The role of risk perception and technical information in scientific debates over nuclear waste storage

This article examines how members of the lay public factor risk perceptions, trust and technical information from differing scientific sources into policy judgements about potentially hazardous facilities. Focusing on radwaste storage repositories, we examine how members of the public filter new information about potential hazards through risk perceptions, and adjust their own beliefs about risks in light of that information. Scientists play a large (and increasing) role in public policy debates concerning nuclear waste issues, in which public perceptions of human health and environmental risks often differ substantially from scientific consensus about those risks. Public concerns and uncertainties are compounded when scientists from competing groups (government agencies, scientific institutions, industries, and interest groups) make different claims about the likely health and environmental consequences of different policy options. We show the processes by which the public receive and process scientific information about nuclear waste management risks using data taken from interviews with 1800 randomly selected individuals (1200 in New Mexico, and 600 nationwide). Among the more important findings are: (1) members of the public are able to make quite reasonable estimates about what kinds of positions on the risks of nuclear waste disposal will be taken by scientists from differing organizations (e.g. scientists from environmental groups, government agencies, or the nuclear industry); (2) in assessing the credibility of scientific claims, members of the public place great emphasis on the independence of the scientists from those who fund the research; and (3) prior expectations about the positions (or expected biases) of scientists from different organizations substantially affects the ways in which members of the public weigh (and utilize) information that comes from these scientists.