초록 ▼

1. 연구목표 : 언론계 오피니언 리더를 통한 원자력 진흥과 안전에 관한 신뢰구축 방안 및 대국민 수용성 증대 강화방안 연구
2. 연구내용 :
○ 언론, 오피니언 리더를 대상으로 원자력 안전기술 및 규제 정보제공, 현안 설명 등으로 올바른 이해를 향상시키고 원자력 안전 수용성 증진 활동에 참여 유도
○ 원자력 안전에 대한 사회적 이해 제고와 국민 수용도 증진을 위해 언론과 오피니언 리더를 활용하여 올바른 여론 형성 및 사회적 공감대 형성 프로그램 운영 ○ 원자력 안전규제 정책 및 관리기술 정보제공 및 국민 수용도

1. 연구목표 : 언론계 오피니언 리더를 통한 원자력 진흥과 안전에 관한 신뢰구축 방안 및 대국민 수용성 증대 강화방안 연구
2. 연구내용 :
○ 언론, 오피니언 리더를 대상으로 원자력 안전기술 및 규제 정보제공, 현안 설명 등으로 올바른 이해를 향상시키고 원자력 안전 수용성 증진 활동에 참여 유도
○ 원자력 안전에 대한 사회적 이해 제고와 국민 수용도 증진을 위해 언론과 오피니언 리더를 활용하여 올바른 여론 형성 및 사회적 공감대 형성 프로그램 운영 ○ 원자력 안전규제 정책 및 관리기술 정보제공 및 국민 수용도 현황 조사분석
○ 언론 및 오피니언 리더 대상 네트워크 구축, 원자력안전 정보제공, 현안 이해도 증진 활동 등
3. 기대효과 : 국내 대 국민 수용과 원자력 인식변화에 기여할 정책 개발 및 여론주도층인 Opinion Leader 들의 이해 증진과 원자력에의 우호적인 활동에의 참여확대 방안에 대한 방법론 제시하고자 하는 본 과제는 원자력 안전에 대한 사회적 이해 제고와 국민 수용도 증진을 위해 언론과 오피니언 리더를 활용하여 올바른 여론 형성에 기여함으로써 원자력안전 운영기관의 정책의 수행 및 원자력 관련 시설 건설에의 주민 수용성 문제 해결에 크게 기여를 할 수 있을 것임.

Abstract ▼

Ⅳ. Results
If the problems related to the Fukushima nuclear accident at the nuclear power plant operators and media communication media and the civil government positions, including the nuclear authorities, such as each point is as follows.
First, the delivery of a nuclear accident TEPCO and t

Ⅳ. Results
If the problems related to the Fukushima nuclear accident at the nuclear power plant operators and media communication media and the civil government positions, including the nuclear authorities, such as each point is as follows.
First, the delivery of a nuclear accident TEPCO and the Japanese government information, such as the Japan Atomic Energy Authority was insufficient to provide timely and accurate information, which has brought a corresponding increase in delay and delay and citizen distrust and insecurity of the solution of the problem. Japanese nuclear authorities have taken a relatively optimistic stance on nuclear proliferation and radioactive contamination after the accident at the beginning. In contrast to the US side made a relatively serious judgment about the situation and evacuation measures. TEPCO and the Japanese government had a decline in confidence in the process, the greater the damage late to evacuate citizens and offered the opportunity to be amplified anxiety.
The resulting effect was reproduced in our country alike. Because the atmosphere due to the westerlies contaminated with radioactivity in Japan is very small that will flow into the domestic Korean government officials said, but suggested that radioactive contamination levels Over time, and was denied the safety of our government. Since the detected radiation contamination levels in the country with a very small amount is very small degree of damage after the announcement of the Korean Atomic Energy Authority, but is also due to the decline in confidence enough to dispel the fears of our citizens difficult. Therefore, nuclear authorities in a crisis situation quickly provide accurate information, but, frankly acknowledged for the determination of the limits and Countermeasures member is desirable to request the assistance of other experts at home and abroad.
Second, in the case of a nuclear accident and the damage to the media expertise of radioactive contamination, additional information, and the information provided by the nuclear authorities in accordance with the diversity of information sources lack the Japanese Fukushima nuclear power plant accident and social communication and critical analysis capabilities were limited verification. If this lack of professionalism in the media about nuclear power to ensure the diversity of sources and provided with a positive outlook and negative view there is a need to maintain a balance perspective. The securing of critical media sources actively trying to increase the capacity of verification of radioactive pollution reduction or conceal information that is liable to fall nuclear authorities is required.
Third, the citizens of Japanese citizens in a position to accept the information maintained the initial order and appearance to control and boyeoteum collaborative response of the government is positive in that it prevents the damage caused by the confusion. But if you do not get the exact information is difficult to respond quickly. In particular nuclear accident around two months to visit this past May 21, the Nikkei reported the trilateral summit of the three countries, regions and No.3 nuclear accident radioactive contaminated water leaked 20 trillion becquerels reports of damage to overcome the distrust of the government and the nuclear accident grows authorities does not show that. Thus, in the case of the Fukushima nuclear accident requiring the necessary information for the citizen level, and the countermeasures to participate in a variety of civic experts suggest that it is required to seek joint. If you obtain information to enhance the ability to respond to civil nuclear power plants, because nuclear power is positive efficacy can be improved. Efficacy is positive for the empowerment of citizens in that it can bring real change by improving their own efforts (Bandura, 1986; 1997; 2000). Therefore, it is necessary, but the future of the nuclear authorities and the media focused on providing secure information in an alternative dimension information of the citizens themselves with it and interpretation, improving efficacy of nuclear information for citizens through the countermeasures proposed.
In short, incomplete information provided by the Japanese government and the nuclear accident at the Fukushima nuclear power authorities and radioactive contamination spreading process, dwaetgo delay, resulting in media reports did not fully convey the risk of radioactive leaks, damage and reduction of nuclear evacuation area near the citizens, failed to overcome anxiety. Japan Fukushima nuclear accident occurred during the press concealment of information by the government and the nuclear power plant side and light enough to cope with poor responders doubt, and if they do not pose a problem for the damage to nuclear power plants exerts an area steeped citizens, as well as the whole Japan Korea the other will have on neighboring countries and the world.
The analysis of acceptability of opinion leaders were able to get the following policy implications.
First, nuclear facilities (power plants and disposal) sympathy for the safety (security) of it is still necessary. As shown in the analysis, opinion leaders are the risks (risks) of nuclear power has been a very significant recognition (whether anti-nuclear ideology, risk) factors as a criterion for determining the presence subjects of nuclear facilities was cited as the most prominent factors.
These results imply that expressed concern about the (hazards) do not know what to doubts about the safety and ever occur to locals nuclear facilities. Indeed even nuclear power plants built in the area and there was not a health problem?
Korea has worn it ever goes wrong irreparable damages radioactive waste repository is built for no operating experience? Will not continue to be made and resolved the question of the fundamental reasons for inhibiting water solubility.
Nuclear power plants and disposal are perceived level of risk represented by a mathematical objective risk is very low, but the local people to subjectively it is the reality quite high. Of course, there apparently common in our society, trust and respect for science, but rather seems to have happened much too big to bridge the gap between the two. So how can you reduce the risk of subjective opinion leaders?
The easy and simple way to scientifically the current high levels of subjective risk (subjectively perceived risk). Will reduce the risk level objective (scientific and objective risk). In order to reduce the level of subjective to objective science, technology and risk communication about risk (risk communication) is required. This requires scientific knowledge and information is discussed only within the ivory tower to the scientists that do not organically connected in real life and they try.
Scientific knowledge about nuclear energy does not share the general public will the risk of exclusion for nuclear facilities grown only subjectively improve facilities. Unfamiliar risks becomes bloated than it actually is. Therefore, by scientists and the exchange of information on the risk of nuclear power that has passed between the people and the scientific effort to overcome the risks to residents objectively can bridge the gap between scientific risks and subjective risk. In democratic societies to accept the risk factors, such as nuclear facilities, but honest education and promote the exchange of information and keywords that you can continue to solve this problem.
Second, the opinion leaders are important participation and democratic decision-making process in hand with an emphasis on the process side of the policy as elite (only if you always want the position to be involved in the policy process). Determination of efficiency are important, but in the case of nuclear facilities, such as non-preferred amenities include efforts to safeguard the democratic consensus and procedures for the process (procedure) to solve the problem. Therefore, the comment system is constantly expanding and autonomous judgment of the policies involved, and it is desirable to be consistently going to maintenance.
Third, this study showed higher confidence Fortunately the government. It appears that the government has the support confidence and competence in ethical aspect is encouraging phenomenon.
Fourth, as can be seen in the response results of an opinion leader, leaders are hoping for better policies and programs. So far it's nuclear policy is never wrong, but in terms of the development of the local people of the community's needs and is not in fact was a gap.
Leaders are to some extent in favor of nuclear power plants and radioactive waste disposal. The condition is to be performed properly serve to improve the quality of life (quality of life).

목차 Contents

• 표지 ... 1
• 제 출 문 ... 3
• 보고서 요약서 ... 4
• 요 약 문 ... 5
• SUMMARY ... 14
• 목차 ... 25
• 제 1 장 연구개발 과제의 개요 ... 27
• 제 2 장 원자력선진화포럼 운영현황 보고 ... 30
• 제 3 장 연구팀 미디어 활동 및 포럼참여 언론인 보도성과 ... 91
• 제 4 장 원자력 이해기반 수용성 증진을 위한 Opinion Leader (언론계, 학계) 인식 조사 보고서 ... 103
• 제 1 절 원자력과 언론 소통 그리고 홍보 ... 103
• 1. 원자력 PR의 이론적 모델과 국내외 동향 ... 103
• 제 2 절 수용성 분석의 배경 ... 109
• 제 3 절 이론적 검토 ... 112
• 1. 원자력 소통과 홍보 ... 112
• 2. 미디어 담론 분석 ... 115
• 3. 오피니언 리더에 대한 이론적 설명 ... 116
• 4. 오피니언 리더 수용성 변수의 구성 ... 118
• 제 4 절 일본 후쿠시마 원자력 발전소 사고 관련 소통 분석 ... 126
• 1. 원전사고 보도에서 담론의 변화와 의미 ... 126
• 2. 소결 ... 129
• 제 5 절 오피니언 리더의 원자력 관련 수용성 분석 ... 133
• 1. 오피니언 리더의 확인 ... 133
• 2. 조사 내용 ... 133
• 3. 조사결과 ... 134
• 제 6 절 오피니언 리더 심층인터뷰 ... 154
• 1. 원자력과 관련된 주요 이슈 ... 154
• 2. 신성장동력으로서 원자력 사업에 대한 인식과 향후 전략 ... 155
• 3. 원자력사업의 외교/안보적 활용 방안과 전략 ... 156
• 4. 언론에 나타난 원자력 관련 이슈 ... 156
• 5. 원자력 사업에 대한 국민 관심/인지도 제고방안 ... 157
• 6. 원자력 소통의 실행 원칙 ... 157
• 7. 소 결 ... 162
• 참고문헌 ... 167
• 부록 질문지 ... 171
• 끝페이지 ... 177