On the surface, majority sentiment has favored construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant
Particularly in the past, public opinion has been molded by the superior media campaign waged by the KMT government and Taipower
Pro-nuclear politicians and Taipower have always cited public opinion as their basis for action. Actually, not only is popular opinion subject to change, but a closer look at recent surveys makes it very easy to see that public opinion is not so supportive of the plant. In the end, the KMT even agreed that construction of the plant and early decommissioning of the first and second plants would be more practical, and in keeping with the public will. If legislators represent the public will, then the fact that two resolutions in 1986 and 1996 to freeze nuclear power construction were reversed, shows how the improper intervention of political power can twist popular will into "pro-nuclear support." In the opposition alliance, the KMT is currently the majority party. The initially anti-nuclear New Party has also joined the alliance, using the alliance's legislative advantage to hinder efforts to shut down the plant.
In fact, most of the public doesn't have a definite opinion on the issue, hence the volatility of public opinion. The main factor (influencing people's opinions) is government policy. Two surveys conducted last May and September each contained a set of hypothetical questions, such as: "If, in the final analysis, the new government decided to complete construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, would you support this decision?" and "If, in the final analysis, the new government decided to halt construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, would you support this decision?"
The results showed that whether construction was resumed or halted, the majority of respondents would support the government's decision. In the May survey, 67 percent of respondents said they would support the government if it decided to continue construction of the plant, while only 14 percent indicated they would not support such a decision. And 52 percent said they would support the government if it decided to stop construction, while only 24 percent responded they would not support such policy.
The situation in the Septem-ber survey was largely the same. The percentage of respondents for and against a decision to continue construction was 63 percent and 19 percent respectively, while the percentage for and against a decision to halt construction was 44 percent to 32 percent respectively.
Why should a single survey produce such seemingly contradictory results? Because most of the public will support the government's decision, whether it chooses to continue or discontinue construction, an example of the "public will" which is well worth noting. These surveys perhaps reflect the fact that, at the time of the polls, most of the public didn't have very strong convictions either way -- unlike politicians, who used the issue as an indispensable tool in their power struggles, adopting pro- or anti-nuclear stances out of political necessity.
Secondly, the majority of the public doesn't feel the immediate effects of policy-making and are unable to predict if any big conflicts will arise. Any uneasiness or even panic reflected in so-called public opinion has been due to the power of politics and the media.
In 1993, a poll asked "Do you have confidence in Taipower's ability to handle a major nuclear accident?" The results showed that respondents who were confident outnumbered those who were not by the very close margin of 42 percent to 37 percent. But it was only in 1993 that the majority of respondents expressed confidence. Beginning in 1994, confidence in Taipower's ability to handle a major accident began to wane. From 1996, the number of confident respondents was around 30 percent, while over 40 percent were not confident. Clearly, in the end, the public didn't have any confidence in Taipower's ability to handle the very thing it most fears -- a nuclear accident.
In the numerous times over the years that surveys concerning the plant have been conducted, all have consistently shown that more than 70 percent of the public thought that construction of the plant should not go ahead without the approval of the residents who would be living nearby.
Upon examination of the process of policy-making and administration regarding construction of the plant, myriad problems arise. Simply stated, it was an unjust decision. The public has never truly supported the opposition's effort to revive the project by taking advantage of the weak government. The power of the "opposition" has been overwhelming, however, bullying local society into powerless submission. It really hurts to see this happen.
Chiu Hei-yuan is professor of Sociology at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Scudder Smith
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry