From the “right to know” to the “right to object” and “decide”. A comparative perspective on participation in siting procedures for high level radioactive waste repositories

Initial impacts of global risk mitigation measures taken during the combatting of the COVID-19 pandemic

“…The challenge to achieve sharing of best practices for risk mitigation during the current COVID-19 pandemic is high (Koonin, 2020). It requires mechanisms that build upon knowing how to evaluate, plan, implement and maintain risk mitigation measures, along with appropriately deciding who to involve (Renn, 2008;Nucci et al, 2017), making decisions about the chain of command, and channelling communication. Communication and information sharing foster democratic learning across governments and sectors, amongst varied stakeholders (decision-makers, scientists, practitioners and citizens), and between different levels of society (international, national, regional and local) (Tompkins et al 2008).…”

Corporate governance paradigms of hazardous industries: Enduring challenges of Britain’s civil nuclear industry

“…Practice models for the operationalization of public, face-to-face accountability (Di Nucci et al, 2017, in Europe; La Porte and Metlay, 1996, for USA) have suggested how ordinary citizens may be mobilized in the same way as Non Executive Directors (NEDs) who perform a critical friend’s role in questioning management decisions. A similar practice model of public accountability has existed in the oil and gas industry in Europe for many decades, but here too the model has remained only partially enacted (Grougiou et al, 2016).…”

“…This model, revisited and developed, may now lie at the heart of processes that mobilize citizen engagement in the nuclear and other hazardous industries (cf. Di Nucci et al, 2017). Typically, these processes would also require well-developed communications and engagement structures for meaningful consultations to take place.…”

Changing the System Culture: Mobilizing the Social Sciences in the Swedish Nuclear Waste System

“…Much of this research has dealt with public participation in radioactive waste management, especially when it comes to siting processes. [2][3][4][5] In addition, safety, retrievability, near-and long-term governance of repositories and managing the long term, not the least informing future generations about repositories, have been researched from the perspectives of the social sciences. 6,7 A conclusion has been that public participation has often been organized and implemented in a technocratic framing, more to seek confirmation of decisions made than to redefine or change them.…”

“…However, a number of comparisons of national systems for nuclear waste management over the past 30 years have been conducted where the Swedish case is included. 5,[12][13][14][15][16] These studies may enable future comparisons of the findings in this paper with experiences from other countries.…”