Classification and dynamic evolution of public's environmental risk coping actions in China

• Published date: 01 May 2019
• Author: Xia‐fei Zhang,Jing Ning,Kai‐ye Song,Gang Wang
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1915
• Date: 01 May 2019

ACADEMIC PAPER

Classification and dynamic evolution of public's environmental

risk coping actions in China

Gang Wang

1

|Jing Ning

2

|Kai‐ye Song

3

|Xia‐fei Zhang

4

1

School of International Affairs and Public

Administration, Ocean University of China;

Marine Development Studies Institute,

Qingdao, P. R. China

2

Management College, Ocean University of

China, Qingdao, P. R. China

3

School of Government, Sun Yat‐sen

University, Guangzhou, P. R. China

4

School of Political Science and Public

Administration, Shandong University,

Qingdao, P. R. China

Correspondence

Jing Ning, Associate Professor, Management

College, Ocean University of China, No. 238,

Song Ling Road, Laoshan District, Qingdao,

Shandong Province, P. R. China.

Email: ningjing1981@hotmail.com

Present Address

Xia‐fei Zhang, School of Political Science and

Public Adminstration ShanDong University

No.72 Binhai Road, Qingdao, Shandong,

China. (266237)

Funding information

Chinese National Natural Science Foundation,

Grant/Award Number: 71804169; National

Social Science Fund of China, Grant/Award

Number: 16BZZ079

Existing studies on public attitudes and actions towards sites elections of projects

with existing environmental risk usually make simple binary partition and mostly focus

on public confrontational actions. Whereas, no attention has been paid to the com-

plexity and dynamic convertibility of public's risk coping actions. This paper constructs

an integrated framework for environmental risk coping actions referring to risk social

amplification theory and risk protective theory. Through the comparative analysis

with three typical projects of nuclear facilities in China, it has been found that there

are four different types of risk coping action based on dual dimensions of risk percep-

tion and risk communication, namely, acquiescence–support and acquiescence–

adaption, belonging to low‐grade risk coping actions, and two high‐grade risk coping

actions, prevention–mobilization and prevention–protest. Under specific conditions,

the dynamic conversions from low grade to high grade among the four action choice

models also existed. Findings of this paper try to provide a theoretical interpretation

for getting a better understanding of the public action choices in relation to environ-

ment risk. In the meanwhile, policy enlightenment to risk governance for government

has also been discussed.

1|INTRODUCTION

In modern society, the topic of environmental risk characterized with

high complexityand uncertaintyhas been gradually turnedto be the cen-

tral focus of social controversies. For instance, thesite selection for PX

(P‐Xylene) Project, garbage incineration plant, nuclear power plant, and

other facilities' projectswith environmentalrisks often arouses ferocious

controversies amo ng local residents, e ven though such controve rsies

couldbe generally divided to supportivecontroversyand confrontational

controversy.In particular,the study on public acceptancefor civil nuclear

facilities is the most typical one (Pligt, Eiser, & Spears, 1984; Sjöberg,

2004; Vainio, Paloniemi, & Varho, 2017). From a historical perspective,

publicperception of nuclearrisk primarily stemsfrom three major nuclear

accidents (meltdown at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl nuclear accident,

and Fukushima nuclear accident). Antinuclear movement triggered by

nuclear risks hasbecome a major branch of social movement (Downey,

1986; Lidskog & Elander, 1992). Influenced by the Chernobyl nuclear

accident, some antinuclear movements in Taiwan and Hong Kong of

China had taken place during the 1990s. Entering the 21st century,

together with the awakening of environmentalism and civil right

consciousness, more and more nuclear projects of China arouse public

controversies, such as Hongshiding nuclear controversies in Shandong

province,2007, Pengze antinuclearmovementin 2012, Jiangmen antinu-

clear movement in Guangdong province, 2013, and protests against

nuclear waste processing plant in Lianyungang, Jiangsu province,2016.

In China,in response to theenergy crisis and pressuresof climate change,

the government's determination to develop nuclear power has been

undoubtedly determined. According to statistics of the State Nuclear

Safety Bureau, as of March 9, 2018, China has built 38 nuclear power

units, and another18 units are under construction.

With theimplementationof nuclear powerstrategy, how to improve

organizations' abilities to prevent nuclear risks and strengthen public trust

in nuclear risk management by government and nuclear enterprises influ-

ence the success of future construction of nuclear plant projects and the

Received: 28 December 2018 Accepted: 3 January 2019

DOI: 10.1002/pa.1915

J Public Affairs. 2019;19:e1915.

https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1915

© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pa 1of11