Explore the vast range of titles available.

Genevieve Fuji Johnson proposes that only deliberative democracy contains convincing conceptions of the good, justice, and legitimacy that provide for the justifiable resolution of debates about the moral foundations of public policy.

The question of what to do with radioactive waste has dogged political administrations of nuclear-powered electricity-producing nations since the inception of the technology in the 1950s. As the issue rises to the forefront of current energy and environmental policy debates, a critical policy analysis of radioactive waste management in the UK provides important insights for the future. Nuclear Waste Politics sets out a detailed historical and social scientific analysis of radioactive waste management and disposal in the UK from the 1950s up to the present day; drawing international comparisons with Sweden, Finland, Canada and the US. A theoretical framework is presented for analysing nuclear politics: blending literatures on technology policy, environmental ethics and the geography and politics of scale. The book proffers a new theory of ‘ethical incrementalism’ and practical policy suggestions to facilitate a fair and efficient siting process for radioactive waste management facilities. The book argues that a move away from centralised, high capital investment national siting towards a regional approach using deep borehole disposal, could resolve many of the problems that the high stakes, inflexible ‘megaproject’ approach has caused across the world. This book is an important resource for academics and researchers in the areas of environmental management, energy policy, and science and technology studies.

A workshop held in Ottawa in October 2002 brought together a wide range of Canadian stakeholders and delegates from radioactive waste management programmes in 14 countries. This third interactive workshop of the NEA Forum on Stakeholder Confidence focused on key areas such as the social concerns at play in radioactive waste management, how these concerns can be addressed, and development opportunities for local communities. These proceedings provide a summary of the workshop, the full texts of the stakeholder presentations and detailed reports of the workshop discussions.

This study identifies key factors influencing the timing of high-level waste (HLW) disposal and examines how social acceptability, technical soundness, environmental responsibility and economic feasibility impact on national strategies for HLW management and disposal. Based on case study analyses, it also presents the strategic approaches adopted in a number of national policies to address public concerns and civil society requirements regarding long-term stewardship of high-level radioactive waste. The findings and conclusions of the study confirm the importance of informing all stakeholders and involving them in the decision-making process in order to implement HLW disposal strategies successfully.

Canadian nuclear waste management policy has taken a deliberative democratic turn. What explains this turn? What is its significance? What lessons does it teach us? I trace a narrative of a powerful discursive coalition that was able to take advantage of institutional and financial opportunities to advance deliberative democratic decision making. I identify limitations in this turn by evaluating the Nuclear Waste Management Organization's subsequent consultation process against the criteria of inclusion, equality, reciprocity, agreement, and integration. Despite impressive deliberative democratic designs, the process falls short of each criterion. This analysis clarifies the relative importance of actors to coalitions and institutions. Even with a strong coalition and favorable institutional context, realizing deliberative democracy is contingent on the will of involved actors. This conclusion has implications for the theory and practice of deliberative democracy.

This paper reviews briefly the history of Canada's civilian nuclear energy program and the consideration of the problem of long-term disposal of nuclear waste. It shows that, after a period of twenty years of initial official deliberations on this problem, the decision making process foundered in the face of a specific dilemma: how to include, within an integrated assessment framework, both \"technical\" (expert judgment) and \"social\" (public acceptability) considerations. It argues that an expanded risk management framework, illustrated below, now provides such a framework: Science ↔ (1) Risk Management ↔ (2) Public Policy Interface (1): Risk Assessment Risk Control Risk Mitigation Interface (2): Public Perception of Risk Risk Acceptability Public Trust The remainder of the paper reviews and comments on a decision making exercise, carried out in Canada in the year 2004, and using a method known as multiattribute utility analysis (MAU), that provided a new approach to the issue of the management of nuclear waste. It argues that the MAU method has some distinctive advantages, over earlier approaches, where intrinsically controversial risk management situations are concerned.