Case Studies Reports: In-Depth Understanding of the Mechanisms for Effective Interaction with Civil Society : Selected Case Studies
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
This is a repository copy of Case studies reports: in-depth understanding of the mechanisms for effective interaction with civil society : selected case studies. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/140388/ Version: Published Version Monograph: Espluga, Josep, Medina, Beatriz, Konrad, Wilifred et al. (8 more authors) (2018) Case studies reports: in-depth understanding of the mechanisms for effective interaction with civil society : selected case studies. Research Report. European Commision Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs (CC BY-ND) licence. This licence allows for redistribution, commercial and non-commercial, as long as it is passed along unchanged and in whole, with credit to the original authors. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Ref. Ares(2018)2779818 - 29/05/2018 D4.3: CASE STUDIES REPORTS: IN-DEPTH UNDERSTANDING OF THE MECHANISMS FOR EFFECTIVE INTERACTION WITH CIVIL SOCIETY: SELECTED CASE STUDIES WP leader: UAB (updated March 2018) Authors: Josep Espluga (UAB), Beatriz Medina (UAB), Wilfried Konrad (DIALOGIK) Co-Authors: Anne Bergmans (UANTWERPEN), Ioan Charnley-Parry (UCLan), Pieter Cools (UNANTWERPEN) Matthew Cotton (USFD), Ann Enander (FHS), Jan-Henrik Meyer (UCPH), Gene Rowe (GRE), John Whitton (UCLan) 1 D4.3 : Case studies reports: in-depth understanding of the mechanisms for effective interaction with civil society: selected case studies PARTNERS 1 D4.3 : Case studies reports: in-depth understanding of the mechanisms for effective interaction with civil society: selected case studies CAVEAT Following the HoNESt research approach, the empirical basis of this deliverable consists of the so-called ‘short country reports’ (SCR) produced by HoNESt historians that are experts of the history of nuclear energy in a specific country. The aim of social science research in HoNESt Work Package 4 is to analyse these reports in terms of perception and engagement. In this process we are only occasionally able to refer to original references since these are usually not accessible e.g. for language reasons. Given this, it is all the more important to mention that, at this stage, these ‘short country reports’ are still in a draft status and not yet approved by the EC. 2 D4.3 : Case studies reports: in-depth understanding of the mechanisms for effective interaction with civil society: selected case studies PREFACE This document Deliverable 4.3 ‘Case studies reports: in-depth understanding of the mechanisms for effective interaction with civil society: selected case studies’ is an update – in response to the HoNESt midterm review – of the previous version of D4.3 which was submitted in March 2017. The revision consists of four elements: 1. Update of country studies: The first issue of D4.3 had to be based on preliminary versions of HoNESt historians short country reports. In the meantime, the final draft versions of these reports are available, which offered the opportunity to amend D4.3 social science country studies in the light of the latest versions of the short country reports which, however, are not yet approved by the EC. 2. USA country study: Following the emphasis put on US nuclear developments by the midterm review, D4.3 will be enhanced by an additional country study analysing the US case. 3. State of the art: In order to improve the theoretical framework and the justification of the analytical dimensions, an extensive literature review has been done to detail the state of the art regarding public perception and engagement in nuclear issues. 4. Completing the in-depth analysis: In the first version of this report, only the phase of classification of the information could be presented (due to the lack of data in the first SCRs versions). Now, however, in the light of the complete reports, it has already been possible to carry out the complete analysis, making connections between variables and dimensions, and testing the working hypotheses arising from the literature review and the proposed theoretical framework.. 3 D4.3 : Case studies reports: in-depth understanding of the mechanisms for effective interaction with civil society: selected case studies EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This deliverable (D4.3) summarizes the key findings from the selected case studies of the HoNESt project in terms of societal perception and societal engagement. Reports from eight countries were selected from a total of twenty, according to the following key criteria: geography (location), political system evolution, and degree of public acceptance. The completed analysis reveals a broad overview of how actors have perceived nuclear developments over the past decades, and which types of engagement tools and mechanisms have been used in each case studied. According to our theoretical proposal, the perception of nuclear energy is composed of four dimensions: health & environment, economics, socio-cultural, and political-institutional. In each specific case, these dimensions may have different weights in their influence on the opinions, attitudes, or behaviours of the population and of the promoters and public authorities. In this way, we not only distinguish between proponents or opponents of nuclear energy, but are able to identify the specific dimensions that underlie actors’ support or rejection of nuclear technologies. This will allow us to better explain the frequent ambivalences related to nuclear developments. Additionally, the relationships between the four analytical dimensions are not linear. Our analysis is based on the assumption that nuclear energy is a technology with different degrees of public acceptance in different countries, depending on the perceived risks and benefits (which are mostly included in the health & environment and economic dimensions). These risks and benefits depend on the social trust of the institutions in charge of managing and/or regulating it (political- institutional dimension), all of which are a function of a series of socio-cultural factors generated by the social climate over time (socio-cultural dimension). The analysis demonstrates that the perceived risks and benefits are very similar in all the countries sampled. The most frequently mentioned risks are those related to the possibility of accidents and radiation contamination; in both cases these include damages or losses that may affect human health or the environment (especially aquatic, fluvial or marine environments). There are also concerns about the safety of nuclear facilities, as well as references to episodes of stress and anxiety in some people when confronted by the possibility of such risks materializing. 4 D4.3 : Case studies reports: in-depth understanding of the mechanisms for effective interaction with civil society: selected case studies A majority of the references to health and environmental concerns related to nuclear power were reported in the period 1970-1990, although some references can also be found in other periods. In all the countries studied, there are actors who argue that nuclear energy will bring benefits of different types, including: economic benefits (jobs, socioeconomic development, inexpensive electricity and/or a guarantee of energy supply), environmental benefits (to a lesser extent), and even benefits to human health (i.e., medical helthy uses, as reported in Michelsen & Harjula, 2017). Regarding these benefits, changes can be small and are observed over time, specifically with respect to environmental benefits. In the first two phases (1950-1970 and 1970-1990), some actors talk about the positive environmental impacts of nuclear energy production. These include temperature increases that could favour certain ecosystems and economic activities (i.e. advantatges for the farmers of the touristic destinations, as said in the Spanish case, in Rubio- Varas et al., 2017) and the fact that nuclear energy produces less pollution than other industries (as said in the Swedish report, in Kaijser 2017). However, since 1990, there are no more references of this type; and instead, more is spoken about the benefits of nuclear energy in the fight against climate change. So, although the perceived risks and perceived benefits are very similar in all the countries studied, the social and institutional responses are very different. In order to give an answer to this enigma we first need to understand how people perceive their relationships with institutions (social trust, or what we have considered here as the political-institutional dimensions), as well as what kind of socio-cultural factors are part of the context in which the nuclear technology is perceived. According to our analysis, the main political-institutional factors identified in the SCRs shaping social trust are the following: - Low institutional trustworthiness, which draws attention to the fact that the behaviours of the institutions in charge of managing or regulating nuclear energy have been perceived as not worthy of trust by certain social sectors. In the SCR there are many examples of these types of behaviours generating mistrust. 5 D4.3 : Case studies reports: in-depth understanding of the mechanisms for effective interaction with civil