| |
Report on Nation-wide Survey
The NWMO has committed to using a variety of methods to dialogue
with Canadians in order to ensure that the study of nuclear waste
management approaches reflects the values, concerns and expectations of
Canadians at each step along the way.
As part of our
activities and efforts to dialogue and solicit input on our first
discussion document, we commissioned an independent research company,
Pollara, to conduct a nation-wide survey with a scientifically
selected cross-section of Canadians. We asked the research company to
explore with Canadians their thoughts concerning the appropriateness of
the analytical framework outlined in the discussion document. As well,
we asked the research company to repeat some questions asked one year
ago to allow us to gauge any changes which may have occurred.
The
results of this study, a telephone survey of 1900 Canadians from coast
to coast, is statistically representative of the perspective of
Canadians on these questions (with a margin of error of +/- 2.25%, 19
times out of 20).
The questions which were asked explored:
-
Canadians’ perception of the issue
-
Canadians’ perception of the NWMO and the job it has been tasked to do
-
Canadians’ interest in this issue; the knowledge they currently have; and their interest in learning more
-
Canadians’ sense of the appropriateness of the issues captured in the ten question framework
-
Canadians’ likely personal involvement in the issue.
What Did Canadians Say
For the questions which were asked one year ago, there has been little change. In this research, Canadians said:
-
The management of used nuclear fuel is not, unprompted, an issue of
concern; it is not an issue that Canadians tend to think about on a
daily basis. However when the issue is raised for discussion, many
Canadians (more than half) say they consider the issue to be a very
important one.
-
Few Canadians feel they know a lot about used nuclear fuel, and how
Canada currently manages this material. And, few are aware of the
NWMO.
-
Most Canadians feel, when it is described to them, the NWMO’s
mandate to study and recommend a long term management approach is an
important one, and are supportive of it.
-
Canadians tend to be split on the use of nuclear power for
generating electricity. This is important contextual information for
the NWMO as it continues to engage Canadians in a dialogue about long
term management approaches.
The new questions which were added to the study were designed to
complement the dialogue and engagement activity which has taken place
since release of our first discussion document. The new questions
focused on eliciting insight on one of the key questions posed in the
discussion document - “Are we asking the right questions? As we assess
different methods, are we on the right track, in terms of capturing the
key issues? …”
A list of 18 agree/disagree statements was created based on key
elements of the analytical framework outlined in the discussion
document. The statements were presented as capturing a list of traits
which some people have suggested are important for Canada’s solution to
the management of used nuclear fuel. Respondents were asked to rate
the importance of each trait on a 0 - 10 scale on which 10 = very
important.
Among the findings:
-
All of the 18 statements received relatively high importance
scores. No one of the statements received an average score lower than
7 out of 10. The NWMO interprets this to mean that the analytical
framework outlined in the discussion document has captured priorities
and objectives which are important to Canadians.
-
There is little sub-group variation in the scores assigned. The
NWMO interprets this to mean that the framework captures priorities and
objectives which are important to a broad spectrum of Canadians.
-
Some of the traits are rated more highly than are others. The most
highly rated traits are: Public health and safety, Protect the
environment, Focus on current generation but be fair to future
generations.
-
The scoring of the 18 statements reflects a balancing of priorities
– take action now, but of a sort that would allow for new learning, and
influence of future generations in implementation.
A second question area focused on presenting respondents with some
of the difficult trade-offs which have emerged through dialogue with
Canadians to date. For two of the trade-offs suggested, Canadians are
clearly divided. NWMO interprets this to indicate that although there
is much common ground, as reflected in Canadians’ response to the 18
statements just described, there are aspects of this issue on which we
do not all agree. For instance, should we:
-
Keep the waste above ground, where it is easy to access and monitor
it (40% say yes), or bury the waste underground where it may be safer
from external threats such as terrorist acts, but is more difficult to
see and monitor (49% say yes)
-
Store the waste at one centralized, dedicated site (50% say yes),
or store the waste at seven nuclear power plant or research sites
across the country as it is now (40% say yes).
NWMO understands that the trade-offs explored in this research do
not exhaust the possibilities which will need to be considered before
NWMO formulates its recommendation. This research marks only the
beginning of NWMO’s exploration of this important area.
A third question area involved asking respondents to react to a
small list of statements. Reaction to these statements is consistent
with Canadians feeling a strong sense of responsibility to initiate
action now, although action which would not entirely foreclose future
options:
-
Since our generation was the one which created the nuclear waste,
we should be the ones to decide on and implement an approach to manage
it - 84% agree strongly or somewhat with the statement.
-
Since nuclear waste remains hazardous for a long time, we should
let future generations decide how they wish to deal with it - 47% agree
strongly or somewhat with the statement
-
I believe that scientific research will soon produce a technology
that will render nuclear waste safe by eliminating its radioactivity
and allowing it to become part of the natural environment again - 52%
agree strongly or somewhat with the statement.
We invite you to read the research company’s report “Report on
Nation-Wide Survey”, and to add your perspective by contributing a
comment on this report or answering a short list of these questions by
completing a deliberative survey. (See the links at the bottom of this
page.)
|
|
