숙의적 원자력 커뮤니케이션 활동과 정책이해관계자의 심리적 거버넌스 변화에 관한 현장실험연구: 원자력 지식보정(knowledge calibration)을 중심으로 (Deliberative nuclear energy communication activity and the role of knowledge calibration in policy stakeholder groups’ psychological governance: A field experiment)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국행정학회
· 수록지 정보 : 한국행정학보 / 51권 / 1호 / 233 ~ 262페이지
· 저자명 : 이태준

초록

본 연구는 원자력 거버넌스의 사회적 자본 확충을 위해 제도적으로 강조하고 있는 숙의적(deliberative) 원자력 커뮤니케이션 활동의 효과와 참여자 개인의 심리적 거버넌스 과정을 분석하고자 현장실험을 실시하였다.
단일집단 사후측정설계 방식으로 참여, 협력, 소통, 관계 중심의 숙의적 원자력 커뮤니케이션 활동이 참여자의 성찰수준, 의견조정, 의견공고화, 정책수용성에 미치는 효과와 설득과정을 경로분석을 통해 검증하였다.
또한 숙의적 원자력 커뮤니케이션 활동에 따른 행위자의 거버넌스 효과(이견 노출 및 교환→성찰수준→의견조정 vs. 의견공고화→정책수용성)가 실험참여자의 원자력 지식보정(knowledge calibration) 수준에 따라어떻게 달라지는 가를 비교하였다. 연구결과를 통해 숙의적 원자력 커뮤니케이션 활동의 효과를 극대화하기위해 고려해야 하는 제도적, 미시적 요인들을 고찰하고, 원자력 지식보정 차원에서 원자력 교육과 정책소통의경계조건(boundary condition)을 살펴보았다.

영어초록

As deliberative communication and educational interventions of nuclear energy grow in popularity and importance, there is an increasing need to better understand the empirical and public policy implications of such approaches. The risk, complexity, uncertainty, and conflict of nuclear energy raise critical concerns about whether and how deliberative communication and educational interventions of nuclear energy contribute to better quality of nuclear energy governance and policy actors’ decisionmaking and problemsolving. To address this issue, this article employs a one-group posttest-only field experiment design in order to examine the effects of deliberative communication and educational interventions on policy actors’ reflection, opinion modification, opinion polarization, and policy acceptance based on Mutz’s theory on cross-cutting networks. In addition, this article tests the role of policy actors’ nuclear energy literacy and calibration—the difference between actual knowledge and perceived knowledge (i.e., how much they think they know) in the effectiveness of deliberative communication and educational interventions. The findings indicate that reflective thinking mediates the influence of exposure to deliberative communication and educational interventions on the enhancement of opinion modification and the reduction of opinion polarization. In this process, opinion modification has a favorable influence on policy acceptance, whereas opinion polarization does not have a meaningful impact on the increase in policy acceptance. Finally, based on the results of model comparisons between knowledge calibration groups and knowledge mis-calibrated groups, this article offers several explanations for why and how knowledge calibration affects policy actors’psychological governance process and policy acceptance in terms of decisionmaking and problemsolving perspectives. These findings have implications for formulating more sound public policies and intervention strategies for future nuclear energy governance preparedness or nuclear policy communication actions.

참고자료

· 없음