CONFIDENCE dissemination meeting: Summary on the scenario-based workshop

Duranova, T.; Bedwell, Peter; Beresford, Nicholas A.; Bleher, M.; Gering, F.; Geertsema, Gertie; Hamburger, T.; Kaiser, Jan Christian; Korsakissok, Irène; Leadbetter, Susan; Montero, M.; Müller, Tim; Oughton, Deborah; Perko, Tanja; Raskob, W.; Tomas, Jasper; Turcanu, C.; Vries, H. de; Walsh, Linda; Woda, Clemens

doi:10.1051/radiopro/2020009

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(19 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The evaluations were performed by means of moderated exercises using different scenarios, and involving stakeholders with different backgrounds, who may be involved in decision making during a real nuclear emergency. The scenarios, data used for evaluation and evaluation results from the final workshop of CONFIDENCE are presented in other articles of this special issue (Charnock et al, 2020;Duranova et al, 2020aDuranova et al, , 2020b.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

MCDA handling uncertainties

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Work package 6 (WP) of the European project CONFIDENCE focussed on decision support for stakeholders in nuclear emergencies especially considering uncertainties in such scenarios. A well-suited method for collaborative decision support is the Multi Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA). It provides a transparent approach for choosing a suitable strategy from a pool of strategies taking into account the different preferences of the involved stakeholders. One goal of WP 6 was to provide this method as a software tool to the nuclear emergency management community. However a default MCDA is not capable of handling uncertainties as input parameters. We embedded an existing MCDA tool in an ensemble evaluation framework to overcome this limitation and to process probabilistic input parameters. Within this framework random deterministic MCDAs are generated from the probabilistic MCDA and their results are combined into a single result reflecting this uncertainty. The enhanced MCDA tool provides user interfaces for defining probabilistic input parameters for impact values and criteria weights, as well as graphical components to communicate the results to the stakeholders. The tool was presented in several workshops to the potential stakeholders where it was applied to fictitious scenarios. The feedback was used to improve the tool in several iterations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

MCDA handling uncertainties

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The methodology developed to elaborate these recommendations is based on the discussions within each national panel, as well as on exchanges among WP4 partners. It also relies on exchanges among the CONFIDENCE project partners and endusers at the occasion of the CONFIDENCE final dissemination workshop that took place in Bratislava, from the 2nd to the 5th of December 2019 (Duranova et al, 2020). As a first step, all partners of the WP4 were asked to select for each of the six categories of uncertainties defined in Montero et al (2020), the most important ones raised from their panels' discussions.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the third step, the recommendations drawn up by each WG were presented and discussed with other CONFIDENCE partners and end-users at the occasion of the dissemination workshop (Duranova et al, 2020). Thanks to round table discussions, the participants expressed their views and suggestions to improve this first set of recommendations.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards an improved decision-making process to better cope with uncertainties following a nuclear accident

Durand¹,

Maître

Croüail

et al. 2020

Radioprotection

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An emergency situation is subject to multiple sources of uncertainties which should be identified in advance in order to improve the emergency and recovery management, and so optimally foster the living conditions of the population and the quality of their environment. In this context, the Work Package 4 of the European Research Project CONFIDENCE aimed at identifying and reducing uncertainties which could emerge in decision-making processes, in order to improve the preparedness and response after a nuclear accident. To that end, stakeholder panels have been set up in several European countries to collect their views and concerns regarding the decisions to be taken in the event of a nuclear crisis (e.g. evacuation, food restrictions, etc.). More particularly, the implementation of these panels allowed the researchers to (i) identify the main uncertainties that may hamper decision-making processes and to (ii) evaluate the influence of prior decisions made during the emergency phase over the medium to long-term evolution of the situation. Based on these discussions, the various types of uncertainties raised by the national panels have been analysed in order to suggest recommendations to better consider them and to improve the decision-making processes. This paper aims to detail the recommendations resulting from the panels discussions.

show abstract

“…3 Main findings from the national panels A summary of the discussions, findings gathering the views of the stakeholders and conclusions obtained in the national panels has been included in a project report (Montero et al, 2019) and presented as national posters in the final workshop of the CONFIDENCE project (Duranova et al, 2020b). Here, the main findings and conclusions have been grouped into four decision specific issues that would be considered in the transition phase.…”

Section: Delphi Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder involvement through national panels and surveys to address the issues and uncertainties arising in the preparedness and management of the transition phase

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Under the framework of the CONFIDENCE project, work package 4 was focusing on the transition to long-term recovery, involving stakeholders in decision-making processes. The essential research was performed using a participatory approach, which combined scenario-based stakeholder discussion panels and transnational stakeholder surveys following the Delphi methodology. The objective was to identify and address the issues and uncertainties arising in the preparedness and management of the transition phase and to explore ways to facilitate the incorporation of stakeholders’ expertise, points of view and interests in the decision-making processes. The final goal was to build best practices for planning optimal remediation strategies during the transition phase considering stakeholder involvement in the decision-making process. The results obtained from the work undertaken in nine European countries are presented.

show abstract

CONFIDENCE dissemination meeting: Summary on the scenario-based workshop

Cited by 10 publications

References 15 publications

MCDA handling uncertainties

MCDA handling uncertainties

Towards an improved decision-making process to better cope with uncertainties following a nuclear accident

Stakeholder involvement through national panels and surveys to address the issues and uncertainties arising in the preparedness and management of the transition phase

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About