The Legacy of Nuclear Power

Blowers, Andrew

doi:10.4324/9781315770048

Cited by 45 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Radioactive waste has been part of the history of west Cumbria for a generation and the local memory of controversies about GDF siting did influence local publics' views on the MRWS strategy, regardless of the UK government presenting it as new and voluntary (Bickerstaff, 2012;Blowers, 2017). It was the controversy erupting around the previous GD programme that prompted the policy rethink resulting in the MRWS strategy.…”

Section: Historically Entwined -Geological Disposal Of Radioactive Wamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this study we do not inquire about the activities of opponents of geological disposal, as such or in the locality, because there are numerous, incisive academic studies of anti-geological disposal activism in the UK and elsewhere, see for exampleBlowers (2017).5 The other organisations involved in the MRWS process maintained their own websites in that period, but have now removed them or changed their content. The version of CoRWM discussed in this paper has left a faint trail at http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/*/http://www.corwm.org.uk/.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Power of Place

Landström

Kemp²

2020

S&TS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Investigating the role of geographical location in public engagement with science we examine the West Cumbria Managing Radioactive Waste Safely (MRWS) Partnership’s undertaking of one of the most extensive local public engagements with environmental risk science in the UK. The case study highlights the transformative impacts of this three-year long local engagement on both science and the public. Differently from other invited public engagements, organised as experiments controlled by scientists in spaces set aside from the everyday, the Partnership’s lay members led a process unfolding in the place that was potentially at risk. The Partnership had the authority to demand that scientists addressed issues of local interest. We frame the analysis with the notions ‘re-situating technoscience' and ‘re-assembling the public' to illuminate how scientific knowledge claims were modified and a new local public emerged, at the intersection of public engagement with science and public participation in environmental risk governance.

show abstract

Section: Historically Entwined -Geological Disposal Of Radioactive Wamentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Power of Place

Landström

Kemp²

2020

S&TS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Let us first focus on a distinction between different types of nuclear communities and why this distinction matters for understanding public acceptance. Blowers (1999Blowers ( , 2003Blowers ( , 2016 argues that nuclear communities reflect the mechanisms that produce social, environmental and political inequality, and these inequalities should be redressed to ensure acceptable or long-lasting decision-making. Other site typologies have been proposed (Di Nucci and Brunnengr€ aber 2017), but we follow Blowers' thinking as it includes the idea of the changing (or degeneration) of the relationship with the nuclear industry, which we find important in such a long-term project.…”

Section: Nuclear Communities and Justice: Blowers' Nuclear Oases And mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The case of Finland's second repository for SNF allows us to compare perceptions of justice in two different types of municipalities, which differ in terms of their respective developmental stages as nuclear communities. Our conceptual framework is in part based on Blowers' (1999Blowers' ( , 2003Blowers' ( , 2016) thesis on nuclear communities, which builds on the inequality of the relationship between the industry and the host community. Blowers (2016, 229) argues that the nuclear communities 'have a moral claim on society for bearing a burden that others are happy not to carry.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptions of justice influencing community acceptance of spent nuclear fuel disposal. A case study in two Finnish nuclear communities

Vilhunen

Kojo

Litmanen

et al. 2019

Journal of Risk Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Final disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) from nuclear power plants (NPPs) is an ethical issue with implications within and across generations. We address this issue from the perspective of nuclear communities that host nuclear waste disposal sites. These are primarily the communities that face injustice due to the potential radiological risks. A resident survey (n ¼ 454) was conducted in two Finnish nuclear communities, i.e. Eurajoki and Pyh€ ajoki, that are being considered as alternative sites for a second repository for SNF. The nuclear waste management (NWM) company Posiva is already building a repository in Eurajoki, the first in Finland. These communities are in different stages of their lifecycles as nuclear communities. We investigated the residents' conceptions of justice and trust regarding the repository SNF management and its main actors, and how these conceptions related to acceptance of the repository. The main findings show that residents of both communities perceived intragenerational and intergenerational injustices to be important in the procedures and the distribution of risks and benefits of the proposed repository. Claims regarding justice and trust were related to the acceptance of the repository. The community with the longer history with NWM expressed greater mistrust and perceived greater procedural injustice than the community with less earlier experience, whichin turnexpressed more concern over intragenerational distributive justice than the former community. Moreover, having longer history with NWM did not lead to a different understanding regarding responsibility toward future generations as resident's in both communities expressed similar concern over intergenerational justice. Moreover, having more experience of NWM did not enhance local acceptance. We emphasize that these results should be understood in the light of the prevailing situation in Finland, where the planning of the second repository is at a very early stage.

show abstract

“…Blowers and Leroy (1994) note that socio-political processes can be just as salient in conditioning where chemical plants, power stations, waste disposal facilities, and other major infrastructures are located. Blowers and Leroy (1994) and Blowers (1999Blowers ( , 2010Blowers ( , 2017 advance a concept of peripheralisation to explain how socially peripheral communities come to adopt LULU infrastructure. Drawing primarily from cases involving nuclear waste, their theory suggests that peripheral communities tend to be:…”

Section: Background and Conceptual Approach: Disempowerment And Peripmentioning

confidence: 99%