The energy crisis caused by the lack of supply from some countries involved in armed conflicts, coupled with society's continuous demand for energy production, is leading to the proposal of new energy sources, such as the development of uranium mines to increase nuclear energy production. Mine projects (MPs) trigger numerous conflicts in the local societies involved. While for some people, they represent an opportunity for development and benefits, for others these proposals are perceived as a threat and a health risk. However, energy scarcity and price increases create a social dilemma that moderates the established relationships between the perceived risks and benefits and the valuation of energy proposals. This research aims to analyze both the weight of the factors influencing the acceptance of a uranium MP and the moderating role of the energy crisis on these factors. A total of 629 people participated in this study (371 before and 258 after the energy crisis). The participants answered a questionnaire assessing their socio-demographic characteristics, beliefs about the environment, the perceived risks and benefits, and their emotional balance, as well as their level of knowledge and acceptance of the uranium mine proposal. The results show that age, gender, and level of education and knowledge both directly and indirectly influence the acceptance of a mine. In addition, the perception of risks and benefits is associated with the emotional balance generated, explaining the level of final acceptance of the proposal. The moderation-mediated energy crisis hypothesis influences the relationship between the perceived risks and acceptance of the uranium mine. The results are discussed in order to determine factors for intervention to alleviate the social conflicts created by new energy proposals.
Keywords: Acceptance; Benefits perception; Energy crisis; Risk perception; Uranium mine.
Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.