0

Full Content is available to subscribers

Subscribe/Learn More  >

Consensus Based Nuclear Public-Hearing System Model

[+] Author Affiliations
Young Wook Lee, Suk Hoon Kim, Young Ho Cho, Hyun Seok Ko, Dong Hoon Shin, Chang Sun Kang

Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea

Joo Hyun Moon

Ministry of Science & Technology, Gwacheon, Korea

Paper No. ICONE14-89722, pp. 775-781; 7 pages
doi:10.1115/ICONE14-89722
From:
  • 14th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering
  • Volume 1: Plant Operations, Maintenance and Life Cycle; Component Reliability and Materials Issues; Codes, Standards, Licensing and Regulatory Issues; Fuel Cycle and High Level Waste Management
  • Miami, Florida, USA, July 17–20, 2006
  • Conference Sponsors: Nuclear Engineering Division
  • ISBN: 0-7918-4242-8 | eISBN: 0-7918-3783-1
  • Copyright © 2006 by ASME

abstract

Although the government admit the benefit of construction of a nuclear facility for national electric source, related policy could be developed and carried out only if the public, especially who have some stake on it, recognize the benefit and accept the policy. For public participation, Korea has a system of public-hearing in accordance with the law. Because of the absence of the detailed way for public opinion aggregation and for the reflection of the aggregated opinion, Korean public-hearing system is only a conceptual model. Therefore, some specific system for Korean Public-Hearing should be developed and applied. In this study, to share the right of decision making, which is an ultimate concept for public participation, decision making components and the characteristics of each phase are analyzed. The criteria weight for assessment and comparison with alternatives are founded as a valuation factor of the decision making components, which should be based on the social consensus. On these foundations, a system for aggregation and reflection of the public opinion was proposed. The system named “CPDM” (Consensus based Participatory Decision Making) has three authority groups for decision making. At first, “advisory experts group” play a role for the technical assessment and the serve utility value on the criteria for each alternatives. Next, “participatory deliberation group” play a role for consensus building on the relative-importance (weight) between the criteria by feedback to promote degree of consensus. Lastly including gentlemen of the long robe, “expert group for decision making” paly a role to reflect the utility and weight and make a decision with agreement for performance of it. Also, in this study, a mathematical model for the quantification of the degree of consensus was conceptualized using Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA) aggregation operator and fuzzy similarity theory, which is a comparison concept. Since this model enables influence of each criteria and each participant on collective consensus to be analyzed, a direction to promote consensus building can be derived. That is to say, this model can support consensus building and promote public acceptance for the nuclear industry and related policy.

Copyright © 2006 by ASME

Figures

Tables

Interactive Graphics

Video

Country-Specific Mortality and Growth Failure in Infancy and Yound Children and Association With Material Stature

Use interactive graphics and maps to view and sort country-specific infant and early dhildhood mortality and growth failure data and their association with maternal

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In