Recent trends and developments in dialogue on radioactive waste management: Experience from the UK

Kemp, Ray; Bennett, D.; White, Matt

doi:10.1016/j.envint.2006.06.010

Cited by 26 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such involvement of local stakeholders has been suggested as vital to project management and development. Kemp et al [65] describe various practices and techniques in stakeholder dialogue regarding nuclear waste management in the UK, and emphasize the importance of engaging fully with local stakeholder and community groups. Stakeholder dialogue has also been promoted as a critical component for biomass technology developments in the Netherlands [66], as for any large development with significant environmental impacts:…”

Section: Rowe and Frewer (2005) [50]mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing a social sustainability framework for energy infrastructure decisions

Whitton

Parry

Akiyoshi

et al. 2015

Energy Research & Social Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe concept of social sustainability is discussed in a wide range of literatures, from urban planning to international development. Authors agree a notion of social sustainability is difficult to define, comprising numerous component parts (criteria), such as community cohesion, human wellbeing, effective dialogue and the access that citizens have to those that make important decisions on their behalf. The definition and measurement of these criteria and the role of social sustainability in energy decision making is a contentious issue. We argue that a community led, asset based approach is required to achieve any sense of how social sustainability can be defined in a community setting within the context of energy developments. We propose a conceptual framework based on a process of community group prioritization and visioning. Our earlier research on public participation and the role of dialogue for nuclear energy development in the UK, US and Japan is used to demonstrate barriers to be overcome if our systemic model of social sustainability is to become a reality. We highlight the importance of fairness and justice, place based approaches and socio-energy systems, concluding that these are necessary to promote a community and institutional awareness of social sustainability for large energy developments.

show abstract

Section: Rowe and Frewer (2005) [50]mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing a social sustainability framework for energy infrastructure decisions

Whitton

Parry

Akiyoshi

et al. 2015

Energy Research & Social Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is a certain ambiguity in the terminology of public participation. Many typologies for public participation are available in the literature, starting with Arnstein’s ladder of eight steps from “manipulation” to “citizen control” (Arnstein, 1969), to more recent ones, which distinguish public participation methods based on information flow, degree of commitment of the parties involved, and the power among those parties (Chilvers, 2007; Kemp, Bennett, & White, 2006; Krütli et al, 2010). In general, these four widely recognized categories are information, consultation, collaboration, and empowerment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Quality of Stakeholder Engagement: From Bureaucracy to Democracy

Tomkiv

Liland

Oughton

et al. 2017

Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The idea of public or stakeholder engagement in governance of science and technology is widely accepted in many policy and academic research settings. However, this enthusiasm for stakeholder engagement has not necessarily resulted in changes of attitudes toward the role of stakeholders in the dialogue nor to the value of public knowledge, practical experience, and other inputs (like salient questions) vis-à-vis expert knowledge. The formal systems of evaluation of the stakeholder engagement activities are often focused on showing that the method is efficient and works. In this article, we argue that every stakeholder engagement process should be evaluated beyond a simple assessment of the methodology and that the wider context of the stakeholder engagement activity should also be addressed. We evaluate two different stakeholder engagement activities against the existing method evaluation criteria and demonstrate their limitations for assessing the quality of a stakeholder engagement. We argue that these criteria need to be extended so that engagement processes will have a chance to improve not only policies but also their democratic legitimacy.

show abstract

“…Waste management requires not only sound technical assessment of risk but also public participation, consultation and stakeholder dialogue on proposed solutions and associated risks. This is more evident for waste streams that need special treatment and certainly a wide public acceptance and consensus among stakeholders, such as radioactive waste management (Kemp et al, 2006). The usefulness of using one MCDA method in combination with life cycle analysis (LCA) modelling as a decision aid tool is considered most critical in the selection of an optimal management strategy in waste management problems (Hanandeh and El-Zein, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of multi-criteria decision analysis to tackle waste management problems: a literature review

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Problems in waste management have become more and more complex during recent decades. The increasing volumes of waste produced and social environmental consciousness present prominent drivers for environmental managers towards the achievement of a sustainable waste management scheme. However, in practice, there are many factors and influences - often mutually conflicting - criteria for finding solutions in real-life applications. This paper presents a review of the literature on multi-criteria decision aiding in waste management problems for all reported waste streams. Despite limitations, which are clearly stated, most of the work published in this field is reviewed. The present review aims to provide environmental managers and decision-makers with a thorough list of practical applications of the multi-criteria decision analysis techniques that are used to solve real-life waste management problems, as well as the criteria that are mostly employed in such applications according to the nature of the problem under study. Moreover, the paper explores the advantages and disadvantages of using multi-criteria decision analysis techniques in waste management problems in comparison to other available alternatives.

show abstract

Recent trends and developments in dialogue on radioactive waste management: Experience from the UK

Cited by 26 publications

References 1 publication

Conceptualizing a social sustainability framework for energy infrastructure decisions

Conceptualizing a social sustainability framework for energy infrastructure decisions

Assessing Quality of Stakeholder Engagement: From Bureaucracy to Democracy

The use of multi-criteria decision analysis to tackle waste management problems: a literature review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About