Motivation for Social Responsibility in Nuclear Power Plants
Keywords:
intrinsic and extrinsic motivational factors, coexistence with the nuclear power plant, social responsibilityAbstract
Research Question (RQ): What motivates owners and operators of Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) for socially responsible acts?
Purpose: This research identifies the dominant motives for the social responsibility of owners and operators of NPPs.
Method: After reviewing the relevant literature of the presented field of interest, we included the owners and operators of the NPPs in the research. They are members of the international organization World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO), with a regional centre in Paris. As an instrument for obtaining the information, we used a developed questionnaire. For the evaluation of data, we used descriptive and frequency statistics, the Mann-Whitney test, Wilcoxon rank test, and Kruskal-Wallis test.
Results: 43 representatives of operators and 3 owners of NPPs cooperated in the research. Motivational factors for socially responsible activities include intrinsic elements, in particular personal ethical and moral values and personal satisfaction. We did not find statistically significant differences in motivation between operators and owners. In most cases, these differences were not statistically significant, considering their function in the organization. Operators and owners of NPPs demonstrated a high willingness to meet the expectations of a wider society.
Organization: The results help NPPs in establishing and consolidating the positive image of a socially responsible organization.
Society: The wider society is aware that the owners and operators of the NPPs obviously demonstrate that they want to act socially responsibly. It affects the acceptability of the NPPs and the quality of life of individuals and different groups in modern society and the environment in which nuclear facilities are located.
Originality: This research is the first one as known to the author that is aimed at studying the motivational factors of the owners and operators of the NPPs for socially responsible actions. The results are directly applicable and relevant in Slovenia and other countries with NPPs. They contribute to a better understanding of the interactions between society and nuclear facilities.
Limitations / further research: The responsiveness of the owners of the NPPs was not as good as the responsiveness of the operators; therefore, the sample is less representative of the owners. This research also focused on the inspirations that influence the motivation for establishing partnership relations with the NPPs, of the external stakeholders of the NPPs (local communities, political public, NGOs, journalists and others).
References
Afgan, N. H. (2013). Sustainable nuclear energy dilemma. Thermal Science, 17(2), 305–321. doi: 10.2298/TSCI121022214A
Avetisyan, E., & Ferrary, M. (2012). Dynamics of stakeholders’ implications in the institutionalization of the CSR field in France and in the United States. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(1), 115–133. doi: 10.1007/s10551-012-1386-3
Bexheti, L., & Bexheti, A. (2016). The Impact of Herzberg's Two Factor Theory and Efficiency at Work. European Journal of Multidiscipliary Studies, 1(2), 379–386.
Bowen, F., Newenham-Kahindi, A., & Herremans, I. (2010). When suits meet roots: The antecedents and consequences of community engagement strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 95, 297–318. doi: 10.1007/s10551-009-0360-1
Goodfellow, M. J., Dewick, P., Wortley, J., & Azapagic, A. (2015). Public perceptions of design options for new nuclear plants in the UK. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 94, 72–88. doi: 10.1016/j.psep.2014.12.008
Graafland, J., Mazereeuw, C., & Van der Schouten, D. (2012). Motives for corporate social responsibility. De Economist, 160(4), 377–396. doi: 10.1007/s10645-012-9198-5
Hetty, I. J., Schreus, B., Cuyper, N., Jawahar, I. M., & Peeters , M. C. (2012). The route to employability. Career Development International, 17(2), 104–119.
Horvath, A., & Rachlew, E. (2016). Nuclear power in the 21st century: Challenges and possibilities. Ambio, 45(1), 38–49. doi: 10.1007/s13280-015-0732-y
IAEA. (2019, maj 10). International Atomic Energy Agency. Retrieved from International Atomic Energy Agency: http://www.iaea.org/PRIS/
Ivanko, Š., & Stare, J. (2007). Organizacijsko vedenje. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za upravo, Univerza v Ljubljani.
Kato, T., Takahara, S., Nishikawa, M., & Homma, T. (2013). A case study of economic incentives and local citizens' attitudes toward hosting a nuclear power plant in Japan: Impacts of the Fukushima accident. Energy Policy, 59, 808–818. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.04.043
Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424.
Matuleviciene, M., & Stravinskiene, J. (2015). Identifying the factors of stakeholder trust: a theoretical study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 213, 599–604. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.456
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: a meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441. doi: 10.1177/0170840603024003910
Raja, K. S., Pesic, B., & Misra, M. (2015). Nuclear Energy and Environmental Impact. New York: Springer Science+Business Media. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-6431-0_30-2
Reason, J. (1998). Achieving a safe culture: theory and practice. Work & Stress, 12(3), 293–306.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 54–67. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Shadrina, E. (2012). Fukushima fallout: gauging the change in Japanese nuclear energy policy. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 3(2), 69–83. doi: 10.1007/s13753-012-0008-0
Simcic Brønn, P., & Vidaver-Cohen, D. (2009). Corporate motives for social initiative: legitimacy, sustainability, or the bottom line? Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 91–109. doi: 10.1007/s10551-008-9795-z
Simončič, M. (2015). Zakaj in kako biti družbeno odgovoren? Revija za univerzalno odličnost, 4(3), 110–129.
Simončič, M., & Žurga, G. (2016). Social responsible communication of nuclear power plant with external stakeholders. Atw - International Journal for Nuclear Power, 61(11), 653–659.
Simončič, M., & Žurga, G. (2019). Successful Co-Existance of Nuclear Power Plants with Their External Stakeholders. Atw - International Journal for Nuclear Power, 64(4), 197–202.
Slovenski standard SIST ISO 26000:2010. (2010). Ljubljana: Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo.
Štrukelj, T., & Mulej, M. (2017). Strategija podjetja in družbena odgovornost. Revija za univerzalno odličnost, 6(3), 292-307.
Truelove, H. B., & Greenberg, M. (2013). Who has become more open to nuclear power because of climate change? Climatic Change, 116, 389–409. doi: 10.1007/s10584-012-0497-2
Trufanov, V. V. (2013). Modeling development options of electric power systems in conditions of multiple stakeholders. Thermal Engineering, 60(13), 931–937.
Van Beurden, P., & Goessling, T. (2008). The worth of values - A literature review on the relation between corporate social and financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(2), 407-424. doi: 10.1007/s10551-008-9894-x
WANO. (2013). Traits of a healthy nuclear safety culture. Atlanta-London&Hong Kong-Moscow-Paris-Tokyo: WANO.
WANO. (21. 9. 2017). WANO. Retrieved from WANO, Members: http://www.wano.info/en-gb/members/members
White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered. Psychological Review, 66, 297–333.
World Nuclear Association. (2017, 05 30). World Nuclear Association. Retrieved from The Harmony programme: http://world-nuclear.org/getattachment/Our-Association/What-we-do/The-Harmony-programme/2017-05-Harmony.pdf.aspx
