Main Article Content
This article aims to present nuclear knowledge management prior to the construction of nuclear power plants through a case study of Thailand. Thai governments, especially in the 2010s, have prepared policy packages, regulatory structures, and organizations to facilitate the construction of nuclear power plants. Policy debates regarding nuclear power plants are based on economic benefits, electricity prices, energy security, and concerns of nuclear accidents. To extend the nuclear policy conversation beyond the conventional topics, this article aims to investigate how the idea of nuclear safety culture, as a global concept promoted by the International Atomic Energy Agency, could be added into policy debates. Previous researches have suggested that nuclear curriculum is an important tool to educate people and (re)shape their perceptions and knowledge about nuclear power plants.
Following the useful suggestions of previous studies, this article compares nuclear curricula in both secondary and higher education levels, from Thailand and other countries, to evaluate whether the curricular developers have integrated the idea of nuclear safety culture into the curricula. The research findings indicate that the nuclear curricula from the case studies, including Thailand, have not fully integrated the concept of nuclear safety culture. The article also provides a set of alternative topics that integrate the idea of nuclear safety culture for redesigning the nuclear curriculum. The knowledge inherent to nuclear safety culture would increase people’s perceptions and understanding of the broader connections between nuclear power and other aspects of society, an ideational condition for identifying the future of nuclear power plants.
Atomic Energy for Peace Act, 1961.
Barabas, R de C. and Sabundjian, G. (2013, November 24-29). Nuclear Energy Education Scenario around the World. Paper presented at the 2013 International Nuclear Atlantic Conference, Brazilian Association of Nuclear Energy, Recife.
Behling, N.; William, M. C.; Managi, S. (2019). “Regulating Japan’s Nuclear Power Industry to Achieve Zero-accidents.” Energy Policy, 127: 308-319.
Bernido, C. C. (2007). Nuclear Science and Technology in Higher Education in the Philippines. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
BP p.l.c. (2019). BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2019. London: BP p.l.c.
Choi, Y.; Kim, J.; and Han, E. (2017). Education Effects of Operating a Model School for Korea Elementary, Middle and High School Student to Understand Nuclear Power. TEM Journal, 6 (2), 286-293.
Committee on Nuclear Energy for Peace. (2017). Policy and Strategic Plan for Development of Nuclear Energy. Bangkok: Ministry of Science and Technology.
Committee on Nuclear Energy for Peace. (2017). Action Plan on Policy and Strategic Plan for Development of Nuclear Energy. Bangkok: Office of Atomics for Peace, Ministry of Science and Technology.
Cooper, D. (2002). “Safety Culture: A Model for Understanding and Quantifying a Difficult Concept.” Professional Safety, June 2002: pp. 30-36.
Energy Policy and Planning Office. (2015). Thailand Power Development Plan 2015-2036. Bangkok: Energy Policy and Planning Office, Ministry of Energy.
Faculty of Engineering, Chulalongkorn University. (2018). Bachelor Course in Engineering in Nuclear Radiological Engineering. Retrieved February 3, 2020, from Faculty of Engineering, Chulalongkorn University Website http://www.ne.eng.chula.ac.th/wp/index. php/programs/b-eng/
Hewamanna, R. (2007). Present Status of Nuclear Science Education and Training in Sri Lanka. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
Hong, S.; Brook, B. W. (2018). “A Nuclear-to-gas Transition in South Korea: Is It Environmentally Friendly or Economically Viable?” Energy Policy, 112: 67-73.
Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology, Ministry of Education. (2010). Handbook for Teaching Physics in High School Program. Bangkok: Office of the Welfare Promotion Commission for Technology and Educational Personnel.
Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology, Ministry of Education. (2012). Physics Volume 5. Bangkok: Office of the Welfare Promotion Commission for Technology and Educational Personnel.
International Atomic Energy Agency. (1991). Safety Culture. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group. (1992). The Chernobyl Accident: Updating of INSAG-1. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
International Atomic Energy Agency. (1998). Developing Safety Culture in Nuclear Activities: Practical Suggestions to Assist Progress. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
International Atomic Energy Agency. (2005). Safety Culture in the Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
International Atomic Energy Agency. (2011). Status and Trends in Nuclear Education. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
International Atomic Energy Agency. (2019). Nuclear Power Reactors in the World. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
Jho, H.; Yoon, H. G.; Kim, M. (2014). The Relationship of Science Knowledge, Attitude, and Decision Making on Socio-scientific Issues: The Case Study of Students’ Debates on a Nuclear Power Plant in Korea. Science and Education, 23, 1131-1151.
Karsono, E. (2005, October 26-28). Nuclear Science and Technology Education and Training in Indonesia. Paper presented at Technical Meeting on Asian Network for Higher Education in Nuclear Technology, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Kim, C. and Goto, S. (2019). The Issue of Nuclear Energy in K-12 Education: Cases of National Curriculum in Japan and Korea. Japanese Journal of Environmental Education, 28 (4), 68-76.
Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute. (2003). Report of the Consultancy Meeting on Asian Network for Higher Education in Nuclear Technology. Daejeon: Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute.
Matsuo, Y.; Nei, H. (2019). “An Analysis of the Historical Trends in Nuclear Power Plant Construction Costs: The Japanese Experience.” Energy Policy, 124: 180-198.
Moray, N. (2001). Culture and National Factors in Nuclear Safety. In B. Wilpert & N. Itoigawa (Eds.), Safety Culture in Nuclear Power Operation (pp. 38-61). New York: Taylor& Francis.
Mwangi, E. and Gatari, M. (2018, May 17-18). Curriculum Development of a Nuclear Engineering Course for Human Resources Enhancement in the Kenya Nuclear Energy Program. Paper presented at the Transactions of the Korean Nuclear Society Spring Meeting, Jeju, Korea.
Nuclear Energy Agency, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2016). The Safety Culture of an Effective Nuclear Regulatory Body. Paris: The OECD Nuclear Energy Agency.
Prachachat, Thailand Promotes Nuclear Power Plants: Public-Private-Academic Groups Support the Investment of Nuclear Power Plants. July 17, 2012.
Roh, S.; Lee, J. W. (2018). “Differentiated Effects of Risk Perception Dimension in Nuclear Power Acceptance in South Korea.” Energy Policy, 122: 727-735.
Royal Decree on Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology, 2006.
Slugen, V. (2005). Education in Nuclear Engineering in Slovakia. Trnava: Research Institute of Nuclear Power Plant.
Thairat, Supporting Nuclear Power Plants. October 6, 2009.
Thairat, EGAT Proposes Nuclear Power Plants. December 11, 2009.
Thailand Power Development Plan, 2010.
Thairat, Ubon Rachatani People Gather to Oppose Nuclear Power Plants. January 21, 2011.
Wang, S.; Wang, J.; Lin S. (2019). “Public Perception and Acceptance of Nuclear Energy In China: The Role of Public Knowledge, Perceived Benefit, Perceived Risk, and Public Engagement.” Energy Policy, 126: 352-360.
Wongkontan, D. (2011). Nuclear Power Plant: Feasibility Study and Socio-cultural Impacts from Power Plant Constructions in Thailand. Doctoral dissertation, Mahasarakham University.
Wilpert, B. (2001). The Relevence of Safety Culture for Nuclear Power Operations. In B.
Wilpert & N. Itoigawa (Eds.), Safety Culture in Nuclear Power Operation (pp. 38-61). New York: Taylor& Francis.