Korean Public Administration Review (한국행정학보)

The Korean Association for Public Administration (한국행정학회)
권호 표지

위험과 편익을 넘어서: 원자력발전소 수용성에 대한 경험적 감정의 휴리스틱 효과

Kim, Seo-Yong;Kim, Geun-Sik
김서용;김근식

  • Published : 20070900
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Beyond Risk and Benefit: Heuristic Effect of Experienced Affect on Acceptance of Nuclear Power Stations ----- Seoyong Kim & Geunsik Kim This paper explores the role of experienced affect as independent variable, which systematically influences local residents’ risk perception, benefit perception and acceptance about nuclear power stations. Our studies based on survey data answer three research questions: ① How does experienced emotion influence the risk and benefit which closely relate to acceptance of nuclear power stations?, ② By which ways does experience affect impact acceptance?, ③ What kinds of factors determine the experience affect?. From empirical data, this paper shows that experienced affect systemically influences the risk, benefit and acceptance. Governments and nuclear power companies should consider local residents’ emotions in managing nuclear power stations. Keywords: Heuristic, Experienced Affect, Risk Perception, Nuclear Power Station

논문의 목적은 원자력발전소 주변지역 주민들이 가진 경험적 감정(experienced affect)이 위험, 편익, 수용성이라는 변수들에 구조적 영향을 미친다는 점을 실증하는 데 있다. 이를 위해 본 논문에서는 첫째, 경험적 감정 변수에 대한 이론적 고찰을 통해 본 개념이 갖는 이론적･현실적 적실성을 제시하였다. 둘째, 원전인근 지역주민들에 대한 설문조사의 표본추출 방법과 문항설계 내용을 설명하였다. 셋째, ① 경험적 감정이 원자력발전소 수용성을 결정하는데 있어 핵심 변수인 위험과 편익에 어떠한 영향을 미치는지, ② 경험적 감정이 원자력발전소 수용성에 어떤 영향을 미치며, 수용성 설명에 있어 다른 변수들에 비해 어느 정도의 상대적 설명력을 가지는지, ③ 경험적 감정을 결정하는 변수들은 어떤 것들이 있는지 등 세 가지 내용을 중심으로 분석을 실시하였다. 분석결과 지역주민들의 경험적 감정이 위험, 편익, 수용성에 유의미한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구는 원전수용성에 있어 ‘경험적 감정’이라는 개념을 발견하고, 그 중요성을 실증했다는데 이론적 함의가 있으며, 정책적 함의로 물질적 편익제공 뿐만 아니라 지역주민들에 대한 감정관리가 중요함을 제안하고 있다. [주제어: 휴리스틱, 경험적 감정, 원자력발전소 수용성, 위험과 편익]

Keywords

References

  1. 김서용.조성은.김선희. (2006). 위험과 편익 사이에서: 방폐장 수용성의 결정요인에 대한 분석. 한국행정연구, 15(3): 297-330
  2. 김영평.장순홍.소영진.김도연.안형기.박창규. (2000). 원자력에 대한 사회적 수용성 증진방안. 서울: 한국원자력문화재단
  3. 김영평.김용정.심준섭.김서용.정재동. (2005). 지역공동체경영전략수립을 위한 연구. 서울: 고려대학교 정부학연구소
  4. 김태기.구재운.이상호.김상호.장덕기. (2005). 영광원전이 영광지역에 미친 영향: 주민 설문조사 결과. 지역개발연구, 37(2): 1-41
  5. 김태진.이재은.김영평.정윤수. (2005). 원자력의 사회적 위험에 대한 인식분석: 다른 발전원과의 비교를 중심으로. 한국행정학회 동계학술대회 발표논문
  6. 박영진.이선이. (1992). 원자력에 대한 국민의 인식. 김경동･홍두승(공편), 원자력과 지역이해: 사회과학적 접근, p.27-53. 서울: 서울대학교 출판부
  7. 성균관대학교 서베이리서치센터. (2003). 원자력 발전에 대한 지역주민들의 인식과 태도. 서울: 과학기술부
  8. 심준섭.김민종. (2006). 휴리스틱스에 기반한 정책실무자의 의사결정과정분석. 한국공공관리학회보, 20(2): 33-68
  9. 이재은.김영평. 정윤수. (2006). 발전원 위험의 사회적 수용성 결정요인분석. 한국행정학회 동계학술대회 발표논문
  10. 조성경. (2003). 인식기반인자방법을 이용한 원자력시설 및 정책에 대한 수용행태분석. 아주대학교 박사학위논문
  11. 최연홍.오영민. (2005). 지방 오피니언 리더의 정책 수용성 연구: 원자력 발전소 및 방사선 폐기물처분장 건설정책을 중심으로. 한국정책학회보, 14(4): 57-89
  12. Alhakami, A. S., & Slovic, P. (1994). A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit. Risk Analysis, 14(6): 1085-1096 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00080.x
  13. Benford, R. D., Moore, H. A., & Williams, Jr., J. Allen. (1993). In Whose Backyard?: Concern About Siting a Nuclear Waste Facility. Sociological Inquiry, 63(1): 30-47 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1993.tb00200.x
  14. Damasio, A. R. (1995). Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: Putnam
  15. Diener, E., & Emmons, R. (1984). The Independence of Positive and Negative Affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47: 1105-1138 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.47.5.1105
  16. Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the Cognitive and the Psychodynamic Unconscious. American Psychologist, 49(8): 709-724 https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.49.8.709
  17. Finucane, M. L., Alhakami, A., Slovic, P., & Johnson, S. M. (2000). The Affect Heuristic in Judgments of Risks and Benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13: 1-17 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(200001/03)13:1<1::AID-BDM333>3.0.CO;2-S
  18. Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & Slovic, P., (2003). Judgment and Decision Making: The Dance of Affect and Reason. In S. L. Schneider & J. Shanteau (eds.). Emerging Perspectives on Judgment and Decision Research (pp. 327-364). London: Cambridge University Press
  19. Grasmück, D., & Scholz, R. W. (2005). Risk Perception of Heavy Metal Soil Contamination by High-Exposed and Low-Exposed Inhabitants: The Role of Knowledge and Emotional Concerns. Risk Analysis, 25(3):611-622 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00628.x
  20. Greenberg, L. S., & Paivio, S. C. (1997). Working with Emotions in Psychotherapy. New York: Guilford Press
  21. Hsee, C. K. (1996). The Evaluability Hypothesis: An Explanation of Preference Reversals Between Joint and Separate Evaluations of Alternative. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 67:247-257 https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.0077
  22. Keller, C., Siegrist, M., & Gutscher, H. (2006) The Role of the Affect and Availability Heuristics in Risk Communication. Risk Analysis, 26(3), 631-639 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00773.x
  23. Krannich, R. S., Little, R. L., & Cramer, L. A. (1993). Rural Community Residents' Views of Nuclear Waste Repository Siting in Nevada. In R. E. Dunlap, M. E. Kraft & E. A. Rosa (eds.), Public Reactions to Nuclear Waste. Durham: Duke University Press
  24. La France, M., & Hecht, M. A. (1995). Why Smiles Generate Leniency. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21: 207-214 https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167295213002
  25. Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as Feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127:267-286 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.267
  26. Loewenstein, G., & Lerner, J. S. (2003). The Role of Affect in Decision Making. In R. Davidson, K. Scherer & H. Goldsmith (eds.), Handbook of Affective Science, 619-642. London: Oxford University Press:
  27. Meijnders, A. L., Midden, C. J. H., & Wilke, A. M. (2001). Role of Negative Emotion in Communication about CO2 Risk. Risk Analysis, 21(5): 955-963 https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.215164
  28. O'Connor, R. E., Yarnal, B., Dow, K., Jocoy, C. L., & Carbone, G. J. (2005). Feeling at Risk Matters: Water Managers and the Decision to Use Forecasts. Risk Analysis, 25(5): 1265-1275 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00675.x
  29. Peters, E., & Slovic, P. (1996). The Role of Affect and Worldviews as Orienting Dispositions in the Perception and Acceptance of Nuclear power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26(16): 1427-1453 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1996.tb00079.x
  30. Rundmo, T. (2001). Employee Images of Risk. Journal of Risk Research, 4(4): 393-404 https://doi.org/10.1080/136698701100653259
  31. Rundmo, T. (2002). Associations Between Affect and Risk Perception. Journal of Risk Research, 5(2): 119-135 https://doi.org/10.1080/136698702753499597
  32. Schwarz, N., & Clore. G. L. (1983). Mood, Misattribution, and Judgments of Well-being: Informative and Directive Functions of Affective States. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(3): 513-523 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.3.513
  33. Siegrist, M., & Cvetkovich, G. (2001). Better Negative than Positive? Evidence of a Bias for Negative Information about Possible Health Dangers. Risk Analysis, 21(1): 199-206 https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.211102
  34. Siegrist, M., Keller, C., & Cousin, M. (2006). Implicit Attitudes Toward Nuclear Power and Mobile Phone Base Stations: Support for the Affect Heuristic. Risk Analysis, 26(4): 1021-1029 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00797.x
  35. Simon, H. (1956). Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment. Psychological Review, 63: 129-138 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042769
  36. Sjoberg, L. (1998). Worry and Risk Perception. Risk Analysis, 18(1): 85-93 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb00918.x
  37. Sjoberg, L. (2003). Risk Perception, Emotion and Policy: the Case of Nuclear Technology. European Review, 11(1):109-128
  38. Sjoberg, L. (2006). Will the Real Meaning of Affect Please Stand Up. Journal of Risk Research, 9(2): 101-108 https://doi.org/10.1080/13669870500446068
  39. Slovic, P. (1993). Perceived Risk, Trust, and Democracy. Risk Analysis, 13: 675-682 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb01329.x
  40. Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002). Rational Actors or Rational Fools: Implications of the Affect Heuristic for Behavioral Economics, Journal of Socio-Economic, 31: 329-342 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-5357(02)00174-9
  41. Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2004). Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality. Risk Analysis, 24: 311-322 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00433.x
  42. Slovic, P., & Peters, E. (2006). Risk Perception and Affect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(6):322-325 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00461.x
  43. Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2007). The Affect Heuristic. European Journal of Operational Research, 177: 1333-1352 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2005.04.006
  44. Thalmann, A. T., & Wiedemann, P. M. (2006). Beliefs and Emotionality in Risk Appraisals. Journal of Risk Research, 9(5): 453-466 https://doi.org/10.1080/13669870600717566
  45. Tomkins, S. S. (1962). Affect, Imagery, and Consciousness(Vol. 1). The Positive Affects. New York: Springer
  46. Tomkins, S. S. (1963). Affect, Imagery, and Consciousness(Vol. 2). The Negative Affects. New York: Springer
  47. Townsend, E., Clarke, D. D., & Travis, B. (2004). Effects of Context and Feelings on Perceptions of Genetically Modified Food. Risk Analysis, 24(5): 1369-1384 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00532.x
  48. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgement Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185:1124-1131 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
  49. Weinstein, N. D. (1989). Effects of Personal Experience on Self-Protective Behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 105:31-50 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.1.31
  50. Wilson, R. S., & Arvai, J. L. (2006). When Less is More: How Affect Influences Preferences When Comparing Low and High-risk Options. Journal of Risk Research, 9(2): 165-178 https://doi.org/10.1080/13669870500419503
  51. Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and Thinking: Preferences Need No Inferences. American Psychologist, 35:151-175 https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.35.2.151