TY - JOUR
T1 - The process to find a process for governance
T2 - Nuclear waste management and consent-based siting in the United States
AU - Richter, Jennifer
AU - Bernstein, Michael J.
AU - Farooque, Mahmud
N1 - Funding Information:
We gratefully acknowledge support provided by the U.S. Department of Energy ( DOE0638102205 ) making this work possible. We thank the four anonymous reviewers whose detailed and constructive feedback helped us to improve this manuscript. Finally, we would also like to acknowledge the faculty, students, and staff at the ASU Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes (CSPO) and the forum staff at the Museum of Science Boston for key contributions to this research.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2022/5
Y1 - 2022/5
N2 - In 2013, the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) attempted to initiate a consent-based siting (CBS) approach to better engage diverse publics and thereby begin to remedy a legacy of technocratic decision-making and inequitable public engagement processes plaguing historical high-level nuclear waste siting efforts. DOE's remediation work included a contract with the Expert and Citizen Assessment of Science and Technology (ECAST) network to employ participatory technology assessment (pTA) to help co-create the CBS process with lay publics. In late 2016, the DOE terminated the process to develop a CBS process. To date, little in the public record explores DOE's novel foray into CBS. As researchers on DOE's aborted ECAST efforts, we situate the novel pTA process to create a CBS process amidst the technocratic political-historical context of commercial nuclear waste siting in the U.S. Lessons from ECAST's effort highlight persistent institutional barriers inhibiting U.S. capacity to more equitably approach the challenge of siting nuclear waste facilities. We identify the undermining consequences of DOE's focus on expediency; imposed limitations on the scope of CBS; bureaucratic obstacles to public input; a lack of continuity in values across executive administrations; and absence of top-level commitment to procedural and institutional learning, innovation, and adaptation. Through our case history and critical reflection, we aim to inform future efforts in the U.S. and beyond to overcome failed technocratic histories and instead steward participatory, equitable, and democratic processes to manage high-level nuclear waste.
AB - In 2013, the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) attempted to initiate a consent-based siting (CBS) approach to better engage diverse publics and thereby begin to remedy a legacy of technocratic decision-making and inequitable public engagement processes plaguing historical high-level nuclear waste siting efforts. DOE's remediation work included a contract with the Expert and Citizen Assessment of Science and Technology (ECAST) network to employ participatory technology assessment (pTA) to help co-create the CBS process with lay publics. In late 2016, the DOE terminated the process to develop a CBS process. To date, little in the public record explores DOE's novel foray into CBS. As researchers on DOE's aborted ECAST efforts, we situate the novel pTA process to create a CBS process amidst the technocratic political-historical context of commercial nuclear waste siting in the U.S. Lessons from ECAST's effort highlight persistent institutional barriers inhibiting U.S. capacity to more equitably approach the challenge of siting nuclear waste facilities. We identify the undermining consequences of DOE's focus on expediency; imposed limitations on the scope of CBS; bureaucratic obstacles to public input; a lack of continuity in values across executive administrations; and absence of top-level commitment to procedural and institutional learning, innovation, and adaptation. Through our case history and critical reflection, we aim to inform future efforts in the U.S. and beyond to overcome failed technocratic histories and instead steward participatory, equitable, and democratic processes to manage high-level nuclear waste.
KW - Consent-based siting
KW - Nuclear
KW - Nuclear energy
KW - Nuclear waste
KW - Participatory technology assessment
KW - Public engagement
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85122626926&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85122626926&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.erss.2021.102473
DO - 10.1016/j.erss.2021.102473
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85122626926
SN - 2214-6296
VL - 87
JO - Energy Research and Social Science
JF - Energy Research and Social Science
M1 - 102473
ER -