Background

Decision-making processes can be optimised across the whole spectrum of nuclear and radiation-related policy, regulation and practice. Although the term is defined in different ways, optimisation has always been a fundamental concept in decision making across all sectors of activities and daily lives in societies and communities. However, the way decisions are taken has changed in recent years. Societal considerations towards nuclear-related activities have evolved to promote more holistic, inclusive and sustainable decision-making perspectives, addressing the need to integrate many diverse aspects and stakeholder^[1] views (notably civil society) towards balanced and ‘optimised’ (i.e. better) decisions.

The NEA has played a pioneering role by encouraging these developments through a number of workshops over the past years to shed light on the complex topic of stakeholder involvement and the concept of optimisation in the policy context. This included the first two editions of the NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop Stakeholder Involvement in Nuclear Decision Making (2017) and Risk Communication - Towards a Shared Understanding of Radiological Risks (2019). Other relevant workshops included the joint NEA and Norwegian Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (DSA) workshop Regulatory Framework of Decommissioning, Legacy Sites and Wastes from Recognition to Resolution: Building Optimization into the Process (2019), the NEA workshops Optimisation: Rethinking the Art of the Reasonable (2020), and Multifactor Optimisation of Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste (2020).

The conclusions of these events established that while optimisation is a crucial aspect in decision making, there is no common understanding across different fields in the nuclear sector of what an ‘optimised’ decision implies. A key aspect identified in this context was the involvement of stakeholders, and especially civil society, in the decision-making process. Clear room for improvement, more transparency and more inclusiveness with regard to stakeholder involvement was outlined, as well as the lack of a robust framework in this context. While an optimised decision depends largely on the prevailing circumstances in which the decision is taken, a need for generic guidance in the implementation of more holistic, inclusive and sustainable decision-making processes was identified. Better cross-sector communication was highlighted as one approach to optimise decisions and appropriately consider and balance their societal, health, environmental, and economic impacts. The Third NEA Stakeholder Involvement Workshop will be an important step towards generating key considerations that allow for a common approach to decision-making processes across the different fields in the nuclear sector[2] and across the NEA member countries. This will support the objectives outlined in the new NEA Strategic Plan 2023-2028.

As societies aim to meet the Sustainable Development Goals adopted by the United Nations, there is a growing need for more holistic, inclusive, and sustainable decision-making processes accounting for national/cultural contexts and complex interplay between economic, environmental, health and societal aspects. In this global framework, humans and their social interactions are essential and approaches to stakeholder involvement in decision making must, more than ever, reflect experience, cultural diversity and country-specific features. The ultimate goal is to reach a sustainable, transparent and widely accepted decision-making process. The latter should balance different factors and risks, depending on the prevailing circumstances that describe a situation of concern, with a view to identifying the optimal solution or solutions for all stakeholders and society as a whole.

In other words, decisions should no longer be narrowly based on limited aspects and number of views or one specific sector. This applies to all kinds of currently existing decision-making processes and contexts. Inclusive and deliberative approaches to the assessment of decision options and the management of their multiple consequences could enable a holistic view of governance and make it a mutual learning process in which policy makers, regulators, industry, practitioners, implementers, experts, and civil society, as individuals or as view-oriented groups can learn and also contribute.

_{[1] In addition to policy makers and regulators (e.g., safety authorities), stakeholders include but are not limited to (representatives of): elected governmental officials; civil society; Indigenous peoples; NGOs (including environmental groups); academic community; media; public opinion builders; businesses and industry (workers, unions, suppliers, professional associations, etc.); and the international community (including neighbouring countries) (adapted from IAEA, 2021 “Stakeholder Engagement in Nuclear Programmes” and NEA, 2021 “Towards a Shared Understanding of Radiological Risks”). More broadly speaking, a stakeholder is “any group or individual who feels affected by an activity, whether physically or emotionally”. This can be “organisations and groups that are statutory stakeholders — those required by law to be involved in any planning, development or operation of a nuclear project — as well as non-statutory stakeholders — those who have an interest in or will be directly or indirectly impacted” (IAEA, Nuclear Communicator’s Toolbox) .}

_{[2] Here specifically the areas covered under the NEA Strategic Plan, i.e., Nuclear Safety Technology and Regulation; Humans Aspects of Nuclear Safety; Nuclear Science and Economics; Nuclear Law; Radiological Protection of People and the Environment; Radioactive Waste and Spent Fuel Management; Nuclear Decommissioning and Legacy Management.}