear power development should be stopped has gradually increased. The number who think it should not be proceeded with any more, which significantly increased right after Chernobyl, has decreased with time. At first glance, these results might seem contradictory. But if we examine them closely in light of public opinion concerning the necessity and safety of nuclear power, which I described above, the following can be assumed to be the case: Many Japanese 91

6 think that there is too much uncertainty surrounding the safety of nuclear power and therefore they prefer to be without it. They would disapprove of it all together if they could. However, under the current circumstances, it is impossible to abolish nuclear power completely. So, they think, if they must have it, it is better to have it under cautious and reliable management. In other words, Japanese public opinion about nuclear power is not firmly set, and it swung back and forth when, for example, accidents occurred, or when there was the oil shock promote more promote deliberately no more stop immediately % Mar-86 Jun-86 Feb-87 Mar-88 Oct-88 Figure 7 What do you think about the future direction/development of nuclear power? (Source: Survey by Nippon Hoso Kyokai (NHK, Japan s public broadcasting corporation), Japan, 1988). Anxiety, Mistrust, and Frustration Over Nuclear Power Next, let us examine in more detail what approval and disapproval of nuclear power in Japan actually consist of. Logical thinking will tell us that people base their judgments about approval or disapproval upon how necessary or safe they think nuclear power is. The necessity of nuclear power might include such factors as whether there are any other sources of energy available, or whether a nuclear power plant will make a contribution to the local area. In regard to the safety of nuclear power, people s judgments might include the 92

7 fear of radiation and possibility of accidents. All of these factors will contribute to the final decision of whether one approves or disapproves of nuclear power. However, as I mentioned earlier, contradictory results come up one after another in actual public polls. People answer that they think nuclear power is necessary, while they also say that they think it is dangerous. While we might presume that those who think nuclear power is dangerous are opposed to nuclear power, often we find that they actually approve of it. In other words, public opinion concerning nuclear power cannot be easily determined simply from the factors of necessity and safety. We must realize that people do not base their opinions purely on logic, and that this seemingly contradictory and unstable trend is an expression of people s anxiety. For this reason, I re-examined the poll results by adding another factor, anxiety, and found that there is a significant correlation between the degree of anxiety and approval/disapproval ratings of nuclear power. These research results show that the majority of the people have a feeling of anxiety toward nuclear power accidents. People s concerns such as it would be horrible if an accident actually occurs, and an accident might actually occur are included in their anxiety, which plays a significant role in determining the structure of people s approval and disapproval of nuclear power (Figure 8). Moreover, precisely what people feel anxiety about is an important point to consider. These include: fear of radiation, frustration and mistrust toward the promotion system of nuclear power, and ambiguity involved in exactly where responsibility lies. Approval or Disapproval Anxiety Necessity Concern for safety Energy policy Future of community Fear of radioactivity Fear of accident Interest Knowledge Figure 8 Structure of approval and disapproval. 93

8 As we can see, an intangible, ambiguous factor such as anxiety in fact plays a defining role in determining people s attitudes and opinions about nuclear power. It is important to note that the structure of anxiety consists of two aspects (Figure 9): one involving the issue of radiation and safety, which is a rather difficult one to persuade people about; another involving questions about the systems for promoting/developing nuclear power and defining responsibility for its operation, which are relatively easy to improve and maintain. Another relevant research shows that more than half the people think that nuclear power has not received public acceptance, and nearly half express feelings of mistrust toward nuclear specialists. Also, more than half express concern about a lack of information disclosure. Fear of radioactivity Anxiety Mistrust to promotion process Concern for safety Unbiguity in responsibility Figure 9 Structure of Anxiety. Such results show that in Japan there exists a common sentiment that nuclear power is being promoted by the government and electric utilities companies one-sidedly without sufficient information disclosure, and that such sentiment has caused many people feelings of mistrust and frustration. Under such circumstances, public acceptance of nuclear power is difficult to achieve. In a democratic society, citizens have the right to know what the government, the politicians, and companies are doing, as well as the reasons for and the consequences of their actions. Moreover, the people have the right to express their opinions, and make their own judgments and either choose or reject particular courses of action. We must remember that a society where maximum effort is made to realize such citizens rights is what we call a democratic society. The Role of Public Relations Government officials and politicians in a democratic society can be said to have two fundamental aspects: responsibility and accountability. Responsibility here refers 94

9 more specifically to their responsibility to deal with a social problem as their own problem. Accountability, on the other hand, involves explaining clearly to the citizens what problems they are dealing with, why they have decided to adopt particular methods of solution, and what the consequences will be. Karel Van Wolferen, a well-known specialist on Japan, says [1] that Japanese government officials have high responsibility but very little. My research supports his view, for it reveals that Japanese citizens have not been given sufficient explanation about nuclear power from the government. If a policy is implemented without sufficient explanation to the citizens, and if the result of such a policy is unsatisfactory, the citizens will not have much trust in the government. Because in Japan the information distribution system has dramatically grown both in quantity and quality, and because citizens have begun to be conscious about their rights, government officials, politicians, and electric companies should be aware that their accountability --that is, to explain-- has come to have a significant meaning in terms of public relations. Unless citizens are provided with explanation about a particular policy that is sufficient for them to truly understand the policy and then approve (or reject) it, public acceptance will only remain as formality without substance. In other words, achieving accountability will help establish the trust of citizens, and further lead to public acceptance. Reference 1. Karel Van Wolferen, Ningen wo Kofuku ni Shinai Nihon to iu Shisutemu (The False Realities of a Politicized Society), Mainichi Shinbunsha, Tokyo,