Signaled and Silenced Aspects of Nuclear Safety: A Critical Evaluation of International Nuclear Safety Thinking

Abstract

This article provides a critical analysis of safety-related assumptions and practices in international nuclear safety regulation, together with an overview of those aspects of safety that have been either signaled or silenced. The data consist of safety reports from the IAEA, OECD NEA and Western European Nuclear Regulators Association (WENRA), as well as from the national stress tests reports of the United Kingdom and Finland. For theoretical tools, we draw on the concept of a dominant co-operative scheme, and on some parts of Luhmann's Theory of Social Systems. The method is content analysis. We argue that the prevailing thoughts on safety by the international nuclear safety organizations, which are based on the field of engineering sciences' understanding of safety, affected what was learned from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident and the way the stress tests were conducted. Moreover, the learning, even though it is still ongoing, has been constrained by some emphasized aspects of safety, which tend to ignore other relevant aspects of safety. Therefore, the stress tests and teachings from Fukushima failed to provide as many improvements in nuclear safety as could have been possible if a broader analysis of the Fukushima nuclear accident was used.

Multinational Energy Justice for Managing Multinational Risks: A Case Study of Nuclear Waste Repositories

“…This reinforces the need for a combination of the social science account of energy (policy) with its natural science counterpart (energy systems and chains) (Heffron & McCauley, ; Hoggett et al, ; Jenkins, Heffron, & McCauley, ). Both employing and challenging the tripartite model of energy justice—distributional, procedural, and recognition justice (Jenkins et al, ; McCauley, Heffron, Stephan, & Jenkins, )—we form our argument using the case study of multinational nuclear waste repositories, where geographically isolated countries are connected by a shared concern for governing risks emanating from nuclear waste, and where the fundamental question of justice such repositories could create are particularly pertinent considering their multinational and intergenerational hazards (Drottz‐Sjöberg, ; Ylönen & Litmanen, ). Our aim is not only to present an incremental analysis that applies the tripartite model of energy justice without question, but through a focus on currently neglected multinational and nuclear waste issues, to highlight the current shortcomings of it.…”

“…In the history of nuclear energy, there have been many examples of multinational collaborations in nuclear safety, security and safeguards, either between geographically proximate countries—for example, regional approaches in the EU—or between geographically distant countries, such as the Franco–Indian collaborations (Sarkar, ; Taebi & Mayer, ). Ylönen and Litmanen () provide a comprehensive overview of international nuclear safety collaborations, for example, including post‐Fukushima crisis revisions of the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) Safety Standards and the Western European Nuclear Regulators’ Associations’ (WENRA) Reference Levels for nuclear reactors. Joint nuclear waste repositories, or the idea to dispose of nuclear waste collaboratively with a couple of countries, represent a further endeavor.…”

The Perceptions of Local Political Actors After Natural Disasters: The Effect of Japan's 3/11 Disasters on Local Politics

“…For instance, the crisis of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear plant explosion provoked wild mood swings in the public and affected nuclear energy policies domestically as well as internationally (Chien, ; Jorant, ; Thomas, ; Ylönen & Litmanen, ). This crisis brought serious accusations against political leadership at the national level (Funabashi & Kitazawa, ).…”