SGER PROPOSAL: Testing the Role of Morality Judgments on the Impact of Procedural and Outcome Fairness Perceptions in the Context of Public Hearings About Nuclear Energy

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Expanding nuclear energy production in the United States has the potential to become a topic of substantial public discussion in upcoming years. Few technologies evoke as much passion, on both sides, as nuclear power. Faced with opposition and cheaper alternatives, U.S. energy producers have not ordered construction of a nuclear power plant since the 1970s. Concerns about climate change, energy prices, and energy independence, however, have engendered renewed interest in nuclear energy technology. As of late 2008, energy producers across the United States were proposing to build new plants. This research project takes advantage of one such proposal in South Carolina to investigate public opinion about nuclear power in the context of a week-long permitting hearing by the state?s Public Service Commission. Surveys will be conducted both before and after the hearing process. Drawing on research into the concept of ?procedural justice,? the study is specifically interested in the degree to which perceptions of the fairness of the state decision-making process may mitigate potential concerns about the proposed expansion. The hypothesis is that fair process is a primary mechanism through which public entities can secure legitimacy for their decision-making processes. In contrast, an alternative hypothesis suggests that the value-laden nature of nuclear power makes fair process irrelevant to how people will judge the decision-making process. According to this view, the only factor underlying how they perceive the process is whether the decision makers make the right decision. In addition to the survey research, the research will involve a systematic study of the media environment (both television and print journalism) surrounding the hearing process and consider the impact of media coverage in any changes in public opinion that may occur.