| Summary: | The electric utility companies that own and/or operate the nation’s 112 licensed commercial nuclear power reactors are required by federal law to provide emergency information to residents living around those plants in advance of a nuclear plant emergency. This requires the owner/operators to acknowledge certain risks (e.g., radiation, nuclear plant accidents, evacuation, etc.) that face people living near nuclear generating plants.
This dissertation critiques the effectiveness of pre-emergency risk communication strategies by nuclear utilities. Specifically, the dissertation demonstrates that certain historic message themes about nuclear power- termed the "nuclear ethic" -have become embedded in the rhetoric of current nuclear risk communication programs and downplay or mask the seriousness of nuclear plant emergencies, thereby contributing to the apparent ineffectiveness of these communication programs. For example, a survey of residents living around four nuclear plants who receive utility risk communication materials found that nearly two-thirds said they would not follow official instructions in a nuclear plant emergency.
Such promotional rhetoric and images remain a part of nuclear risk communication programs because agencies which regulate nuclear power delegate their responsibility for pre-emergency risk communication to the utilities operating the plants. Moreover, there is little involvement in pre-emergency nuclear risk communication by state and local governments. This suggests that risk communication serves a latent symbolic role rather than a functional role for both the regulatory agencies and the utilities by making both groups appear to be isomorphic with societal goals of safety and security for a risky technology.
The dissertation concludes by suggesting federal regulatory agencies, and specifically the Federal Emergency Management Agency, intensify their vigilance of risk communication planning and take steps to create authentic two-way communication between the nuclear utilities and the public living near the plants. One way this could be done is by establishing local citizens advisory committees to assess utility risk communication programs and suggest improvements that would help bridge the gap between the nuclear industry’s view of nuclear plant risk and that of the public. === Ph. D.
|
|---|
