Sociology and Political Science; Philosophy; Social Sciences (miscellaneous); Anthropology; opening up; closing down; closing up; expert analysis; public participation; decision-making process; radioactive waste management; comparative analysis; mutation; politics; science and technology studies; efficacy paradox; democratizing technology; participatory turn; appraisals; commitments; power asymmetry; reversibility; retrievability; adaptive phase management; Canada; France
Abstract :
[en] It is well established in science and technology studies that participation and expert analysis should not be seen as contradictory. Key analytical questions include how both public and expert knowledge contribute to “closing down” and “opening up” appraisals and commitments, and how important these dynamics are in assessing the process and the conditions of democratizing technology. This article examines how the participatory turn has affected nuclear waste governance options in France and Canada. Through cross-case analysis, it describes how at each constitutive step of management programs, public and expert knowledge has followed a variety of pathways in (in)forming commitments, resulting in asymmetrical trade-offs. The term “closing up commitment” is introduced to refer to the way both national governments finally opted for closing the technological options at hand while introducing new conditions that might challenge future actions. We argue that paying attention to this mutation in nuclear governance allows for a more detailed analysis of power distributions in science and technology governance than a critical approach that rejects any closure because it can be (and often is) the result of an instrumental approach undertaken by the incumbent actors.
Research center :
Spiral Research Center Cité - ULiège Department of Science and Technology Studies
Disciplines :
Political science, public administration & international relations Law, criminology & political science: Multidisciplinary, general & others Engineering, computing & technology: Multidisciplinary, general & others
Macq, Hadrien ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de science politique ; Department of Science and Technology Studies, Technical University of Munich, Germany
AECL (Atomic Energy Canada Limited). 1978. Management of Radioactive Fuel Wastes: The Canadian Disposal Program. AECL Report 6314. Report prepared and edited by Boulton J.. Pinawa, Canada: Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment.
AECL (Atomic Energy Canada Limited). 1994. Environmental Impact Statement on the Concept for Disposal of Canada’s Nuclear Fuel Waste. AECL-10711, COG-93-1. Pinawa, Canada: AECL.
Aiken A. M. Harrison J. M. Hare F. K.. 1977. The Management of Canada’s Nuclear Wastes. EMR Report EP 77-6. Report of a study prepared under contract for the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources Canada. Ottawa, Canada: EMR.
Barthe Yannick. 2002. “Rendre Discutable. Le Traitement Politique d’un Héritage Technologique.” Politix 15: 57–78. doi: 10.3406/polix.2002.1207.
Barthe Yannick. 2006. Le Pouvoir d’indécision. La Mise En Politique Des Déchets Nucléaires. Paris, France: Economica.
Barthe Yannick. 2009. “Framing Nuclear Waste as a Political Issue in France.” Journal of Risk Research 12: 941–54. doi: 10.1080/13669870903126119.
Bergmans Anne Sundqvist Göran Kos Drago Simmons Peter. 2014. “The Participatory Turn in Radioactive Waste Management: Deliberation and the Social–Technical Divide.” Journal of Risk Research 18: 347–63. doi: 10.1080/13669877.2014.971335.
Blok Anders. 2007. “Experts on Public Trial: On Democratizing Expertise through a Danish Consensus Conference.” Public Understanding of Science 16: 163–82. doi: 10.1177/0963662507062469.
Brunnengräber Achim Nucci Maria Rosaria Di, eds. 2019. Conflicts, Participation and Acceptability in Nuclear Waste Governance: An International Comparison Volume III. Energiepolitik Und Klimaschutz. Energy Policy and Climate Protection. Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-27107-7.
Brunnengräber Achim Nucci Maria Rosaria Di Losada Ana Maria Mez Lutz Schreurs Miranda. 2015. Nuclear Waste Governance. An International Comparison. Energiepolitik Und Klimaschutz. Energy Policy and Climate Protection. Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
CEAA (Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency). 1998. Report of the Nuclear Fuel Waste Management and Disposal Concept Environmental Assessment Panel. No. EN-106-30/1. Ottawa, Canada: Public Works and Government Services Canada.
CEN (Commission d’Evaluation Nationale). 1995. Rapport d’évaluation N°1. Commission Nationale d’Évaluation relative aux recherches sur la gestion des déchets radioactifs institués par la loi 91-1381 du 30 décembre 1991, 178.
CEN (Commission d’Evaluation Nationale). 2006. Rapport global d’évaluation des recherches conduites dans le cadre de la loi du 30 décembre 1991. Commission Nationale d’Évaluation des recherches sur la gestion des déchets radioactifs instituée par l’article L542 du Code de l’environnement issu de la loi no 91-1381 du 30 décembre 1991, 38.
Chilvers Jason Burgess Jacquelin. 2008. “Power Relations: The Politics of Risk and Procedure in Nuclear Waste Governance.” Environment and Planning A 40 (8): 1881–900. doi: 10.1068/a40334.
Durant Darrin. 2009. “Radwaste in Canada: A Political Economy of Uncertainty.” Journal of Risk Research 12: 897–919. doi: 10.1080/13669870903126127.
Durant Darrin Stanley Anna. 2009. “An Official Narrative: Telling the History of Canada’s Nuclear Waste Management Policy Making.” In Nuclear Waste Management in Canada: Critical Issues, Critical Perspectives, edited by Durant Darrin Fuji Johnson G., 31–51. Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press.
Ely Adrian Zwanenberg Patrick Van Stirling Andy. 2014. “Broadening Out and Opening Up Technology Assessment: Approaches to Enhance International Development, Co-ordination and Democratisation.” Research Policy 43: 505–18. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.09.004.
Fiorino Daniel J. 1990. “Citizen Participation and Environmental Risk: A Survey of Institutional Mechanisms.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 15 (2): 226–43. doi: 10.1177/016224399001500204.
Harrison Stephen Mort Maggie. 1998. “Which Champions, Which People? Public and User Involvement in Health Care as a Technology of Legitimation.” Social Policy & Administration 32 (1): 60–70. doi: 10.1111/1467-9515.00086.
Hecht Gabrielle. 2002. “Rupture-talk in the Nuclear Age: Conjugating Colonial Power in Africa.” Social Studies of Science 32 (5-6): 691–727.
Ialenti Vincent. 2021 “Drum Breach: Operational Temporalities, Error Politics and WIPP’s Kitty Litter Nuclear Waste Accident.” Social Studies of Science 51(3): 364–391.
Irwin Alan Jensen Torben Elgaard Jones Kevin E.. 2012. “The Good, the Bad and the Perfect: Criticizing Engagement Practice.” Social Studies of Science 43 (1): 118–35.
Jasanoff Sheila. 2004. States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and the Social Order. London, UK: Routledge.
Jasanoff Sheila. 2012. Science and Public Reason. Edited by Routledge. Science in Society Series. Oxon, NY: Routledge.
Jensen Casper Bruun. 2005. “Citizen Projects and Consensus-building at the Danish Board of Technology: On Experiments in Democracy.” Acta Sociologica 48 (September): 221–35. doi: 10.1177/0001699305056564.
Johnson Genevieve F. 2007. “The Discourse of Democracy in Canadian Nuclear Waste Management Policy.” Policy Sciences 40: 79–99.
Kemp René Parto Saeed. Gibson Robert B.. 2005. “Governance for Sustainable Development: Moving from Theory to Practice.” International Journal of Sustainable Development 8: 12–30.
Latour Bruno. 1996. Aramis, or the Love of Technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lehtonen Markku. 2010. “Opening up or Closing Down Radioactive Waste Management Policy? Debates on Reversibility and Retrievability in Finland, France, and the United Kingdom.” Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy 1: 139–79. doi: 10.2202/1944-4079.1044.
Lehtonen Markku. 2015. “Megaproject Underway. Governance of Nuclear Waste Management in France.” In Nuclear Waste Governance. An International Comparison, edited by Brunnengräber Achim Nucci Maria Rosaria Di Losada Ana Maria Mez Lutz Schreurs Miranda, 117–38. Berlin, Germany: Springer VS.
Masco Joseph. 2004. “Mutant Ecologies: Radioactive Life in Post–Cold War New Mexico.” Cultural Anthropology 19(4): 517–50.
Masco Joseph. 2006. The Nuclear Borderlands. The Manhattan Project in Post–Cold War New Mexico. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Mercadal Georges Boullier Dominique Ceccaldi Paula Darras Jean-Claude Guillaumont Robert Schapira Jean-Paul Vourch Catherine. 2006. Compte-Rendu Du Débat Public Sur Les Options Générales En Matière de Gestion Des Déchets Radioactifs de Haute Activité et de Moyenne Activité à Vie Longue. Septembre 2005—Janvier 2006. CPDP de gestion des déchets radioactifs. Paris, France: CPDP, 110.
NWMO (Nuclear Waste Management Organization). 2005a. Choosing a Way Forward. The Future Management of Canada’s Used Nuclear Fuel (Final Study) [Report]. Toronto, Canada: NWMO.
NWMO (Nuclear Waste Management Organization). 2005b. From Dialogue to Decision: Managing Canada’s Nuclear Fuel Waste [Annual report]. Toronto, Canada: NWMO.
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) and NEA (Nuclear Energy Agency). 2012. “Reversibility and Retrievability in Planning for Geological Disposal of Radioactive Waste.” Proceedings of the “R&R” International Conference and Dialogue, December 14–17, 2010 [NEA No. 6993]. Reims, France: OECD NEA. ISBN 978-92-64-99185-9.
OPECST (Office parlementaire d’évaluation des choix scientifiques et technologiques). 1990. Rapport Sur La Gestion Des Déchets Nucléaires à Haute Activité Déposé Le 14 Décembre 1990 Par M. Christian Bataille, Député. Paris, France: OPECST, 367.
OPECST (Office parlementaire d’évaluation des choix scientifiques et technologiques). 1996. Rapport sur l’évolution de la recherche sur la gestion des déchets nucléaires à haute activité, tome I: les déchets civils, déposé le 27 mars 1996 par le Député Christian Bataille. Paris, France: OPECST, 124.
OPECST (Office parlementaire d’évaluation des choix scientifiques et technologiques). 2005. Rapport sur l’avancement et les perspectives des recherches sur la gestion des déchets radioactifs, déposé le 16 mars 2005 par MM. Christian Bataille et Claude Birraux, députés. Paris, France: OPECST, 341.
Parotte Céline. 2018. L’art de gouverner les déchets hautement radioactifs. Liège, Belgium: Sciences, technologies et société, Presses Universitaires de Liège.
Parotte Céline Delvenne Pierre. 2015. “Taming Uncertainty: Towards a New Governance Approach for Nuclear Waste Management in Belgium.” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 27(8): 1–13. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2015.1044429.
Parotte Céline Delvenne Pierre. 2018. “Co-produced Legitimacies: Parliamentary Technology Assessment and Nuclear Waste Management in France.” Science and Public Policy. 45 (6): 853–62.
Pestre Dominique. 2014. “Du Gouvernement Du Progrès Technique et de Ses Effets.” In Le Gouvernement Des Technosciences. Gouverner Le Progrès et Ses Dégâts Depuis 1945, edited by Pestre Dominique, 7–30. Paris, France: La Découverte.
Prins Baukje. 1995. “The Ethics of Hybrid Subjects: Feminist Constructivism According to Donna Haraway.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 20(3): 352–67.
Rabinow Paul. 1999. French DNA: Trouble in Purgatory. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Smith Adrian Stirling Andy. 2007. “Moving Outside or Inside? Objectification and Reflexivity in the Governance of Socio-Technical Systems.” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 9 (September): 351–73. doi: 10.1080/15239080701622873.
Smith Adrian Stirling Andy Berkhout Frans. 2005. “The Governance of Sustainable Socio-Technical Transitions.” Research Policy 34: 1491–510. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.07.005.
Stirling Andy. 2006. “Analysis, Participation and Power: Justification and Closure in Participatory Multi-criteria Analysis.” Land Use Policy 23: 95–107. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.010.
Stirling Andy. 2008. “‘Opening Up’ and ‘Closing Down’ Power, Participation, and Pluralism in the Social Appraisal of Technology.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 33: 262–94.
Sundqvist Gran Elam Mark. 2010. “Public Involvement Designed to Circumvent Public Concern? The ‘Participatory Turn’ in European Nuclear Activities.” Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy 1(4): 198–224. doi.org/10.2202/1944-4079.1046.
Timmerman Peter. 2009. “The Long Haul: Ethics in the Canadian Nuclear Waste Debate.” In Nuclear Waste Management in Canada: Critical Issues, Critical Perspectives, edited by UBC Press, 52–68. Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press.
Topçu Sezin. 2013. La France nucléaire. L’art de gouverner une technologie contestée. Paris, France: Seuil.
Voß Jan-Peter Kemp René Bauknecht Dierk. 2006. “Reflexive Governance: A View on an Emerging Path.” In Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development, edited by Voß J.-P. Bauknecht D. Kemp R., 419–37. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Wilsdon James Willis Rebecca. 2004. See-through Science: Why Public Engagement Needs to Move Upstream. London: Demos.
Wynne Brian. 2007. “Public Participation in Science and Technology: Performing and Obscuring a Political-conceptual Category Mistake.” East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal 1(1): 99–110. doi: 10.1007/s12280-007-9004-7.
