Research on high‐level nuclear waste management has focused on technical and scientific issues since the U.S. National Academy of Sciences first studied the problem in the mid‐1950s and recommended long‐term disposal in deep salt formations. In this review, we trace the development of the problem's definition and its associated research since socioeconomic, political, and policy issues were first given consideration and nuclear waste management became recognized as more than a technical problem. Three somewhat overlapping time periods can be identified. First, from the mid‐1970s to the early 1980s, initial research explored institutional dimensions of nuclear waste, among other subjects, while several countries attempted to officially solve the problem. The second period began in the early 1980s with a concerted effort to site nuclear waste repositories, and ended in the mid‐1990s with some progress in Sweden, Finland, and the United States, and general stalemate elsewhere. This period accelerated research on risk perception and stigma of nuclear waste, and elevated a focus on public trust. Special attention was given to repository siting conflicts in particular. The last period, since the mid‐1990s, has been characterized by failure and continuing political stalemate, with the major exception of Scandinavia, and increased attention to public participation, political systems, and international solutions. Questions of ethics have been given serious attention, while research on risk perceptions and siting conflicts continues. Thus, we see some signs of progress toward final disposal. We frame these periods in a broader context of the shifting role of applied social scientists. The paper concludes with a general discussion of this research area and prospects for future research.

No abstract

This paper outlines the evolution of the global public policy debate concerning the management and disposal of used nuclear fuel, with particular attention to the central points of contention that have shaped that debate. Utilizing the experience in Sweden and the U.S., we provide a frame for the application of a diverse range of social science perspectives (including law) to the used nuclear fuel policy debate, and introduce a set of papers that apply those perspectives.

No abstract

Modernist theories of development and democratization predicted that secularization would lead to the disappearance of religion. This has not happened. But contemporary democratic states are secular and define religion as a private matter. At the same time, a politics of recognizing religiosity is deeply rooted in the modern state, and it is obvious that intangible values play an important role and have a valid claim to public spaces. On the metaphorical agora, the square that constitutes the middle ground between the cathedral and the parliament, commitment born in the cathedral is transformed into rational arguments that can be presented in parliament. But who governs the square? Do spiritual values need a public defence? Can or should all religious commitments and expressions be transformed into profane arguments? How could public spaces be designed and maintained to promote peaceful mediations between profane, sacred and other principled commitments? By assembling artistic and academic thinkers who do not confine themselves to intellectual analysis, but demand our involvement and our realization that we are part of the processes we are considering, this Focus contributes to a discussion of religiosity and public spaces in post-secular societies.