INTERNATIONAL SOCIO- TECHNICAL CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTING GD PROJECT OVERVIEW

Transcription

1 INTERNATIONAL SOCIO- TECHNICAL CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTING GD PROJECT OVERVIEW EURADISS workshop Montpellier 25-26/10/2012

2 A different governance project 2 In discussions on radioactive waste management (RWM) today, often there is still a strong distinction drawn between social and technical issues Work on social aspects has focused largely on activities concerning acceptance, communication, and public participation (on actors and processes) : Who should have the right to participate? How participation should be organized?

3 A different governance project 3 InSOTEC focuses on slightly different questions Drawing on work in the social studies of science and technology (STS), it starts from the proposition that social and technical processes are entangled, inextricably bound together Radioactive waste management is therefore a combined social and technical activity : GD as a solution is based on particular views on society, expectations of future evolutions, etc.

4 What is socio-technical? 4 An approach originating in STS: problematizing the dividing line between the social and the technical realms Study of socio-technical networks (ActorNetworkTheory) Complexity Whenever we talk about the "technical" the "social" is inevitably involved in some way Considering the social issues alongside the technical ones Political, ethical and legal contexts of technology Participation the "social" should also be considered (SOCIAL-AND- TECHNICAL)

5 Socio-technical issues 5 Social aspects of science and technology Social acceptability of technology Social shaping of technology Technical translation of socio-political requirements Technical feasibility of socio-political expectations and demands How technology shapes its environment

6 Socio-technical issues in RWM 6 Safety first but Different interpretations and perceptions of safety Varying solutions (even if basis is GD) Siting: principles, criteria, procedures Introducing reversibility in the concept of GD Monitoring for confidence building

7 Project Partners 7 Partner full name Short name Country code UNIVERSITEIT ANTWERPEN (coordinator) UA BE UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA (WP 1 leader) UEA UK OEKO-INSTITUT E.V.-INSTITUT FUER ANGEWANDTE OEKOLOGIE (WP 4 leader) OEKO DE GOETEBORGS UNIVERSITEIT UGOT SE CENTRE NATIONAL DE LA RECHERCHE SCIENTIFIQUE (WP 2 leader) CNRS FR MAGYAR TUDOMANYOS AKADEMIA SZOCIOLOGIAI KUTATOINTEZET MTA SKI HU GROUP OF EUROPEAN MUNICIPALITIES WITH NUCLEAR FACILITIES GMF ES TAMPEREEN YLIOPISTO UTA FI JYVASKYLAN YLIOPISTO JYU FI UNIVERZA V LJUBLJANI UL SI UNIVERZITA KARLOVA V PRAZE CUNI CZ MARTELL LAMOLLA MERITXELL (WP 3 leader) MERIENCE ES UNIVERSITETET I OSLO (WP 2 leader) UI NO

8 Work Plan WP5 WP6 WP7 Seminars Dissemination Management 8 Support Research WP2 Understanding socio-technical combinations: further analysis of specific topics ( ) WP4 Rounding up: final report and practical recommendations ( ) WP2 WP3 WP4 WP1 WP1 Drawing boundaries: what do we define as sociotechnical challenges? ( ) WP3 Socio-technical networks : interaction between producers and users of different forms of socio-technical knowledge ( )

9 Task 3.3 Interaction with technical projects 9 WHY? To explore with scientists and technical experts involved in other (FP7) projects the socio-political dimensions and implications of their work how they perceive this socio-technical entanglement Benefit for InSOTEC gaining further insight into socio-technical relations

10 Task 3.3 Interaction with technical projects 10 Benefit for the partners in the technical projects explore the potential implications of their work beyond the technical community reflect on social assumptions behind technical approaches gain insight into how to engage with outsiders on technical and safety issues and deal with outsider expectations

11 Task 3.3 Practical 11 Mini-workshop Proposition: half-day seminar (3 to 4 hours) in conjunction with scheduled project meetings But open to other suggestions Possible timeframe: Dec 2012 Dec 2013 Feedback to the projects involved Report Joint discussion at InSOTEC seminar or EURADWASTE conference (October 2013)

12 Outline of Mini-Workshop with MoDeRn 12 Discuss examples of socio-technical combinations and boundary work in repository development (focus on role of monitoring) What does socio-technical mean to you? Personal and secondary experience with boundary work Examples of incorporation of S&T Examples of direct benefits? Examples of adverse effects? Examples of explicitly maintaining (or trying / pretending to maintain) a separation between S&T?

13 Outline of Mini-Workshop with MoDeRn 13 How society impacts R&D programmes What influences and how? Consequences for R&D programmes (national level / international (IGD-TP) /? How to capture societal expectations and demands [with regard to R(D)&D]? Who (and how) to make judgement in case of conflicting demands?

14 More Info 14 Project coordinator: Website: Open seminar to communicate project progress and intermediary results: October 2013 (Berlin)