The present study examined the information theme in more detail by surveying people's opinions on the credibility of various sources of information. The respondents had to assess different communicators with regard to their perceived degree of reliability in matters related to electricity production alternatives and the associated environmental impacts, costs and risks.

Public opinion yields a relatively clear ranking of communicators representing various parties in society and background operators. According to the answers, the most reliable sources of information are the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, STUK (77% consider it reliable, 12% unreliable) and energy researchers and research institutions (77%/11%). The Ministry of the Environment is clearly ranked number three (73%/17%). The fourth place, occupied by the Ministry of Employment and the Economy and its energy department (65%/21%), reinforces the good position of the authorities in the competition for credibility. The impression is completed by the Energy Market Authority (49%/21%), with its slightly more cautious but still positive figures [Figure 36.].

However, other types of influencers rise ahead of the Energy Market Authority. The credibility of the Finnish Association for Nature Conservation (57%/31%) is also notably extensive. Environmental and nature conservation organisations as a general category (50%%/37%) fall slightly short of this, and the opinions become more polarised. Not all named environmental organisations clear the test without discord: Greenpeace receives more distrust than trust (37%/49%). The organisation's campaigns may be too aggressive for conservative Finns.

The bottom of the credibility list is rather even, and no single party remains clearly the last. There are, however, not many candidates for last place, and the energy industry is strongly represented among them. If the difference between the number of positive and negative estimates is used as a criterion, the weakest net figures are received by energy and electricity companies (-20), the political decision-makers (the government and leading politicians, -19) and the nuclear power companies (-18).

Also the figures for Greenpeace, and forestry and export industries are below zero, the latter only barely. All in all, the results indicate that the confidence figures for various parties are determined - in addition to their actual communication actions - based on their estimated independence. Clearly identified interests or an actual position as a party to an issue of social dispute create fundamental scepticism in the assessment. It can be assumed that similar reservations would be associated with the assessment of the objectivity of atheists vs. bishops in matters related to the church, etc.

Within the energy sector, the least amount of open criticism - and the only positive net figure - is received by non-governmental energy sector organisations (44%/31%). However, they typically have a rather low degree of recognition (similar to the Energy Market Authority among authorities), which is indicated by high proportions of 'I don't know'.

Changes in the assessments 2001-2008

Because the series of questions was also included in the 2001, 2004 and 2006 studies, a comparison of the results to earlier ones can yield conclusions on the changes in the credibility of parties. Generally speaking, the changes are not great. The basic form of the assessments has remained unchanged. In both surveys, the top of the reliability ranking list is occupied by the same operators, almost in the same order. The bottom of the list has also remained relatively unchanged.

If the comparison of the changes is limited only to the previous (2006) study, for example, the forest industry and energy sector organisations receive a slightly better assessment. Weakening can be seen mostly among the nuclear power companies, Greenpeace and the political decision-makers. Inspection of the whole follow-up period (2001-2008) does not reveal any clear trend-like development. However, a gradual decrease can be seen among the electricity companies¹ and, on the other hand, a certain degree of increase can be seen among, for example, certain environmental organisations [Figure 37a.] and [Figure 37b.].

Differences in the assessments by population group

A more detailed examination of the results indicates that gender is a significantly differentiating factor for the confidence figures. Women's confidence in information distributed by environmental organisations (all organisations included in the survey) is essentially stronger than men's. There is a similar difference with regard to the Ministry of the Environment and the EU environmental authorities. There is only one clear difference in the opposite direction: men have more confidence in information provided by nuclear power companies than women [Figure 38.]. Significant age dependency can be observed in assessments of the Ministry of the Environment, environmental organisations as a whole, energy research institutions and the European Union. Young people have more confidence in information provided by these parties.

Differences in accordance with an individual's opinion on nuclear power are even greater. The supporters of nuclear power are substantially more confident not only in the nuclear power companies - where the difference is enormous - but also in the Ministry of Employment and the Economy, all the parties in the energy sector (energy companies, energy sector organisations), the forest industry and the Energy Market Authority. On the other hand, anti-nuclear people show substantially greater confidence in information provided by various environmental organisations. The Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, energy research institutions, researchers and the Ministry of the Environment enjoy widespread confidence among both groups.

______________________________