The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reframing nuclear power in the UK energy debate: nuclear power, climate change mitigation and radioactive waste
Open accessAbstract
In the past decade, human influence on the climate through increased use of fossil fuels has become widely acknowledged as one of the most pressing issues for the global community. For the United Kingdom, we suggest that these concerns have increasingly become manifest in a new strand of political debate around energy policy, which reframes nuclear power as part of the solution to the need for low-carbon energy options. A mixed-methods analysis of citizen views of climate change and radioactive waste is presented, integrating focus group data and a nationally representative survey. The data allow us to explore how UK citizens might now and in the future interpret and make sense of this new framing of nuclear power—which ultimately centers on a risk—risk trade-off scenario. We use the term “reluctant acceptance” to describe how, in complex ways, many focus group participants discursively re-negotiated their position on nuclear energy when it was positioned alongside climate change. In the concluding section of the paper, we reflect on the societal implications of the emerging discourse of new nuclear build as a means of delivering climate change mitigation and set an agenda for future research regarding the (re)framing of the nuclear energy debate in the UK and beyond.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment
Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611 · Cited by 9,953
Media Discourse and Public Opinion on Nuclear Power: A Constructionist Approach
Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1989) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/229213 · Cited by 4,971
Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality
Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2004) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00433.x · Cited by 3,885
Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States
Jasanoff, S. (2005) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9781400837311 · Cited by 2,338
The politics of environmental discourse: ecological modernization and the policy process
(1996) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.34-1513 · Cited by 2,233
Frame Reflection: Toward the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies
Meyer, P. B. (1995) · Journal of Economic Issues · doi:10.1080/00213624.1995.11505729 · Cited by 1,710
Blake, J. (1999) · Local Environment · doi:10.1080/13549839908725599 · Cited by 1,289
A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship Between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit
Alhakami, A. S., & Slovic, P. (1994) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00080.x · Cited by 1,151
Public Views on Climate Change: European and USA Perspectives
Lorenzoni, I., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2006) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9072-z · Cited by 1,047
Self-citationTechnologies of Humility: Citizen Participation in Governing Science
Jasanoff, S. (2003) · Minerva · doi:10.1023/a:1025557512320 · Cited by 1,004
Cited by
Energy justice: A conceptual review
Jenkins, K., McCauley, D., Heffron, R., Stephan, H., & Rehner, R. (2016) · Energy Research & Social Science · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2015.10.004 · Cited by 2,116
Nuclear power, climate change and energy security: Exploring British public attitudes
Corner, A., Venables, D., Spence, A., Poortinga, W., Demski, C., & Pidgeon, N. (2011) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2011.06.037 · Cited by 351
Self-citationTemper, L., Avila, S., Bene, D. D., Gobby, J., Kosoy, N., Billon, P. L., Martinez-Alier, J., Perkins, P., Roy, B., Scheidel, A., et al. (2020) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/abc197 · Cited by 320
Deliberating stratospheric aerosols for climate geoengineering and the SPICE project
Pidgeon, N., Parkhill, K., Corner, A., & Vaughan, N. (2013) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate1807 · Cited by 160
Self-citationUpham, P., & Roberts, T. (2011) · International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control · doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2011.06.005 · Cited by 103
Metadata
- Authors
- Bickerstaff, K., Lorenzoni, I., Pidgeon, N. F., Poortinga, W., & Simmons, P.
- Venue
- Public Understanding of Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-04
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 145-169
- ISSN
- 0963-6625 (ISSN-L)
- 1361-6609
- OpenAlex
- W2002694732
- Cited by
- 314
- References
- 35
- FWCI
- 62.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reframing nuclear power in the UK energy debate: nuclear power, climate change mitigation and radioactive waste. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0963662506066719
- The paper
- Bickerstaff, K., Lorenzoni, I., Pidgeon, N. F., Poortinga, W., & Simmons, P. (2008). Reframing nuclear power in the UK energy debate: nuclear power, climate change mitigation and radioactive waste. Public Understanding of Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506066719
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
