Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T11:22:54.074Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Transparency and Public Participation in Radioactive Waste Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2012

Grazyna Zakrzewska-Trznadel
Affiliation:
Institute of Nuclear Chemistry and Technology, ul. Dorodna 16, 03-195 Warsaw, Poland
Kjell Andersson
Affiliation:
Karita Research, Box 6048, SE-187 06 Taeby, Sweden
Get access

Abstract

Selection of appropriate sites for disposal of radioactive waste, especially high level waste and spent nuclear fuel, is a controversial task, not only from technological but also from societal point of view. A key part of the nuclear facility development is public consultation before the siting, construction and operation of the new repository. All decisions on these issues should be made in clear and transparent manner. The involvement of the local community from the very beginning of planning process may avoid faults and misunderstandings resulting in social objections and organized protests in future. To enhance the public participation in decision-making process several approaches of communication with the society were elaborated in the countries with well-developed nuclear power industry. Special models for communicating with stakeholders to build the acceptance and confidence concerning the radioactive waste management may be also helpful for Poland – the country entering the nuclear energy pathway. An effort to adapt the RISCOM Process developed in Sweden and also implemented in Czech Republic, to Polish conditions will be made in the scope of the EC-FP 7 IPPA project.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Arnstein, S.R.. A Ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 35 (4) (1969) pp 216224.10.1080/01944366908977225Google Scholar
2. Collins, K. and Ison, R.. Dare we jump off Arnstein’s ladder? Social learning as a new policy paradigm. In: Proceedings of PATH (Participatory Approaches in Science & Technology) Conference, 4–7 June 2006, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
3. Tritter, J.Q. and McCallum, A.. The snakes and ladders of user involvement: moving beyond Arnstein. Health Policy, 76:156168. (2006)10.1016/j.healthpol.2005.05.008Google Scholar
4. Andersson, K., Drottz-Sjöberg, B-M, Espejo, R., Fleming, P-A. and Wene, C.O.. Models of Transparency and Accountability in the Biotech Age. Bulletin of Science Technology Society. 2006; 26: 4656.10.1177/0270467605284347Google Scholar
5. Vojtechova, H.. Evaluation, testing and application of participatory approaches. Application of RISCOM Model in the Czech Republic. EU Contract FP6–036413. ARGONA Deliverable D14. (2009)Google Scholar