ARGONA Arenas for Risk Governance

1
ARGONA Arenas for Risk Governance

• Kjell Andersson, Karita Research
• Josefin Päiviö-Jonsson, SKI
• GMF General Seminar, Brussels, October 11, 2006

2
Participants

• 1 Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate Sweden
• 2 Karita Research AB Sweden
• 3 Göteborg University Sweden
• 4 Nuclear Research Institute Rez plc Czech
  Republic
• 5 University of Tampere Finland

3
Participants

• 6 DECONTA Slovakia
• 7 SCK.CEN Belgium
• 8 University of Lancaster UK
• 9 RAWRA Czech Republic
• 10 Stockholm University Sweden

4
Participants

• 11 Joint Research Centre Netherlands
• 12 Galson Sciences Ltd UK
• 13 University of Stavanger Norway
• 14 Wenergy AB Sweden

5
Why ARGONA?
The ARGONA project intends to demonstrate how
participation and transparency link to the
political and legal systems and how new
approaches can be implemented in nuclear waste
management programmes.
6
ARGONA Operational Goals

• Mapping of policy making structures within EU in
  general and in the participating countries in
  particular
• Clarification of the roles of the deliberative
  and the transparency approaches in strengthening
  policy making structures
• Further implementation of the RISCOM model in
  Europe

7
Operational Goals

• Testing a number of approaches to participation
  in within the Czech system
• Delineation of good risk communication
  approaches across national borders, as well as
  specification of circumstances that require more
  specific national or group considerations.
• Understanding of how information systems, such
  as ERMON, can used for effective risk
  communication

8
Operational Goals

• An integrated approach to risk communication
  that includes behavioural sciences findings and
  more technical approaches.
• Knowledge about how different approaches to the
  public mediation lead to varying levels of public
  engagement and involvement.
• Awareness of the roles of mediators of public
  participation approaches

9
Operational Goals

• A guide for the strengthening existing policy
  making structures by the application of novel
  approaches to participation and transparency in
  nuclear waste management.
• Dissemination of the ARGONA approach to other
  policy making areas, such as biotechnology, oil
  industry and other energy related areas

10
Work package 1Policy making structures

•        to clarify the legal and structural
  frameworks within which processes of transparency
  and participation take place (EU and national) .
•          means questionnaire

11
Work package 2Theoretical perspectives on
participation and democracy

• The three arenas
• deliberative arena
• transparency arena
• arena of representative democracy

12
Work package 2

•   to carry out a detailed analysis of the RISCOM
  model philosophy through a confrontation with
  other philosophical frameworks
•   to make a theoretical analysis of the links
  between the three arenas
•  to make practical recommendations for the
  improvement of the RISCOM framework
• application for the research results.

13
Work package 3Mediators of issues and
mediators of process

• Mediators of issues
• Mediators of process (conduct of conduct)
• Theoretical elaboration of concepts
• Case studies (Östhammar and Oskarshamn)
• Evaluation of the roles of mediators, citizens

14
Work package 4Risk communication

• To compare and summarize different countries
  approaches to risk communication
• To cross-compare, within the framework provided
  by ERMON, risks associated to different
  alternatives of nuclear waste management ERMON -
  Energy Risks Monitor - Developed by Joint
  Research Centre
• To create a programme for improving public
  awareness about risks associated with nuclear
  waste.

15
Work package 4Risk communication

• Interviews and focus groups with stakeholders,
  cross-cultural comparisons
• Further development of ERMON, collection of data,
  analysis
• An integrated and systematic approach to risk
  communication, which includes both technical and
  social sciences elements.

16
Work package 5Evaluation, testing and
application of participatory approaches

• To demonstrate how a structured framework for
  transparency and participation can be designed
  for a real process (of e.g. site selection) by
  transferring the theoretical principles explored
  in other work packages to practical working
  arrangements.

17
Work package 5Evaluation, testing and
application of participatory approaches

• A critical evaluation of public participation
  processes as a part of EIA
• Focused science shops
• Consensus panel on SNF management alternatives
• Interaction panel on safety case
• Application of the RISCOM Model

18
RISCOM Model history

• Developed by SKI and SSI
• ref Andersson, Espejo , Wene (1998)
• Used by SKI - hearings on site selection, 2001
• RISCOM II project
• Used by Oskarshamn and Östhammar
• Used by SSI mobile phones, 2004-05
• KASAM now launches a transparency project

19
RISCOM Model of Transparency
Truth/efficiency - Objective world - Scientific
methods and technology Are we doing things
right?
RISCOM Model
Authenticity - Personal integrity/
organisational identity no hidden agenda?
Legitimacy - Social world - Are we doing the
right things?
20
Work package 5

• Assessment of the role of public and stakeholders
  in local political processes
• Novel procedures as applied to radioactive waste
  management and new LLW facilities
• Comparison report
• Focus on the Czech Republic
• Also a new LLW facility in Scotland
• Studies of Swedish abd Belgian cases

21
Work package 6Guidance for participation and
transparency

• Objective
• To provide the European Union with guidance for
  participation and transparency in nuclear waste
  management programmes. Early contact with policy
  makers

22
Work package 6

• Advice will be given how to link the three
  arenas of transparency, deliberation and
  representative democracy.
• The work will be going on during the project by
  taking into account both the theoretical and the
  practical achievements made in the work packages
  1-5.

23
Lead contractors

• Policy making structures Karita Research
• Theoretical perspectives on participation and
  democracy SCK.CEN
• 3 Mediators of issues and mediators of process
• Göteborg University
•  

24
Lead contractors

• 4 Risk communication
• University of Stavanger
•  5 Evaluation, testing and application of
  participatory approaches
• Nuclear Research Inst.
• 6 Guidance for participation and transparency
• Karita Research

25
Dissemination

•    ARGONA web site, links to OBRA and CIP, Links
  to partnersown web sites
• Much dissemination takes place in WP s
• Conferences and scientific articles
• Interaction with CIP and OBRA (possible joint
  conference)
• Meetings with government bodies, NGOs
• and DG TREN

26
Dissemination

•     Science and Society Programme
• Some input to CARGO summer school
• Interface to the petrochemical industry in
  Norway

27
Three core elements of ARGONA

• Strengthening existing policy making structures
  with participation and transparency
• Implementation of the RISCOM Model
• Integrated risk communication