Although the government admit the benefit of construction of a nuclear facility for national electric source, related policy could be developed and carried out only if the public, especially who have some stake on it, recognize the benefit and accept the policy. For public participation, Korea has a system of public-hearing in accordance with the law. Because of the absence of the detailed way for public opinion aggregation and for the reflection of the aggregated opinion, Korean public-hearing system is only a conceptual model. Therefore, some specific system for Korean Public-Hearing should be developed and applied. In this study, to share the right of decision making, which is an ultimate concept for public participation, decision making components and the characteristics of each phase are analyzed. The criteria weight for assessment and comparison with alternatives are founded as a valuation factor of the decision making components, which should be based on the social consensus. On these foundations, a system for aggregation and reflection of the public opinion was proposed. The system named “CPDM” (Consensus based Participatory Decision Making) has three authority groups for decision making. At first, “advisory experts group” play a role for the technical assessment and the serve utility value on the criteria for each alternatives. Next, “participatory deliberation group” play a role for consensus building on the relative-importance (weight) between the criteria by feedback to promote degree of consensus. Lastly including gentlemen of the long robe, “expert group for decision making” paly a role to reflect the utility and weight and make a decision with agreement for performance of it. Also, in this study, a mathematical model for the quantification of the degree of consensus was conceptualized using Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA) aggregation operator and fuzzy similarity theory, which is a comparison concept. Since this model enables influence of each criteria and each participant on collective consensus to be analyzed, a direction to promote consensus building can be derived. That is to say, this model can support consensus building and promote public acceptance for the nuclear industry and related policy.

This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.