In the past decade, human influence on the climate through increased use of fossil fuels has become widely acknowledged as one of the most pressing issues for the global community. For the United Kingdom, we suggest that these concerns have increasingly become manifest in a new strand of political debate around energy policy, which reframes nuclear power as part of the solution to the need for low-carbon energy options. A mixed-methods analysis of citizen views of climate change and radioactive waste is presented, integrating focus group data and a nationally representative survey. The data allow us to explore how UK citizens might now and in the future interpret and make sense of this new framing of nuclear power--which ultimately centers on a risk-risk trade-off scenario. We use the term "reluctant acceptance" to describe how, in complex ways, many focus group participants discursively re-negotiated their position on nuclear energy when it was positioned alongside climate change. In the concluding section of the paper, we reflect on the societal implications of the emerging discourse of new nuclear build as a means of delivering climate change mitigation and set an agenda for future research regarding the (re)framing of the nuclear energy debate in the UK and beyond.

Does stakeholder involvement really benefit biodiversity conservation?Contact CEH NORA team at noraceh@ceh.ac.ukThe NERC and CEH trademarks and logos ('the Trademarks') are registered trademarks of NERC in the UK and other countries, and may not be used without the prior written consent of the Trademark owner. consider making processes more independent, and acknowledge and address underlying 42 biodiversity conflicts. The findings also emphasise the need to evaluate multi-level 43 conservation efforts in terms of processes, social outcomes and biodiversity outcomes. 44 45

Jordan, Andrew. 2016. The role of trust in the resolution of conservation conflicts.Contact CEH NORA team at noraceh@ceh.ac.ukThe NERC and CEH trademarks and logos ('the Trademarks') are registered trademarks of NERC in the UK and other countries, and may not be used without the prior written consent of the Trademark owner.

Building upon a detailed empirical analysis of the local understanding of hazards in one geographical area, in this paper we offer a critique of both the psychometric and 'risk society' approaches to the relationship between lay and scientific groups. Specifically, we explore the connection between lay understandings of risk and the contexts of their development and application with regard to one industrial hazard site in northeast England. Rather than presenting local knowledges as fixed or separable from cultural practices and social worldviews, we examine the relational and active construction of environmental understandings-noting the significance of such factors as local memory, observation and evidence, definitions of expertise, risk and credibility, and moral discourses. The paper concludes with a discussion of the relationship between knowledge, understanding, and context. We also consider the wider significance of this case study both for environmental policy and for more theoretical treatments of science and its publics. p

The paper examines the ways in which citizens negotiate responsibility in relation to various environmental and technological risks. It focuses on the role of agency and the way that this figures in constructions of relations of responsibility between individuals and institutions. A central argument is that, across the different issue contexts, patterns of perceived agency are crucial to understanding the apparent contradiction in citizens' attributions of role-responsibilities for the management of risk. The empirical basis of the paper is a series of twelve reconvened focus groups conducted at locations around England, giving a total of twenty-four meetings, in which citizens discussed six different areas of technological risk: genetically modified (GM) crops, genetic testing, mobile-phone handsets; mobile-phone masts; radioactive waste; and climate change. The authors highlight the problem of citizen ambivalence towards responsibility, tracing it to perceived tensions affecting both citizen and state performances of responsibility, and conclude by discussing the implications for policy and by outlining an agenda for further research.