Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byThomas Stevens Modified over 9 years ago
1
The importance of trust in environmental risk communication: the case of LILW repository site selection in Slovenia Darinka Drapal, Mojca Drevenšek (PR’P Communications Consultancy) Metka Kralj (ARAO - Agency for Radwaste Management) Draft paper for the SRA–Europe conference: “Innovation and Technical Progress: Benefit without Risk?” Ljubljana 11 – 13 September 2006
2
A three-part presentation Part 1: environment, perception of environmental issues… Part 2: Slovenia and radioactive waste Part 3: case study - local partnership in the LILW repository site selection
3
The attitudes towards the environment Q: “In general, how informed do you feel about environmental issues?” 71% of Slovene citizens feel ‘very well’ or at least ‘well’ informed about environmental issues What does that mean? What is the definition of ‘being informed’? Source: Eurobarometer - “The attitudes of European citizens towards the environment, 2005
4
The attitudes towards radioactive waste Q: “How well informed do you think you are about radioactive waste?” 46% of Slovenes feel very well informed about radioactive waste Source: Eurobarometer - “Radioactive waste”, 2005
5
Who do you trust most when it comes to (a) environmental issues and (b) radioactive waste management in your country? Most: Environmetal protection associations Scientist TV Least: Companies Trade unions Radio Sources: Eurobarometer - “The attitudes of European citizens towards the environment”, 2005, and Eurobarometer – “Radioactive waste”, 2005
6
What is so different today? Trust in organizations (companies, decision- makers, media etc.) is declining. Publics have better access to information. Publics have a right to participate in environmental decision-making… Charlie Chaplin: Modern Times (1936)
7
Three components of trust The components of trust Expertise (knowledge, competency etc.) Caring (empathy, consistency etc.) Honesty (openess, objectivity etc.) Covello (1992) Kasperson (1991) Peters et al. (1997) Renn and Levine (1991)
8
Slovenia and radioactive waste Sources of radioactive waste 1 NPP: Krško Nuclear Power Plant small producers: medicine, research activities, industry Role of ARAO Public opinion researched since 1995…
9
Short chronological overview First preliminary studies: before NPP went into operation 1990 – 1993: the siting process suspended in its final phase; strong dissaproval within local communities – mainly due to lack of information/communication Project continuation estimated as not feasible! ARAO assigned to start a new site selection process Key lesson learned: public acceptance = crucial element
10
Q1: “People in Slovenia benefit from the use of nuclear technologies.” Source: ARAO/Ninamedia, 2005.
11
Q2: “Dealing with radioactive waste is a serious problem in Slovenia.” Source: ARAO/Ninamedia, 2005.
12
Q3: “In Slovenia, we have to take care for the repositing of our own radioactive waste.” Source: ARAO/Ninamedia, 2005.
13
Q4: “Because we produce radioactive waste in Slovenia, we urgently need an appropriate repository for them.” Source: ARAO/Ninamedia, 2005.
14
Q5: Who should make the final decision regarding the construction of radioactive waste repository in Slovenia? Source: ARAO/Ninamedia, 2005.
15
How to establish and maintain trust? The components of trust Expertise (knowledge, competency etc.) Caring (empathy, consistency etc.) Honesty (openess, objectivity etc.) Covello (1992) Kasperson (1991) Peters et al. (1997) Renn and Levine (1991)
16
Possible answer: through a local partnership Principles: Equality of partners Transparency Opennes Honesty Professional credibility Tolerance Respecting the opinions of others etc.
17
Local partnership – goals Three groups of goals: Information and communication Public participation in the decision- making process Building and increasing trust and facilitating dialogue
18
Local parnership – partners Three partners: local community – citizens, everyone interested to directly or indirectly take part in the local partnership, ARAO - Agency for Radwaste Management (as the representative of the investor, the Republic of Slovenia), Municipality Krško - the local decision- makers.
19
Organizational structure The coordinating committee (5 working groups) The national advisory board The secretariat Sustainable development Aarhus Convention Restricted land use Technical cooperation Environment Assembly of all (5) working groups
20
Cross-cutting themes Internal communication External communication (www.partnerstvo.si, local media etc.)www.partnerstvo.si Financial viewpoint How can we (really) participate in the decision-making process? To what extent? Respect for minority opinions Collision of interests (Who are you?, Where do you come from?)
21
Thank you for your attention! Comments, ideas, comparisons, suggestions… …are more than wellcome! Mojca Drevenšek (mojca.drevensek@prp-dd.si)mojca.drevensek@prp-dd.si Darinka Drapal (darinka.drapal@prp-dd.si)darinka.drapal@prp-dd.si Metka Kralj (metka.kralj@gov.si)metka.kralj@gov.si
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.