NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Dynamics of stakeholder involvement in the development of a handbook on practical radiation protection for areas contaminated for prolonged periods Anne Nisbet Julie Mercer, Céline Bataille, Pascal Crouaïl, Irene Fiedler

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Presentation Outline  Background  The SAGE handbook  Why stakeholder engagement  Who are the stakeholders  The stakeholder consultation process  Feedback on the handbook  Evaluation of consultation process  Conclusions

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Background  Former Soviet Union  ETHOS project  Inclusive radiation monitoring  Need for strategies & guidance

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency The SAGE handbook The householder The health professional The measurement professional The stakeholder advisory board Radioactivity Exposure routes Radiation monitoring Practical tools Points of entryTechnical sheets

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Why stakeholder engagement?  Top down approaches can lead to loss of social trust  Innovative approaches involving stakeholders at national & local levels  UK Recovery Handbook  Rehabilitation in Stolyn district Belarus

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Who are the stakeholders? GOs Radiological protection Health protection Environmental protection Medical doctors Social services Food control NGOs Teachers Consumer association Monitoring laboratory Farmers Union Public pressure group Public health group Academics – experts in risk communication Help for Gomel Fireman

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency The stakeholder panels

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Public pressure group Public health group Experts in risk communication Health protection unit Head teacher The stakeholder panels

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Stakeholder consultation process Five meetings Practical sessions Presentations Discussions & iterative feedback

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency  Three meetings  Presentations  Discussions & iterative feedback Stakeholder consultation process

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency  Three meetings  Presentations  Four/five satellite panels  Discussions & iterative feedback Stakeholder consultation process

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency ‘The Questionnaire’  Format  structure, language, clarity, level of technical detail  General applicability of the handbook  philosophy, fit with current systems, other contaminants  Practicability and appropriateness of information/ guidance provided  target audience, relevance, availability of equipment & training  Adapting the handbook  irrelevant sections, missing topics Stakeholder consultation process

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Stakeholder feedback on the handbook 1Format, structure and content Common language Easily understood ‘front end’ & technical sheets at the back Information & illustrations for Western Europe Additional sections - reference situations, stochastic risks Glossary

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Stakeholder feedback on the handbook 2 Concern over the role of doctors Doctors would be overstretched Extend role to all ‘health professionals’ (public health physicians, staff of hospitals, nurses, pharmacists, psychologists, school doctors and company doctors) Emphasise need for education & training

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Stakeholder feedback on the handbook 3Concern over measurements Ambient dose rates, measurements in food & whole body How much to involve the people? Need for calibrated equipment, collection & preparation of samples, training Results should always discussed with experts Importance of measurements from different sources (plurality) Openness/availability of individual data

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Final reflections on the handbook Two years was insufficient to develop the handbook Provides first principles of how to live in … Generic, based on a ‘virtual’ territory Biased to rural environments Needs to be adapted to specific countries, territories and environments Belarussian panel welcomed work of Western European panels re format & content & were keen to adapt to Belarussian context

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Final reflections on the handbook Useful reference tool – concepts generally applicable to other contaminants Requires ‘political will’ and funding Western European panels agreed to produce leaflets for members of the public Requirement for other types of handbooks, strategies & guidance for management of early & late phases & these must be consistent with the principles set out for long-term rehabilitation

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Evaluation of consultation process 1 st time for this type of consultation on rehabilitation Successfully engaged all of the key stakeholders Establishment of satellite panels efficient mechanism Mix of practical sessions, presentations & discussion maintain interest Stakeholders felt empowered

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Evaluation of consultation process Stakeholders have had a significant influence on scope, format & content of handbook Process raised profile of rehabilitation issues Authorities starting to understand issues Some making plans for tackling deficiencies in national infrastructure

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Conclusions Good example of participative inclusive governance Dynamics of process – significant & positive influence on handbook development Good representation of GO and NGOs Health professionals play key role Need for training and investment essential

NRPB © Working in partnership with the Health Protection Agency Acknowledgements  The contribution made by members of all the stakeholder panels  Financial support from the European Commission Fifth Framework Programme (Nuclear Fission, Radiation Protection) under Contract No: FIS