Siting Experience Documents Only
Country
Keywords
WP 2 Appendix 10 Balance of Power: Principles and Good Practices for Local Stakeholders to Influence National Decision-making Processes
WP 2 Appendix 10 Balance of Power: Principles and Good Practices for Local Stakeholders to Influence National Decision-making Processes
Our basic position is that the outcomes of policy-making in radioactive waste management (RWM) should be driven by the will of the people through democratic processes. Achieving this inclusiveness requires good practices to increase local influence on what is essentially a national policy process. However inclusiveness poses significant practical problems; can society afford lengthy and costly consultation processes, often perceived as inefficient and ineffective?
WP 3 Quality of decision-making process Proposed Framework for Decision-making Processes
WP 3 Quality of decision-making process Proposed Framework for Decision-making Processes
The long-term governance of radioactive waste is complex socio-technical issue. The disposition of radioactive waste is decided on ethical grounds, having to take into account a variety of other dimensions (society, economy, ecology, politics, time, space, and technology). Thereto, a study of variants is required. Decision theory, in principle, takes diverse options as a starting point begin as the basis of a decision.
WP 2 Appendix 8 Mechanisms for Local Influence on National Decision Making Processes in Radioactive Waste Management
WP 2 Appendix 8 Mechanisms for Local Influence on National Decision Making Processes in Radioactive Waste Management
This document develops further the questions offered to stakeholders in the Berlin Meeting (see Appendix). It describes mechanisms that local stakeholders can use to influence national decision-making processes in radioactive waste management.
WP 2 Appendix 9 Principles and Good Practices for Local Actors to Influence National Decision-Making Processes
WP 2 Appendix 9 Principles and Good Practices for Local Actors to Influence National Decision-Making Processes
The outcomes of policy-making in radioactive waste management (RWM) should be driven by the will of the people through democratic processes. Achieving this inclusiveness requires good practices to increase local influence on what is essentially a national policy process. However inclusiveness poses significant practical problems; can society afford lengthy and costly consultation processes, often perceived as inefficient and ineffective?
Final Report: Influence of Local Actors on National Decision-making Processes WP2
Final Report: Influence of Local Actors on National Decision-making Processes WP2
Work Package 2 (WP2) focused on the ways in which local stakeholders can influence national decision-making processes on radioactive waste management (RWM). The participants in WP2 were particularly interested in examining how local stakeholders could contribute to national debates. Their interest stemmed from the fact that participants from France, Spain and the United Kingdom — who made up the majority of the WP2 group — were engaged, as stakeholders, in the decision-making processes that were under way in each of those countries.
Geological Challenges in Radioactive Waste Isolation
Geological Challenges in Radioactive Waste Isolation
Over the past forty years, the development of the technology needed to isolate radioactive waste in underground rock systems has been found to be a formidable problem. This is especially the case in connection with high-level waste (HLW) after its removal from operations in nuclear power plants. There is also the additional problem of isolating low- and intermediate-level waste (LILW).
Stakeholder Dialogue: Experience and Analysis
Stakeholder Dialogue: Experience and Analysis
The report begins with a consideration of the factors which have led to a growth in the use of dialogue processes, a clarification of key concepts and a classification of dialogue processes. A description of recent and current activities in Europe and North America is followed by discussion of the relationship of processes and contexts. This then leads to an identification of the key aims and evaluation criteria which will be used in the design of dialogue processes to be conducted in subsequent phases of the project.