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

被引:14
|
作者
Richter, Jennifer [1 ,2 ]
Bernstein, Michael J. [1 ,3 ]
Farooque, Mahmud [4 ]
机构
[1] Arizona State Univ, Sch Future Innovat Soc, Tempe, AZ USA
[2] Arizona State Univ, Sch Social Transformat, Tempe, AZ USA
[3] AIT Austrian Inst Technol GmbH, Ctr Innovat Syst & Policy, Seibersdorf, Austria
[4] Arizona State Univ, Consortium Sci Policy & Outcomes, Tempe, AZ USA
关键词
Nuclear energy; Nuclear waste; Participatory technology assessment; Public engagement; Consent-based siting; Nuclear; ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE; SCIENCE; PARTICIPATION; TECHNOLOGY; ACCEPTANCE; DISPOSAL; POLITICS; POWER;
D O I
10.1016/j.erss.2021.102473
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
In 2013, the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) attempted to initiate a consent-based siting (CBS) approach to better engage diverse publics and thereby begin to remedy a legacy of technocratic decision-making and inequitable public engagement processes plaguing historical high-level nuclear waste siting efforts. DOE's remediation work included a contract with the Expert and Citizen Assessment of Science and Technology (ECAST) network to employ participatory technology assessment (pTA) to help co-create the CBS process with lay publics. In late 2016, the DOE terminated the process to develop a CBS process. To date, little in the public record explores DOE's novel foray into CBS. As researchers on DOE's aborted ECAST efforts, we situate the novel pTA process to create a CBS process amidst the technocratic political-historical context of commercial nuclear waste siting in the U.S. Lessons from ECAST's effort highlight persistent institutional barriers inhibiting U.S. capacity to more equitably approach the challenge of siting nuclear waste facilities. We identify the undermining consequences of DOE's focus on expediency; imposed limitations on the scope of CBS; bureaucratic obstacles to public input; a lack of continuity in values across executive administrations; and absence of top-level commitment to procedural and institutional learning, innovation, and adaptation. Through our case history and critical reflection, we aim to inform future efforts in the U.S. and beyond to overcome failed technocratic histories and instead steward participatory, equitable, and democratic processes to manage high-level nuclear waste.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Current Progress on the Development of the Integrated Waste Management Consent-Based Siting Process in the United States
    Uribe, J.
    Saraeva, N.
    Petry, K.
    Bickford, E.
    Kreuzer, R.
    Howard, R.
    [J]. NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY, 2024, 210 (09) : 1748 - 1753
  • [2] Controversy and consensus in the design of a consent-based siting process for radioactive waste
    Tuler, Seth P.
    Webler, Thomas
    [J]. ENERGY RESEARCH & SOCIAL SCIENCE, 2023, 95
  • [3] The Process Matters: Fairness in Repository Siting For Nuclear Waste
    Kruetli, Pius
    Stauffacher, Michael
    Pedolin, Dario
    Moser, Corinne
    Scholz, Roland W.
    [J]. SOCIAL JUSTICE RESEARCH, 2012, 25 (01) : 79 - 101
  • [4] The Process Matters: Fairness in Repository Siting For Nuclear Waste
    Pius Krütli
    Michael Stauffacher
    Dario Pedolin
    Corinne Moser
    Roland W. Scholz
    [J]. Social Justice Research, 2012, 25 : 79 - 101
  • [5] POLICY CONFLICTS IN THE PROCESS FOR SITING NUCLEAR WASTE REPOSITORIES
    COLGLAZIER, EW
    LANGUM, RB
    [J]. ANNUAL REVIEW OF ENERGY, 1988, 13 : 317 - 357
  • [7] STATUS OF NUCLEAR WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE UNITED-STATES
    MEYERS, S
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY SOCIETY OF JAPAN, 1981, 23 (12): : 910 - 919
  • [8] Nuclear Waste Management in the United States-Starting Over
    Ewing, Rodney C.
    von Hippel, Frank N.
    [J]. SCIENCE, 2009, 325 (5937) : 151 - 152
  • [9] Nuclear waste management in the United States - The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board's perspective
    Cantlon, JE
    [J]. TOPSEAL '96 - INTERNATIONAL TOPICAL MEETING: DEMONSTRATING THE PRACTICAL ACHIEVEMENTS OF NUCLEAR WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL, VOL I: INVITED PLENARY SESSION PAPERS, 1996, : 156 - 167
  • [10] Community risk perception and waste management in three communities at different stages in the siting process
    Hertzman, C
    Ostry, A
    [J]. HAZARDOUS WASTE SITING AND DEMOCRATIC CHOICE, 1996, : 273 - 289