Pius Krütli

Functional‐dynamic public participation in technological decision‐making: site selection processes of nuclear waste repositories

Projects for the long‐term disposal of radioactive waste have often been hampered by strong local and regional opposition. Public participation has been recognized as a means to cope with this problem. Advocates promoting extensive public participation suggest various, mostly distinct, involvement techniques that are claimed to cover all needs. However, public participation is still a controversial issue. Several key questions need to be answered: why and when should who be involved, by whom, using which technique, and with which expected outcome? Here, a procedure with a functional‐dynamic view of public participation is proposed that combines the decision‐making process (DMP) with specific types and extents of public participation. We distinguish four discrete levels of public participation, namely information, consultation, collaboration, and empowerment. We argue that these levels of participation must fit the corresponding technical and non‐technical requirements of the different phases of the DMP and illustrate our arguments using a proposed site selection process for nuclear waste. This means that the type and the extent of public participation vary over the time span of a long‐term DMP.

Technical safety vs. public involvement? A case study on the unrealized project for the disposal of nuclear waste at Wellenberg (Switzerland)

The disposal of radioactive waste is a striking example with which to trace the changing relationship between technology, society and policy when dealing with societally relevant controversial issues. The change is characterized by a transition from a technocratic approach to an approach with more intense cooperation and public participation. We analyze the societal discourse of a failed disposal project for low- and intermediate-level waste at the Mount Wellenberg site, Canton of Nidwalden (Central Switzerland). Insights are based on a case study in 2006, with focus groups, expert interviews, a media analysis, a representative canton-wide postal survey and targeted in-depth stakeholder interviews. The article focuses on the relationship of safety and process aspects. The data suggest that both are prime issues and people recognize the need for disposal of radioactive waste in a technical system but only if a fair procedure is guaranteed. We conclude that a sound balance between safety and procedural aspects needs to be found and thus a functional-dynamic view of public involvement is necessary, i.e. distinct levels of involvement (ranging from mere information up to empowerment) must fit the corresponding technical and non-technical requirements of a stepwise decision-making process.

Transdisciplinary Research on Cancer-Healing Systems Between Biomedicine and the Maya of Guatemala A Tool for Reciprocal Reflexivity in a Multi-Epistemological Setting

Transdisciplinarity (TD) is a participatory research approach in which actors from science and society work closely together. It offers means for promoting knowledge integration and finding solutions to complex societal problems, and can be applied within a multiplicity of epistemic systems. We conducted a TD process from 2011 to 2014 between indigenous Mayan medical specialists from Guatemala and Western biomedical physicians and scientists to study cancer. Given the immense cultural gap between the partners, it was necessary to develop new methods to overcome biases induced by ethnocentric behaviors and power differentials. This article describes this intercultural cooperation and presents a method of reciprocal reflexivity (Bidirectional Emic–Etic tool) developed to overcome them. As a result of application, researchers observed successful knowledge integration at the epistemic level, the social-organizational level, and the communicative level throughout the study. This approach may prove beneficial to others engaged in facilitating participatory health research in complex intercultural settings.

The influence of linear and cyclical temporal representations on risk perception of nuclear waste: an experimental study

Time is an important aspect of the issue of nuclear waste, both from a technical and from a perceptional perspective. Previous studies have investigated the relationship between time and risk perception of nuclear waste, applying the discounting paradigm and therefore limiting time to one very narrow aspect: its duration. However, time is a multifaceted concept and encompasses more than a linear property. The aim of our study is to test the influence of a different aspect of time, namely temporal representations (linear or cyclical) on risk perception of nuclear waste. In an experimental study we demonstrate that both linear and cyclical representations have a reducing effect on risk perception compared to the control condition, where no specific time representation was activated. Examining group differences, we also demonstrate that temporal representations have a differing influence depending on whether participants have a stable belief about nuclear waste or whether they belong to an ambivalent group that does not yet hold a stable belief. Furthermore, we replicate the well-documented gender gap in risk perception. Our results bear potentially interesting implications for risk communication by demonstrating a causal relationship between the graphic representation of time and risk perception of nuclear waste.

Learning from the Transdisciplinary Case Study Approach

Participation of a variety of actors has been observed in both energy research and the transition process of energy systems, and more participation is commonly advocated. Despite this, ‘participation’ seems to be an all-purpose term with an unclear definition. To give it meaning, the following key questions must be addressed: Why and when should different actors be involved? Who should be involved and who should involve them? In which specific issues should the participants be involved and what are they expected to contribute? Which techniques allow for appropriate participation? How can informal participation techniques be combined to develop a staged, formal process? Finally, what role do research methods play in such processes? This contribution addresses these questions conceptually and then more concretely with illustrations from the authors’ own experiences in collaborating with diverse actors in a transdisciplinary research process. The chapter concludes that a functional-dynamic approach to addressing collaboration is necessary, further knowledge integration is crucial and a systematic and analytical framework is thus essential. These elements are presented in the transdisciplinary case study (TdCS) design. Appropriate and tailored participation techniques and research methods were selected and integrated in order to provide the prerequisites for inclusive collaboration, depending on the goals and phase of the research process in question.

The Crucial Role of Nomothetic and Idiographic Conceptions of Time: Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Nuclear Waste Management

The disposal of nuclear waste involves extensive time scales. Technical experts consider up to 1 million years for the disposal of spent fuel and high-level waste in their safety assessment. Yet nuclear waste is not only a technical but also a so-called sociotechnical problem and, therefore, requires interdisciplinary collaboration between technical, natural, social sciences, and the humanities in its management. Given that these disciplines differ in their language, epistemics, and interests, such collaboration might be problematic. Based on evidence from cognitive psychology, we suggest that, in particular, a concept like time is presumably critical and can be understood differently. This study explores how different scientific disciplines understand extensive time scales in general and then focuses on nuclear waste. Eighteen qualitative exploratory interviews were conducted with experts for time-related phenomena of different disciplines, among them experts working in nuclear waste management. Analyses revealed two distinct conceptions of time corresponding to idiographic and nomothetic research approaches: scientists from the humanities and social sciences tend to have a more open, undetermined conception of time, whereas natural scientists tend to focus on a more determined conception that includes some undetermined aspects. Our analyses lead to reflections on potential difficulties for interdisciplinary teams in nuclear waste management. We focus on the understanding of the safety assessment, on potential implications for communication between experts from different disciplines (e.g., between experts from the humanities and engineering for risk assessment and risk communication), and we reflect on the roles of different disciplines in nuclear waste management.

Multiplicity of equilibria in conjectural variations models of natural gas markets

Spatial partial equilibrium models incorporating conjectural variations are widely used to analyze the development of oligopolistic multi-agent markets, such as international energy and raw material markets. Although this model type can produce multiple equilibria under commonly used assumptions, to the best of our knowledge, the consequences for the interpretation of the model results have not yet been explored in detail. To this end, we derive a linear complementarity model for the gas market and discuss under which assumptions on the model structure a component of the solution is unique. In particular, we find that the gas flow between a trader and a consumer is unique whenever the trader is modeled to exert market power in the consumer’s market. We demonstrate our findings by computing the extreme points of the polyhedral solution space and show that erroneous conclusions could be drawn whenever only one (arbitrary) point in the solution space is picked for interpretation. Furthermore, we discuss whether economically meaningful parameter value changes exist which would enforce uniqueness in all components of the solution.

How to Fairly Allocate Scarce Medical Resources: Ethical Argumentation under Scrutiny by Health Professionals and Lay People

Background Societies are facing medical resource scarcities, inter alia due to increased life expectancy and limited health budgets and also due to temporal or continuous physical shortages of resources like donor organs. This makes it challenging to meet the medical needs of all. Ethicists provide normative guidance for how to fairly allocate scarce medical resources, but legitimate decisions require additionally information regarding what the general public considers to be fair. The purpose of this study was to explore how lay people, general practitioners, medical students and other health professionals evaluate the fairness of ten allocation principles for scarce medical resources: ‘sickest first’, ‘waiting list’, ‘prognosis’, ‘behaviour’ (i.e., those who engage in risky behaviour should not be prioritized), ‘instrumental value’ (e.g., health care workers should be favoured during epidemics), ‘combination of criteria’ (i.e., a sequence of the ‘youngest first’, ‘prognosis’, and ‘lottery’ principles), ‘reciprocity’ (i.e., those who provided services to the society in the past should be rewarded), ‘youngest first’, ‘lottery’, and ‘monetary contribution’. Methods 1,267 respondents to an online questionnaire were confronted with hypothetical situations of scarcity regarding (i) donor organs, (ii) hospital beds during an epidemic, and (iii) joint replacements. Nine allocation principles were evaluated in terms of fairness for each type of scarcity along 7-point Likert scales. The relationship between demographic factors (gender, age, religiosity, political orientation, and health status) and fairness evaluations was modelled with logistic regression. Results Medical background was a major predictor of fairness evaluations. While general practitioners showed different response patterns for all three allocation situations, the responses by lay people were very similar. Lay people rated ‘sickest first’ and ‘waiting list’ on top of all allocation principles—e.g., for donor organs 83.8% (95% CI: [81.2%–86.2%]) rated ‘sickest first’ as fair (‘fair’ is represented by scale points 5–7), and 69.5% [66.2%–72.4%] rated ‘waiting list’ as fair. The corresponding results for general practitioners: ‘prognosis’ 79.7% [74.2%–84.9%], ‘combination of criteria’ 72.6% [66.4%–78.5%], and ‘sickest first’ 74.5% [68.6%–80.1%); these were the highest-rated allocation principles for donor organs allocation. Interestingly, only 44.3% [37.7%–50.9%] of the general practitioners rated ‘instrumental value’ as fair for the allocation of hospital beds during a flu epidemic. The fairness evaluations by general practitioners obtained for joint replacements: ‘sickest first’ 84.0% [78.8%–88.6%], ‘combination of criteria’ 65.6% [59.2%–71.8%], and ‘prognosis’ 63.7% [57.1%–70.0%]. ‘Lottery’, ‘reciprocity’, ‘instrumental value’, and ‘monetary contribution’ were considered very unfair allocation principles by both groups. Medical students’ ratings were similar to those of general practitioners, and the ratings by other health professionals resembled those of lay people. Conclusions Results are partly at odds with current conclusions proposed by some ethicists. A number of ethicists reject ‘sickest first’ and ‘waiting list’ as morally unjustifiable allocation principles, whereas those allocation principles received the highest fairness endorsements by lay people and to some extent also by health professionals. Decision makers are advised to consider whether or not to give ethicists, health professionals, and the general public an equal voice when attempting to arrive at maximally endorsed allocations of scarce medical resources.

Public preference of electricity options before and after Fukushima

The accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in spring 2011 spurred Germany and Switzerland to phase out nuclear technology. To ensure future electricity supply, this phase-out requires a strong commitment to accept alternative production technologies and energy strategies. This study examined if and how laypeoples preference for electricity produced by nuclear power and the alternatives in Switzerland has been affected by the Japanese disaster. An online study was conducted in February (N = 69) and repeated in June 2011 (N = 57), applying the same questionnaire to both samples. The study included a preference rating task involving nuclear, gas, photovoltaics, wind power, and hydropower, and choice-based conjoint tasks. The conjoint tasks contained attributes such as production technologies and price instruments. Participants had to choose their preferred combination of attributes. The results show that laypeoples preference for nuclear power dropped significantly between February and June 2011, whereas their preferences for other technologies changed only marginally. Furthermore, the envisaged mid-term “stepping stones” of gas and electricity imports on the way to renewable energy have been highly unpopular and have remained so after the Fukushima accident. Transitioning from nuclear energy to renewable energy, therefore, will likely be challenging.

Values in the siting of contested infrastructure: the case of repositories for nuclear waste

In major infrastructure projects, experts are usually regarded as responsible for producing and evaluating facts, whereas the public plays a role as far as values are concerned. In this study, we investigate the potential of values and value-related concepts in explaining acceptance of a deep ground repository for high-level radioactive waste in Switzerland. The study was in two parts, first, screening for relevant values using a questionnaire (N = 500) and, second, face-to-face interviews with 42 participants from the first part. Although the questionnaire could not predict overall acceptance on the basis of value concepts, interesting relative differences were nevertheless revealed between participants who were or were not affected by the potential siting of a deep geological repository in their own community. Additionally, the interviews offered insights into how values are related to the participatory process designed by the Swiss authorities.