ANSTO completes community attitudes survey

ANSTO recently commissioned a survey of residents of a number of communities, including Sutherland Shire, to gain their opinions of the Organisation and their information needs on issues or areas of concern.
 
The management of the survey, which was paid for by ANSTO, was assisted by Mrs Muriel Baxter of North Cronulla Precinct Committee, Mr Michael Priceman of the Sutherland Shire Environment Centre and Dr Garry Smith, Sutherland Shire Council’s Principal Environmental Scientist. Mr Phil Smith, Director of the Sutherland Environment Centre also contributed. 
 
Group members managing the survey agreed upon a preliminary brief for potential consultants, provided additional briefings for them on what the survey should canvass, considered their formal proposals and unanimously appointed the successful consultancy, Keys Young, of Sydney.
 
The group also agreed on the questionnaire to be used and the methodology employed for the survey.
 
The survey, done by random telephone calls, contacted 915 people: 311 in Sutherland Shire, 250 in the Bankstown-Liverpool area, 253 in other areas of Sydney and in Wollongong and, as a check, 101 people in Melbourne. It was carried out in December 1996. 
 
Questions were asked in two ways: the first invited responses with no prompting, while the second suggested information and invited responses.
 
The Executive Director of ANSTO, Professor Helen Garnett, said the survey results provided valuable detail about how ANSTO is, and should be, meeting the information needs of the community.
 
She said some of the findings were already being implemented, while others will be used to refine ANSTO’s Communications Strategy with the aim of providing relevant and timely information to the community.
 
ANSTO is pleased to see that through working with the local community in the Sutherland Shire, their understanding of ANSTO’s contributions and activities are recognised and that close to 60% of people from the Sutherland Shire were supportive of a replacement reactor at the existing site at Lucas Heights.
 
Professor Garnett extended the thanks of ANSTO to Mrs Baxter, Mr Priceman, Dr Smith and Mr Smith for their contributions to the survey.
 

 
 

Summary of findings

 
  • While only small proportions of people were familiar with ANSTO, a majority of people had heard of Lucas Heights or the Atomic Energy Commission. Sydney, and in particular Sutherland residents, were most likely to be familiar with ANSTO/Lucas Heights. 
     
  • The mainstream media, and in particular the television, were the most common sources of knowledge about ANSTO/Lucas Heights, though general knowledge and less formal information sources such as friends and relatives were also common. 
     
  • Awareness and concern about ANSTO’s activities were measured at two levelsunprompted and prompted. When respondents were asked, unprompted, about their understanding of what happened at ANSTO/Lucas Heights, the reported level of understanding was relatively low, though substantial proportions of people knew about the manufacture of radioisotopes/nuclear medicines and the research function of the ANSTO facility. It was also common for people to (incorrectly) think that nuclear power or electricity was produced at Lucas Heights. 
     
  • When people were prompted through questions which identified specific ANSTO activities, the reported level of awareness appeared substantially higher. This may be due to people having a tendency to overestimate their knowledge (or conversely, a reluctance to admit ignorance) or may represent a general difficulty in being able to articulate what they thought happened at ANSTO. 
     
  • When asked, unprompted, of their concerns about ANSTO’s operations, nearly two thirds of those interviewed said that they did not have any concerns. 
     
  • However, when prompted about their concerns on a number of specific issues, the level of concern reported was far greater. It could be said that while people may not have ‘top of mind’ concerns about ANSTO, the level of concern is far greater in response to identified issues or propositions, particularly where it is difficult for people to admit not being concerned. 
     
  • The issues of most concern to people were with regard to the health and environmental impacts of ANSTO in terms of its day-to-day emissions of radioactive waste products, the storage of nuclear waste at Lucas Heights and the possibility of a radiation leak or other nuclear ‘accident’. A perceived lack of information about what happens at ANSTO and how safe these activities are was also a widely held concern. 
     
  • The manufacture of radioisotopes and nuclear medicines was generally seen as the most important function of ANSTO. Some respondents perceived this as a necessary practice, despite the drawbacks of operating a nuclear reactor. 
     
  • A majority of respondents thought that ANSTO’'s activities were at least fairly safe. 
     
  • There was a fair degree of confusion as to who monitors and regulates ANSTO’s activities, with the most common response being ‘the Government’. 
     
  • Those interviewed were divided in terms of how confident they were in the organisation (s) they thought were responsible for monitoring and regulating ANSTO’s activities. Respondents most commonly had confidence in independent scientists or specialists in the field to say whether or not ANSTO was safe. 
     
  • Survey respondents were asked three questions in regard to the possible siting of a new reactor to replace the existing HIFAR reactor. Respondents were first asked how supportive they would be of a new reactor being built at Lucas Heights. Some 53% of respondents indicated that they were very supportive, fairly supportive or somewhat supportive. In response to the second- whether it should be sited on the fringes of Sydney, 41% said that they would be very supportive, fairly supportive or somewhat supportive. In response to the third- whether it should be sited at a remote location in Australia, 83% said they were very supportive, fairly supportive or somewhat supportive. 
     
  • Sutherland residents reported a desire for more information regarding ANSTO’s activities generally as well as some reassurance regarding the safety of the facility, the environmental and health impacts of its operations and the treatment and storage practices for nuclear waste produced on the site. The favoured means or methods of providing this information were through the mainstream media- newspaper, television and radio advertisements and articles, as well as through letter drops and pamphlets and open days at the Lucas Heights site. There was however, low regard among respondents for the reliability of the mainstream media, compared with other mediums, as an information source on ANSTO. 
     
  • Sutherland residents generally had a much greater awareness of ANSTO’s activities than people from other areas. Respondents from Melbourne had the lowest level of awareness. The level of concern about ANSTO’s activities was inversely related to the level of awareness, thus people from Sutherland were generally the least concerned about ANSTO’s activities and those from Melbourne were generally the most concerned. 
     
  • Males reported a higher level of awareness about ANSTO than females. Females were generally more likely to have concerns about ANSTO’s activities than were males. 
     
  • Older respondents generally had fewer concerns about the operation of ANSTO than did younger people. 
     
  • More highly educated people reported being more aware of ANSTO’s activities and also fewer concerns than people with lower levels of educational achievement. 
     
  • People who lived in a household where at least one person was a member of an environmental group, differed little from other people in their knowledge of, and attitudes to ANSTO and its operations. 
 

 

Published: 20/03/1997

Recent articles

See all »

Media enquiry form

If you have a media enquiry please call
Phil McCall: +61 438 619 987

Or

Send »

Please provide us with your name, phone number and
email so we can get back to you.

Error: Enquiry was not sent! Check all fields have been populated correctly.
Success: Enquiry was sent successfully.