[en] The study comprised on one hand a nationwide telephone interview (totally 800 interviews) aimed at mapping out the current image of possible host municipalities to a final disposal facility for spent nuclear fuel, and on the other hand some group interviews of people of another parish but of interest from the municipalities' point of view. The purpose of these group interviews was the same as that of the telephone interview, i.e. to find out what kind of an impact locating a final disposal facility of spent nuclear fuel in a certain municipality would have on the host municipality's image. Because the groups interviewed were selected on different grounds the results of the interviews are not fully comparable. The most important result of the study is that the current attitude towards a final disposal facility for spent nuclear fuel is calm and collected and that the matter is often considered from the standpoint of an outsider. The issue is easily ignored, classified as a matter 'which does not concern me', provided that the facility will not be placed too near one's own home. Among those interviewed the subject seemed not to be of any 'great interest and did not arouse spontaneous feelings for or against'. There are, however, deeply rooted beliefs concerning the facility and quite strong negative and positive attitudes towards it. The facility itself and the associated decision-making procedure arouse many questions, which at present to a large extent are still unexpressed because the subject is considered so remote. It is, however, necessary to give concrete answers to the questions because this makes it possible for people to relate the issue to daily life. It is further important that things arousing fear and doubts also can be discussed because a silence in this respect only emphasizes their importance. The attitude towards the facility is varying. On one hand there are economic and technical factors: the probable economic benefit from it, the obligation to take care of nuclear waste and the advantages of final disposal compared with the present situation. On the other hand there are the fears and doubts: risks involved in the transportation of spent fuel, doubts about the fairness of the decision-making procedure, the risks involved in the operation of the facility and a fear for accidents. Regarding the municipalities' current images the results of the interview show that Eurajoki does not have any distinct profile. About fifty procent of Finns are not able to attach any ideas or characteristics to Eurajoki. About 15% of Finns associate Eurajoki with nuclear power. Kuhmo, on the contrary, has a distinct profile as a place with culture/music, nature and a customer-friendly atmosphere. Loviisa is a town which is spontaneously associated with nuclear power (64%). With a little help also the sea around and the historical background to the town, as well as qualified services and communications were mentioned. Aeaenekoski's image is that of an industrial centre: industry in general, paper and pulp industry in particular, as well as certain famous firms are associated with the town. Also the adverse factors, such as the bad smell from paper and pulp industry, were mentioned. About one-third of Finns cannot associate Aeaenekoski with anything special. (orig.)