Radioactive Waste Governance, State of the Art & Future Needs

Research output: Contribution to report/book/conference proceedingsIn-proceedings paper

Standard

Radioactive Waste Governance, State of the Art & Future Needs. / Schröder, Jantine; Meskens, Gaston; Laes, Erik (Peer reviewer).

European Nuclear Conference 2010: Transactions (tue 01/06). Vol. 3 Brussel, Belgium, 2010. p. 226-233.

Research output: Contribution to report/book/conference proceedingsIn-proceedings paper

Harvard

Schröder, J, Meskens, G & Laes, E 2010, Radioactive Waste Governance, State of the Art & Future Needs. in European Nuclear Conference 2010: Transactions (tue 01/06). vol. 3, Brussel, Belgium, pp. 226-233, ENC 2010, Barcelona, Spain, 2010-05-30.

APA

Schröder, J., Meskens, G., & Laes, E. (2010). Radioactive Waste Governance, State of the Art & Future Needs. In European Nuclear Conference 2010: Transactions (tue 01/06) (Vol. 3, pp. 226-233). Brussel, Belgium.

Vancouver

Schröder J, Meskens G, Laes E. Radioactive Waste Governance, State of the Art & Future Needs. In European Nuclear Conference 2010: Transactions (tue 01/06). Vol. 3. Brussel, Belgium. 2010. p. 226-233

Author

Schröder, Jantine ; Meskens, Gaston ; Laes, Erik. / Radioactive Waste Governance, State of the Art & Future Needs. European Nuclear Conference 2010: Transactions (tue 01/06). Vol. 3 Brussel, Belgium, 2010. pp. 226-233

Bibtex - Download

@inproceedings{36c4a72389054c92ad1499789a460f09,
title = "Radioactive Waste Governance, State of the Art & Future Needs",
abstract = "During the past decade, a positive evolution towards more openness, transparency and communication can be observed within RWM. The proven failed technocratic, top down approach is slowly and gradually changed towards a governance approach. Governance can be described as an inclusive, multidisciplinary, consensus directed process of human interactions wrt intricate problems. It aims to accept complexity and uncertainty as inherent characteristics of reality to be dealt with, not as problems to be solved. Despite this positive and pragmatically speaking inevitable evolution in RWM, stakeholders on both sides of the spectrum as to speak, cannot deny the persistent fragility of trust and proneness to misunderstanding. Scientist and industry on the one hand and the public on the other, often end up baffled with each others vocabulary and underlying motives. Although this confrontation may well be inherently unavoidable, we will argue that at least part of the potential stagnation due to it, as well as the explanation thereof, have to do with the fact that RWM has come to focus mainly on conditions for acceptance instead of on a genuine exercise of justification. The prominent issue of compensation will be explored as an illustrative example of this focus and its difficulties.",
keywords = "Radioactive Waste Management, governance, compensation, expert, participation",
author = "Jantine Schr{\"o}der and Gaston Meskens and Erik Laes",
note = "Score = 3",
year = "2010",
month = "12",
day = "10",
language = "English",
isbn = "978-92-95064-09-6",
volume = "3",
pages = "226--233",
booktitle = "European Nuclear Conference 2010: Transactions (tue 01/06)",

}

RIS - Download

TY - GEN

T1 - Radioactive Waste Governance, State of the Art & Future Needs

AU - Schröder, Jantine

AU - Meskens, Gaston

A2 - Laes, Erik

N1 - Score = 3

PY - 2010/12/10

Y1 - 2010/12/10

N2 - During the past decade, a positive evolution towards more openness, transparency and communication can be observed within RWM. The proven failed technocratic, top down approach is slowly and gradually changed towards a governance approach. Governance can be described as an inclusive, multidisciplinary, consensus directed process of human interactions wrt intricate problems. It aims to accept complexity and uncertainty as inherent characteristics of reality to be dealt with, not as problems to be solved. Despite this positive and pragmatically speaking inevitable evolution in RWM, stakeholders on both sides of the spectrum as to speak, cannot deny the persistent fragility of trust and proneness to misunderstanding. Scientist and industry on the one hand and the public on the other, often end up baffled with each others vocabulary and underlying motives. Although this confrontation may well be inherently unavoidable, we will argue that at least part of the potential stagnation due to it, as well as the explanation thereof, have to do with the fact that RWM has come to focus mainly on conditions for acceptance instead of on a genuine exercise of justification. The prominent issue of compensation will be explored as an illustrative example of this focus and its difficulties.

AB - During the past decade, a positive evolution towards more openness, transparency and communication can be observed within RWM. The proven failed technocratic, top down approach is slowly and gradually changed towards a governance approach. Governance can be described as an inclusive, multidisciplinary, consensus directed process of human interactions wrt intricate problems. It aims to accept complexity and uncertainty as inherent characteristics of reality to be dealt with, not as problems to be solved. Despite this positive and pragmatically speaking inevitable evolution in RWM, stakeholders on both sides of the spectrum as to speak, cannot deny the persistent fragility of trust and proneness to misunderstanding. Scientist and industry on the one hand and the public on the other, often end up baffled with each others vocabulary and underlying motives. Although this confrontation may well be inherently unavoidable, we will argue that at least part of the potential stagnation due to it, as well as the explanation thereof, have to do with the fact that RWM has come to focus mainly on conditions for acceptance instead of on a genuine exercise of justification. The prominent issue of compensation will be explored as an illustrative example of this focus and its difficulties.

KW - Radioactive Waste Management

KW - governance

KW - compensation

KW - expert

KW - participation

UR - http://ecm.sckcen.be/OTCS/llisapi.dll/open/ezp_112686

UR - http://knowledgecentre.sckcen.be/so2/bibref/7901

M3 - In-proceedings paper

SN - 978-92-95064-09-6

VL - 3

SP - 226

EP - 233

BT - European Nuclear Conference 2010: Transactions (tue 01/06)

CY - Brussel, Belgium

ER -

ID: 303924