Stakeholder Engagement & Education: Why it Matters

As fusion energy moves closer to commercial viability, its future will not be determined by technical breakthroughs alone. The success of fusion depends equally on how well it is understood, accepted, and trusted by the public. That trust must be earned - through education, transparent communication, and meaningful engagement with the communities and stakeholders who will be impacted by its rollout.

The Stakeholder Engagement and Education Pillar of the Plasma Power Framework focuses on these human elements: stakeholder engagement and education. By prioritizing earning public trust and building awareness into a broader fusion strategy, developers and governments can avoid costly delays, reduce project risk, and build the public consensus needed to deploy fusion successfully. Recent polling reveals that while attitudes toward fusion are generally positive, many people still confuse it with nuclear fission or lack basic knowledge about how it works. Clear communication, early engagement with communities, and targeted public education can bridge these gaps. Here’s more on what we know, and where to go from here: 

Public Opinion About Fusion Energy

A landmark survey of 2,016 U.S. adults, conducted in January 2023 by the University of Oklahoma’s Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis, gives us the first rigorous look into Americans' views on fusion energy:

• Awareness is low: Fewer than half had previously heard of fusion energy, and many conflated it with nuclear fission.

• Mental images are mixed: People often default to nuclear-associated imagery, even when thinking about “fusion energy.” But overall, emotional associations tend to be less negative than those evoked by traditional nuclear energy.

• Risk vs. benefit perception: Benefits slightly outweigh perceived risks, though most respondents sat in the neutral middle ground. There’s potential for perceptions to polarize or be influenced by fission-related fears.

• Support status: General support is high, even if people are uncertain. Support drops somewhat when participants consider local siting of fusion facilities, but that support remains significantly higher than for nuclear facilities.

• Trust landscape: Highest trust is placed in university scientists, the National Academy of Sciences, and national laboratories; trust in tech companies and media is relatively low. Trust correlates strongly with support for fusion.

• Drivers of support: Technological optimism and trust in regulators play key roles, while confusion with fission undermines acceptance.

Where Engagement and Education Can Have Impact

To move fusion forward, it's essential to close the knowledge gap and proactively shape public understanding. This begins by clarifying how fusion differs from fission, a distinction that continues to trip up even generally supportive audiences. Unlike fission, fusion does not produce long-lived radioactive waste and carries far lower risk of catastrophic failure. These facts need to be communicated clearly and frequently, using credible messengers the public already trusts.

Effective communication also means more than just disseminating facts. Engagement must be interactive, allowing for two-way dialogue with communities, especially those near potential fusion facility sites. Listening, instead of just informing, builds trust and reduces the risk of local opposition. Communities want to understand how projects will affect them, economically, environmentally, and socially, and they want a voice in how decisions are made.

At the same time, fusion’s story must be told honestly. While the technology holds enormous promise, overhyping its capabilities or timeline can backfire. The public responds best to honest communication: what milestones are coming up, what uncertainties remain, and what a responsible path to deployment looks like. Staying grounded helps prevent disillusionment down the line.

Resistance to siting is a challenge even for popular technologies, and fusion is no exception. While general support is high, people are more hesitant when a facility might be located nearby. Addressing this concern early, through transparent forums and accessible information about safety, site selection, and benefits, can reduce friction later. These conversations shouldn’t start when shovels are already in the ground, they need to begin long before. Early siting successes or failures can color the trajectory of the entire sector; choosing locations with the right mix of state and local support, regulatory clarity, and economic incentives can dramatically reduce overall project risk.

Crucially, trusted institutions can be tapped in these efforts. The public places confidence in university scientists, national labs, and independent scientific bodies. These groups should be visible, vocal participants in public engagement, reinforcing transparency and credibility. By contrast, messages perceived to come from corporations or media outlets may face more skepticism and should be carefully framed or delivered in partnership with more trusted voices.

Finally, as fusion continues to enter the public discourse, proactive myth-busting will be vital. Misconceptions, especially those that conflate fusion with fission, can spread quickly in the absence of clear counter-narratives. Equipping trusted experts with materials to address misinformation directly helps inoculate the public against confusion and doubt.

Building Public Trust Into Deployment Strategy

Stakeholder engagement and education should not be siloed or ad hoc. They must be embedded into the broader commercialization strategy for fusion, with dedicated resources and formalized processes. This includes mapping stakeholders, creating inclusive channels for public consultation, and designing education programs that reach both future workers and the general population.

Done well, these activities help build legitimacy. They create space for the public to not only learn about fusion but to shape its future. That sense of inclusion makes it far more likely that fusion projects will receive the support they need when it matters most. Helixos offers strategic communications expertise to help companies, governments, and nonprofits carefully consider how their work can contribute to building public trust and deploying in responsible and ultimately successful ways. 

Conclusion

Fusion is no longer a distant concept. As countries prepare for deployment, the path forward must include the people who will live with the outcomes. By investing in engagement and education now, governments and developers can build trust, reduce friction, and ensure a smoother, more equitable rollout of fusion energy.