• ISSN: 2148-2225 (online)

Ulaştırma ve Lojistik Kongreleri

alphanumeric journal

The Journal of Operations Research, Statistics, Econometrics and Management Information Systems

Attitudes of University Students on Nuclear Power Plants: A Proposal of the Structural Equation Model

Veysel Yılmaz, Ph.D.

Yusuf Bilge


Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the factors that influence university students' acceptance of nuclear power plants with a proposed Structural Equation Model (SEM). For this purpose, a research model was designed with literature search and various hypotheses were developed to test the model relations. A data collection tool was then developed to test the hypotheses put forward. Factors involved in the research model; related to nuclear power plants are "Trust", "Environmental Benefit Perception", "Energy Utility Perception", "Risk Perception" and "Acceptance". In the proposed model, Trust is defined as exegenous, accepted endegenous, and others are defined as endegenous latent variables. In the study, the proposed research model was analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and the goodness fit of the proposed model was evaluated according to various fit measures. As a result of the study, it has been determined that trust and energy utility perception related to nuclear power plants are important factors in the acceptance of power plants.

Keywords: Acceptance, Nuclear Power Plants , Risk, Structural Modeling

Jel Classification: C10, C46

Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Nükleer Santraller Hakkındaki Tutumları: Bir Yapısal Eşitlik Model Önerisi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, üniversite öğrencilerinin nükleer santralleri kabul etmelerine etki eden faktörleri önerilen bir Yapısal Eşitlik Modeliyle (YEM) araştırmaktır. Bu amaçla önce, literatür taraması yardımıyla bir araştırma modeli tasarlanmış ve modeldeki ilişkileri sınamak için çeşitli hipotezler oluşturulmuştur. Daha sonra öne sürülen hipotezleri test edebilmek için veri toplama aracı geliştirilmiştir. Araştırma modelinde yer alan faktörler; nükleer santrallere ilişkin, “Güven”, “Çevresel Fayda Algısı”, “Enerji Fayda Algısı”, “Risk Algısı” ve “Kabul” dür. Önerilen modelde Güven içsel, Kabul dışsal ve diğerleri aracı içsel gizil değişkenler olarak tanımlanmıştır. Çalışmada, önerilen araştırma modeli Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi (YEM) kullanılarak analiz edilmiş ve önerilen modelinin uygunluğu çeşitli uyum ölçütlerine göre değerlendirilmiştir. Çalışmanın sonucunda nükleer enerji santrallerine ilişkin güven ve enerji fayda algısının santrallerin kabul edilmesinde önemli faktörler olduğu belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Güven, Kabul, Nükleer Santraller, Risk, Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi

Suggested citation

Yılmaz, V. & Bilge, Y. (). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Nükleer Santraller Hakkındaki Tutumları: Bir Yapısal Eşitlik Model Önerisi. Alphanumeric Journal, 6(1), 133-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.17093/alphanumeric.373447

bibtex

References

  • Arı, E., Yılmaz, V., (2015). Consumer attitudes on the use of plastic and cloth bags, Environment, Development and Sustainability, 9:1219–1234.
  • Arı, E., Yılmaz, V., (2017). Effects of environmental illiteracy and environmental awareness among middle school students on environmental behavior, Environment, Development and Sustainability, 19:1779–1793
  • Ayyıldız, H., Cengiz, E., (2006). Pazarlama Modellerinin Testinde Kullanılacak Yapısal Eşitlik Modeli Üzerine Kavramsal Bir İnceleme; Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Y, 11: (1), 63-84.
  • Byrne, B., (1998). Structural equation modelling with LISREL, PRELIS and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications and Programming. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Carr, J., Devgun G., (2011). Safety of the nuclear ındustry : A case study of public awareness and perceptions ; SYMPOSIUM SERIES NO. 156- Hazards XXII.
  • Chung, J.B., Kim, H.K., (2009). Competition, economic benefits, trust, and risk perception in siting a potentially hazardous facility. Landscape and Urban Planning, 91(1): 8-16.
  • Corner, A., Venables, D., Spence, A., Poortinga, W., Demski, C., Pidgeon, N., (2011). Nuclear power, climate change and energy security: Exploring British public attitudes; Energy Policy, 39 (9): 4823–4833.
  • Çelik, E. H. ve Yılmaz, V., (2013). LISREL 9.1 ile Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi, Temel kavramlar-uygulamalar-programlama, Anı Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  • Doğan R., Yılmaz V., (2017). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Girişimcilik Niyetlerinin Betimlenmesine Yönelik Bir Yapısal Eşitlik Modeli Önerisi, Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2): 655-675.
  • Fang, X., (2013). Local people's understanding of risk from civil nuclear power in the Chinese context. Public Understanding of Science, 23(3): 283-298.
  • Flynn, J., Burns, W., Mertz, C.K., Slovic, P., (1992). Trust as a determinant of opposition to a high-level radioactive waste repository: analysis of a structural model, Risk Analysis, 12(3): 417-429.
  • Fornell, C., Larcker, D., (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1):39-50.
  • Frewer, L.J., (1999). Risk perception, social trust, and public participation into strategic decision making: implications for emerging Technologies, Ambio, 28(6): 569-574.
  • Greenberg, M., Lowrie, K., Burger, J., Powers, C., Gochfeld, M., Mayer, H., (2007). Nuclear waste and public worries: public perceptions of the United States' majör nuclear weapons legacy sites. Human Ecology Review, 14, 1-12
  • Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., Black, W.,(1998). Multivariate Data Analysis, (5th Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • He, G., Mol, A.P.J., Zhang, L., Lu, Y., (2013). Public participation and trust in nuclear power development in China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 23, 1-11.
  • http://nepud.enerji.gov.tr/tr-TR/Bilgi-Bankasi/Nukleer-Guc-Santralleri-Cevreyi-Nasil-Etkilemektedir (Erişim Tarihi 11.12.2017)
  • Karabulut, E. (1999). Enerji kaynakları. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi.
  • Katsuya, T. (2001). Public response to the Tokai nuclear accident Risk Analysis, 21 (6): 1039–1046.
  • Kim, Y., Kim, W., Kim, M., 2014. An international comparative analysis of public acceptance of nuclear energy, Energy Policy, 66, 475-483.
  • Kline, B.R., 2005, Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, Second Edition, The Guilford Press, New York London 385.
  • Liu C., Zhang, Z., Kidd, S., (2008). Establishing an objective system for the assessment of public acceptance of nuclear power in China, Nuclear Engineering and Design, 238, 2834-2838.
  • Midden, C.J.H., Verplanken, B., (1990). The stability of nuclear attitudes after Chernobyl Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10, 111-119.
  • Mourogov, V.M., (2000). Role of nuclear energy for sustainable development Progress in Nuclear Energy, 37, 19-24.
  • Özdemir, N., Çobanoğlu, O.,(2008). Türkiye’de Nükleer Santrallerin Kurulması ve Nükleer Enerji Kullanımı Konusundaki Öğretmen Adaylarının Tutumları, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (H. U. Journal of Education), 34: 218-232.
  • Peters , H. P., Albrecht, G., Hennen,. L., ve Stegelmann, H. U., (1990). “Chernobyl” and the nuclear power issue in West German public opinion Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10, 151–167.
  • Pidgeon, N.F., Poortinga, W., (2005). Trust in risk regulation: cause or consequence of the acceptability of GM food, Risk Analysis, 25(1): 199-209.
  • Reisinger, Y. And Turner, L., (1999). Structural equaiton modeling with Lisrel: application in tourism, Tourism Management, 20, 71-84.
  • Renn, O., (1990). Public responses to Chernobyl accident, Journal of Environmental Psychology,10,151–167.
  • Rosa, E.A., Clark, D.L., (1999). Historical routes to technological gridlock: nuclear technology as prototypical vehicle. Research in Social Problems and Public Policy, 7, 21-57.
  • Siegrist M., Connor M., Keller C., (2011) . Trust, confidence, procedural fairness, outcome fairness, moral conviction, and the acceptance of GM field experiments, Risk Analysis, 32(8): 1394-1403
  • Siegrist, M., (2000). The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technolog, Risk Analysis, 20, 195–203.
  • Siegrist, M., Cvetkovich, G., (2000). Perception of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge, Risk Analysis, 20(5): 713-719.
  • Sjöberg, B. D. ve Sjöberg, L., (1990). Risk perception and worries after Chernobyl accident, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10, 135–149.
  • Slovic, P., (1993). Perceived risk, trust, and democracy, Risk Analysis. 13(6): 675-682.
  • Slovic, P., (1999). Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: surveying the risk assessment battlefield, Risk Analysis, 19(4): 689-701.
  • Tanaka, Y., (2004). Major psychological factors determining public acceptance of the siting of nuclear facilities, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 1147-1165.
  • Timm, H. N., (2002), Applied Multivariate Analysis. Springer – Verlag New York, 720p
  • Viklund, M.J., (2003). Trust and risk perception in Western Europe: a cross-national study, Risk Analysis, 23(4): 727-738.
  • Visschers, V.H.M. and Siegrist, M., (2013). Vol. 33, No. 2, Nuclear Power Plant Accident Influences Acceptance of Nuclear Power: Results of a Longitudinal Study Before and After the Fukushima Disaster; , 33(2):333-347.
  • Visschers, V.H.M., Keller, C., Siegrist, M., (2011). Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations: investigating an explanatory model, Energy Policy, 39(6): 3621-3629.
  • Wang, Y., Li, J., (2016). A causal model explaining Chinese university students' acceptance of nuclear power, Progress in Nuclear Energy, 88: 165-174.
  • Whitfield S.C., Rosa E.A., Dan A., Dietz T., (2009). The future of nuclear power: value orientations and risk perception, Risk Analysis, 29(3): 425-437.
  • Zsóka, Á., Szerényi, Z.M., Széchy, A., Kocsis, T., (2012). Greening due to environmental education? Environmental knowledge, attitudes, consumer behavior and everyday pro-environmental activities of Hungarian high school and university students, Journal of Cleaner Production, 48, 126-138.

Volume 6, Issue 1, 2018

2018.06.01.STAT.01

alphanumeric journal

Volume 6, Issue 1, 2018

Pages 133-150

Received: Jan. 1, 2017

Accepted: May 31, 2018

Published: June 27, 2018

Full Text [661.5 KB]

2018 Yılmaz, V., Bilge, Y.

This is an Open Access article, licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons Attribution licence

scan QR code to access this article from your mobile device

Contact Us

Faculty of Transportation and Logistics, Istanbul University
Beyazit Campus 34452 Fatih/Istanbul/TURKEY

Bahadır Fatih Yıldırım, Ph.D.
editor@alphanumericjournal.com
+ 90 (212) 440 00 00 - 13219

alphanumeric journal

alphanumeric journal has been publishing as "International Peer-Reviewed Journal" every six months since 2013. alphanumeric serves as a vehicle for researchers and practitioners in the field of quantitative methods, and is enabling a process of sharing in all fields related to the operations research, statistics, econometrics and management informations systems in order to enhance the quality on a globe scale.