Paper short abstract:

This paper compares how critical publics have been integrated in institutionalized nuclear waste management processes in Canada, Belgium and France. Findings reveal a common ‘closing up’ strategy to move forward with nuclear wastes.

Paper long abstract:

Since so-called participatory turn from the 90s onwards, Canadian, Belgian and French nuclear establishments (Durant 2009) have developed different strategies to involve publics at each constitutive steps of the siting process of nuclear wastes management. Each country has had its own dynamics managed by different actors (nuclear waste agencies, regulatory agencies, public and private organizations) and the processes of engaging both experts and publics have taken a variety of pathways. This presentation suggests a comparison of the integration of invited critical publics (Wynne 2007) in three different institutionalized processes (in Belgium, in France and in Canada). In each case, the analysis shows how such integration contributed to 'close down' and 'open up' appraisals and commitments (Stirling 2008). Findings also highlight a common feature, namely how the different governments finally opted for a closing "up" strategy in order to, at the same time, manage both the right for publics to continue to partially shape the decisions and for experts to continue to develop the technical option (geological disposal) they have been supporting since the 70's.

Data used include a combination of theoretical and empirical materials - i.e. participatory observations of consultation processes, 90 semi-directive interviews with policy makers, nuclear waste agencies, nuclear regulators in France, Belgium and Canada and local actors such as members of local information and monitoring council (CLIS) and members of community liaison committee of four volunteer collectivities (CLC).