As an NGO dedicated to ensure and increase transparency and public participation in nuclear safety and security in all fields of nuclear activities[1], Nuclear Transparency Watch (NTW) found it relevant to be involved in the European Joint Programme on Radioactive Waste Management (EURAD).
When EURAD started in 2019, the programme was foreseen to include activities and Interactions with Civil Society (ICS) in the perspective of the Aarhus Convention[2]. Therefore, it was understood that Civil Society (CS) could contribute to enhancing decisions on safety and security of Radioactive Waste Management (RWM)[3].
ICS activities in EURAD were structured based on a so-called “double wing” model[4] that was established and tested during the previous European projects SITEX II[5] and JOPRAD[6] following a specific vision and development plan[7]. This model allowed regular exchanges in between 13 CS experts involved in various EURAD Work Packages (WPs) and 22 CS larger group members attending yearly ICS workshops as described in the figure here below.
Figure 1 – Structure of ICS activities in EURAD
The yearly ICS workshops organised by the CS experts for the CS larger group were based on the results obtained by the CS experts from their work for the WPs labelled as “strategic studies” (ROUTES[8] and UMAN[9]) and their work for the WP PMO[10] which included:
- Interactions with R&D technical WPs.
- Interactions with all stakeholders.
- Evaluation of the CS contribution to EURAD.
- CS coordination, organisation, integration, and reporting.
Figure 2 – ICS workshop n°6 in Ljubljana (April 2024)
Between 2019 and 2024, 17 deliverables were published by the CS experts on various topics by stimulating interactions with the CS larger group and with the technical partners of EURAD [11]. Moreover, NTW has organized 17 workshops, participated to 30 EURAD events and contributed in around 40 EURAD documents. This iterative process helped to identify and deepen the knowledge in the main areas of concern for CS towards RWM.
First and foremost, the importance of sharing a culture for safety and security was underlined as a cornerstone for any fruitful pluralistic interaction on RWM. Therefore, based on previous studies such as SITEX II[12] a charter for fruitful interactions was established and used as an evaluation tool for the ICS activities in EURAD[13]. It was also considered relevant to update the existing studies on safety culture with more concrete examples of ways and situations where it can be enhanced[14]. Developing the “double wing” model into a “third wing model” was one of the propositions made[15], another was to continue the diversification of ways for CS to participate using existing tools such as the Pathway Evaluation Process (PEP)[16] – allowing pluralistic views on various RWM scenarios which had already proven to be very effective considering the feedback – or with new tools such as a visualisation tool designed by CS to be used as an interactive support enabling knowledge sharing and public participation[17].
Finally, to sustain and improve the Aarhus Convention pillars approved by the European Union[18] and the addition proposed by NTW in the BEPPER report[19], the concept of intergenerational stewardship[20] was studied as a means to maintain a safety culture through time until a final safe enough solution is found. This implies a recognition that the problem remains to be solved going against abandonment and amnesia.
Now that EURAD (2019-2024) is finished, a second phase of the programme (EURAD 2) is under final agreement with EC with NTW again foreseen as the coordinator for all CS organisations – which makes it important to share and evaluate the results of the first EURAD programme. This is why NTW has provided the following feedback for the evaluation of Euratom Research and Training Programme (2021-2025) which encompasses EURAD to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the Programme in the eyes of CS:
As an NGO involved in the Joint Programme on RWM EURAD, NTW has benefited from funding to represent civil society in the programme, in accordance with the first 2 pillars of the Aarhus Convention (access to information, access to participation) to help ensure the development of transparency and safety.
Results were obtained (e.g., production of deliverables on Transparency & Public Participation (T&PP) or Interaction with the Civil Society (ICS)) that envision better ways for interaction of different stakeholders involved in decision making procedures and research. Progress (e.g., double wing model of interaction and involvement in strategic studies) was made in understanding how to approach uncertainties through a shared culture for safety and security and what this could mean in the perspective of intra- and intergenerational stewardship.
However, there is still the need of sufficient structural and material support to develop a sustainable citizen engagement in a trustworthy environment independent from nuclear industry’s influence. Therefore, referring to the obligations under the Aarhus Convention art. 3(2), 3(3) and 3(4), it is necessary to include funds to develop civil society engagement structures to enhance civil society participation from a wider perspective and also in future research and training concerning the development of nuclear technology, including management of radioactive waste.
This is key to develop and implement processes, tools, knowledge, and relations that were previously established in the EURAD programme. If this is not continued, engagement towards transparency, public participation but also safety and security will suffer, as recognized by all stakeholders, who emphasized that participation of civil society in these research programmes is indeed indispensable in increasing safety.
List of publications per work packages in which NTW’s has been involved
PMO
- D1.13 List of CS group members: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d113-list-cs-group-members
- D1.14 Mid-term evaluation ICS activities and interactions EURAD participants and Civil Society: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d114-mid-term-evaluation-ics-activities-and-experimental-model-interaction
ROUTES
- D9.15 Plan of actions: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d915-scoping-routes-initial-cs-input-and-ics-action-plan-task-71
- D9.16 Shared solutions for European countries: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d916-implementation-routes-ics-action-plan-first-phase
- D9.17 Transparency in establishment of national radioactive waste facilities: Criteria for good transparency, national case studies and recommendations: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-deliverable-d917-routes-implementation-routes-ics-action-plan-second-phase
- D9.18 Public participation in technical aspects of Radioactive Waste Management (RWM), such as the development of Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC), the management of challenging wastes and safety case development: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d918-implementation-routes-action-plan-third-phase
- D9.19 Synthesis report of Task 7 activities: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d919-synthesis-task-7-activities
UMAN
- D10.12 Preferences of different actors on uncertainty management: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/d1012-identification-analysis-and-description-preferences-different-actors-uncertainty
- D10.13 Understanding of uncertainty management by the various stakeholders: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d1013-understanding-uncertainty-management-various-stakeholders
- D10.14 Pluralistic analysis of site and geosphere uncertainty: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d1014-pluralistic-analysis-site-and-geosphere-uncertainty-0
- D10.15 Pluralistic analysis of uncertainty related to human aspects: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d1015-pluralistic-analysis-uncertainty-management-related-human-aspects
- D10.16 How to manage uncertainties in a pluralistic way and in a long-term perspective? https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d1016-how-manage-uncertainties-pluralistic-way-and-long-term-perspective
- D10.17 Synthesis report of WP UMAN outcomes from a civil society point of view: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d1017-synthesis-report-wp-uman-outcomes-civil-society-point-view
- D10.18 Views of the different actors on the identification, characterization, and potential significance of uncertainties on the near field: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d1018-views-different-actors-identification-characterization-and-potential
- D10.19 Management options for different types of uncertainties and preferences of different actors: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/d1019-identification-analysis-and-description-preferences-different-actors-options
- D10.20 Application of the methods for a pluralistic assessment of uncertainties and their management to near-field uncertainties: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d1020-application-methods-pluralistic-assessment-uncertainties-and-their
MODATS
- D17.5 Enhanced system understanding, multi-party dialogue: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d175-enhanced-system-understanding-multi-party-dialogue
[1] Nuclear Transparency Watch statutes:
https://www.nuclear-transparency-watch.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/NTW-statutes-2024-ENG.pdf
[2] Adopted on 25 June 1998, the Aarhus Convention is created to empower the role of citizens and civil society organisations in environmental matters and is founded on the principles of participative democracy. See: https://aarhus.osce.org/about/aarhus-convention
[3] EURAD – D1.14 Mid-term evaluation ICS activities and interactions EURAD participants and Civil Society: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d114-mid-term-evaluation-ics-activities-and-experimental-model-interaction
[4] EURAD – D1.13 List of CS group members:
https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications/eurad-d113-list-cs-group-members
[5] SITEX-II is the acronym for “Sustainable network for Independent Technical Expertise of Radioactive Waste Disposal – Interactions and Implementation” (2015-2017). Its overall objective was the practical implementation of the sets of activities issued by the previous European research program SITEX (2012-2013). See: http://sitexproject.eu/
[6] JOPRAD is the acronym for « Joint Programming on Radioactive Waste Disposal” (2015-2017). The objective was to prepare a proposal for setting up of a Joint Programming that bring together at the European level, aspects of R&D activities implemented within national research programmes where synergy is identified. See: http://www.joprad.eu/about-joprad/rationaleobjectives.html
[7] The EURAD vision and EURAD deployment plan are two of the founding documents of EURAD.
All the funding documents are available here: https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/publications.
[8] https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/implementation/waste-management-routes-europe-cradle-grave-routes
[9] https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/implementation/wp10-understanding-uncertainty-risk-and-safety-uman
[10] https://www.ejp-eurad.eu/implementation/interaction-civil-society
[11] See the list of deliverables published in the Appendix.
[12] https://igdtp.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/SITEX-II_D4.1-Conditions-and-means-for-developing-SITEX-network_FINAL.pdf
[13] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1WJW5URedhv4-Bvj5XeQAZscIYoocOHJ1/edit#slide=id.p1
[14] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1IgDUkKpokcO0HIMn6ufBugfthjsXYaJN/edit#slide=id.p1
[15] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1TK6e0og1-z-m-xiUOuf0c2_0Qh0gGJ3l/edit#slide=id.p1
[16] https://www.sitex.network/projects/
[17] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/18kSmg9VybMynwHDRAtL7uKBtW9KrJjxW/edit#slide=id.p1
[18] Access to information, access to public participation and access to justice.
[19] Access to resources. See: https://www.nuclear-transparency-watch.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/NTW_Transparency_in_RWM_BEPPER_report_December_2015.pdf
[20] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1hl4Za69yMx60DGuqEJ53qTxew4_OTUmr/edit#slide=id.p14
You must be logged in to post a comment.