The process to find a process for governance: Nuclear waste management and consent-based siting in the United States

Participatory Science Communication Through Consensus Conferences: Legitimacy Evaluations of a German Consensus Conference on Genome Editing

“…However, inherent challenges, for example regarding unequally distributed abilities to engage in rational discourse, or finding consensus within increasingly contested context remained (Van Bouwel & van Oudheusden, 2017). While some authors urge organizers of deliberation events to remain open for all potential context (Richter et al, 2022; Rountree et al, 2022), a number of interviewees showed a “pragmatic orientation” (Rountree et al, 2022) arguing that the wide scope of the event coupled with a tight time schedule contributed to an output that they saw as too vague and diverse to have an impact on policy making. Instead, like in many previous studies, the main impact was perceived to be on individual learning around genome editing and citizen participation (Dryzek & Tucker, 2008; Guston, 1999; Rask & Worthington, 2012).…”

“…As a result, we can find a “systemic turn” in deliberation research where scholars increasingly investigate how deliberative mini-publics should and can impact broader political systems (Rountree et al, 2022). Authors have proposed, for example, to tailor deliberation activities to windows of policy-making opportunity, in terms of topic (e.g., consideration of competing themes), timing (e.g., early stage engagement), and the involvement of DM (Burgess, 2014; Caluwaerts & Reuchamps, 2015; Delborne et al, 2013; Itten & Mouter, 2022; Kaplan et al, 2021; Rask & Worthington, 2012; Richter et al, 2022). Kaplan et al (2021) found that the outputs from their deliberative method “proved most valuable for decision-making when the project had a direct connection to a policy decision and when there were strong ‘process champions’” (p. 9).…”

“…Such developments go hand in hand with a move in science communication away from information-deficit models, where lack of uptake of scientific results or technological innovation is linked to insufficient public understanding and treated with top-down information, to more dialogue-oriented and participatory, including “deliberative” (Gastil, 2017), science communication (Davies, 2021; Merkelsen, 2011; Priest et al, 2018; Richter et al, 2022).…”

Key Science Goals for the Next-Generation Event Horizon Telescope

“…The literature is vast, but a starting point with many further references can be found in sources including: Gerrard [261] addresses community concerns about siting from the perspective on an environmental lawyer; Kuletz [262] focuses on Western US nuclear sites of waste; Masco [263] attends to the quadruple intersection of weapons scientists, Pueblo Indian nations, nuevomexicano communities, and activists as they live amidst and confront the legacy of Los Alamos. On consent-based siting rather than top-down imposition, see Hamilton et al [264]; and for a recent development and analysis of consent-based siting, Richter et al [265]. 16 For lessons learnt regarding knowledge formation, governance, organisational structure, decision-making, diversity, accountability, creativity, credit assignment and the role of consensus, from a range of perspectives across the humanities and social sciences, see e.g., (a) in general: Galison and Hevly [272], Knorr Cetina [273], Sullivan [274], Shrum et al [275], Boyer-Kassem et al [276] and references therein; (b) for specific collaborations and institutions: Collins [277], Nichols [278] on LIGO; Boisot et al [279], Ritson [280], Sorgner [281], Merz and Sorgner [282] on ATLAS and/or CERN; Jebeile [283] on the IPCC; Smith et al [284], Vertesi [285] on NASA; and Traweek [286] on SLAC and KEK.…”

The European Commission’s Green Deal is an opportunity to rethink harmful practices of research and innovation policy

“…The failed technocratic attempts of the U.S. Department of Energy, for some 50 years, to permanently store high-level commercial nuclear waste offer a case-in point. Taking consideration of nuclear waste alone, questions of siting permanent high-level waste storage facilities in democracies involve issues of equity (of processes and outcomes); trust; community well-being, information, and economic, needs; political power in negotiations; and flexibility and adaptability to dynamic societal needs, circumstances, and values over extended periods of time (Richter et al 2022 ).…”