This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Public concernsBieke Abelshausen, Ferdiana Hoti, Catrinel Turcanu,
Tanja Perko
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Results of systematic literature review on definitions and types
of uncertainties
Ferdiana Hoti, SCK•CEN, Belgium
Tanja Perko, SCK•CEN, Belgium
Peter Thijssen, University of Antwerp, Belgium
Ortwin Renn, University of Stuttgart, Germany
Oxford, UK, 19.03.19
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Introduction and research question
Research question: Which are the existing definitions and typologies of uncertainty in literature?
Task 3.1. Uncertainty management in decision-making process in long lasting radiological exposure situations
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Methodology: Systematic literature review in different fields of study
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Preliminary results: Uncertainty definitions
Table 1. Uncertainty definitions made by authors in the literature review
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Uncertainty definition based on sources and types
Epistemic
Uncertainty
Aleatory
Uncertainty
Authors
Doyle, McClure et al. 2014
Thompson 2002
Eiser, Bostrom et al. 2012
Harris 2015
Knoblauch, Stauffacher et al. 2018
Walker, Harremoes et al. 2003
Romao and Pauperio 2016
Levin, Hansson et al. 2004
Markon, Crowe et al. 2013
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Uncertainty definition based on sources and types
Epistemic
Uncertainty
Aleatory
Uncertainty
Informal
Uncertainty
Authors Reference made
to
Maxim (2014) Möller and Beer
(2004, p. 953)
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Uncertainty definition based on sources and types
Epistemic
Uncertainty
Aleatory
Uncertainty
Informal
Uncertainty
Stochastic
uncertainty
Variability
Authors
Walker, Harremoes et al. 2003
Bier and Lin 2013
Thompson 2002
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Uncertainty definition based on sources and types
Epistemic
Uncertainty
Aleatory
Uncertainty
Informal
Uncertainty
Stochastic
uncertainty
Variability
Internal
UncertaintyExternal
Uncertainty
Author Reference made to
Dequech 2004 Kahneman and Tversky 1982, p. 150
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Uncertainty definition based on sources and types
Epistemic
Uncertainty
Aleatory
Uncertainty
Informal
Uncertainty
Stochastic
uncertainty
Variability
Internal
UncertaintyExternal
Uncertainty
Assessment
Uncertainty
Outcome
Uncertainty
Authors
Bier and Lin 2013
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Uncertainty definition based on sources and types
Epistemic
Uncertainty
Aleatory
Uncertainty
Informal
Uncertainty
Stochastic
uncertainty
Variability
Internal
UncertaintyExternal
Uncertainty
Assessment
Uncertainty
Outcome
Uncertainty
Ambiguity
Authors
Walker, Kwakkel et al. 2010
Markon, Crowe et al. 2013
Levin, Hansson et al. 2004
Kox, Gerhold et al. 2015
Kox, Gerhold et al. 2015
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Uncertainty definition based on sources and types
Epistemic
Uncertainty
Aleatory
Uncertainty
Informal
Uncertainty
Stochastic
uncertainty
Variability
Internal
UncertaintyExternal
Uncertainty
Assessment
Uncertainty
Outcome
Uncertainty
Ambiguity
Contentual
Uncertainty
Linguistic
Uncertainty
Decision
Uncertainty
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Territories definition of uncertainty
• The word uncertainty refers to any situation for which a fact, data or phenomenon and their causes or consequences are not known with certainty by a specific actor in her/his decision context.
• This context, that corresponds to the state of the world that has been changed by the situation (NORM or post-accident contamination), is embracing many aspects: social, economic, environmental, health, etc (Guillevic et al, D 9.65 –Decision processes/pathways TERRITORIES: Synthesis report of CONCERT sub-subtask 9.3.3.1)
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Uncertainties present on different stakeholder categories
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Public Decision-makers Scientists and experts
Stakeholder categories
Nu
mb
er
of
refe
ren
ces
in
th
e a
rtic
les
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Public Uncertainties
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Content
1. Document review: Background for Decision processes related to NORM pollution and
remediation in Tessenderlo
2. Mass media reporting: Uncertainties and their causes in NORM pollution in
Tessenderlo in last 15 years
3. Interviews with the affected population in Tessenderlo
4: Expert’s view on the Tessenderlo case (panel discussions and survey)
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Document review: Background for decision processes related to NORM
pollution and remediation in Tessenderlo
Decision processes/pathways
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Uncertainties or causes of uncertainties important for the Tessenderlo case found in documents
e.g. National policy and the legal and regulatory framework related to long-term exposure situations due to NORM:
• A lack of, or incomplete or ineffective, national policy;
• A lack of a legal and regulatory framework;
• Non-independence or ineffectiveness of the regulatory authority;
• A lack or incompleteness of environmental remediation regulations and standards or guidelines.
e.g. Historical knowledge
• Location of unknown or poorly defined sources of contamination and radiation;
• Unknown physical condition of structures and systems including waste amount;
• Unknown exposure to dangerous amounts of radioactivity;
• Exposure to mixed contaminations.
• Risk and remediation prioritizations.
• Different problem framing/vocabulary and understanding of radiological risks
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Document review demonstrates that
• Uncertainties related to NORM arise mostly as a result of the socio-political and economic factors rather than technical factors;
• On the one hand that uncertainties often originate due to different perceptions, attitudes, opinions, concerns and expectations of stakeholders towards the risks and benefits of remediation projects and due to the lack of stakeholder involvement in planning and implementation of remediation projects;
• On the other hand, EU countries have ensured a legal background, e.g. Basic Safety Standards, that is or has to be implemented at the level of national policies, in order to avoid additional uncertainties due to NORM exposure situations including Belgium and in the Tessenderlo case.
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Media analysis145 articles in 15y
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Some examplesfrom media
• “Everything was said to be fine and then one day, all of a sudden people were sent a letter saying that the ground is contaminated.”
• “It is said to be no problem to walk nearby the river, yet radioactivity has been measured at that place.”
• “There is said to be no real danger, although people shouldn’t live in the areas.”
• “The contamination problem is said to be a surprise, although it is not surprisingly since it is a historical pollution.”
• “The company says that the salt losses are like seawater, yet political parties (Agalev) state the opposite.”
• “The company says that there is no problem, yet effects have already been detected in fish and vegetation.”
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Media reported about uncertainties and courses of uncertainties related to:
The most often reported:
• Public and environmental health
• Remediation management
• Ambiguity about the problem
• Financial matters
• Contradiction in messages
Contradiction in opinions
Responsibility for the problem
Financial matters
Duration of the remediation
Waste management
Contradiction in the communicated
messages
Communication problems
Remediation management
Lack of trust in authorities
Ambiguity about the problem
Public and environmental health
Concerns for future
Reputation of the polluter Media attention changes through years!
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
e.g. Uncertainties and/or causes related to
Public and environmental health issues:
• Fear for a decrease in the quality of both public and environmental health.
• People worry about getting cancer.
• Is it safe to live close to the factory facilities?
• What are risks for children and pregnant women?
• Will the remediation project influence the surroundings in their neighborhood (e.g. green areas)
• Does pollution enter a food chain (e.g. milk from a cow eating a grass, ground water)
• Will the ecosystem be protected?
• Will the project have an impact on social and cultural life?
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Interviews with people
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Societal Uncertainties - Lay
• Three categories for uncertainties• Behaviour
• Health
• Air pollution
• Historical pollution
• Other
• Knowledge • Pollution
• Type
• Impact
• Norm
• Remediation
• Location
• Timing
• Impact
NORM
Behaviour
Leisure
Health
Air pollution
Historical pollution
OtherFinancial
Knowledge
Pollution
Type
Impact
NORM Unknown
Remediation
Location
Timing
Impact
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Societal Uncertainties - Lay
• Time
• Pollution (noticeable)
• Type and intensity
• Fight
• Economic dependency
• Open
• Closed
• Altruistic
• Resolve
• Trust
• Resign
• Society
• Pragmatism
• Powerlessness
• Knowledge
• Causes
TimeNoticeability of
pollution
Type and intensity of concerns
FightEconomic
dependency
Open
Closed
AltruisticResolve Lack of trust
Resign
Society
Pragmatism
Powerlessness
Knowledge
Causes
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Societal Uncertainties - Lay
• Time
• Pollution (unnoticeable)
• Intensity of concerns
• Trust
• Institution
• Distrust
• Knowledge
TimeLack of noticeability
of pollutionIntensity of
concerns
Trust
Change
Intuition
Distrust Knowledge
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Societal Uncertainties - Experts
• Uncertainties of experts• Mainly technical
• E.g. Move from several storage locations to one
• E.g. Swamp area (difficulties for drilling)
• Societal • Inclusion of stakeholder makes different needs and aspirations more
obvious
• Societal uncertainties as perceived by experts• Difference between technical options and expectation from
societies• Advise for after remediation (f.e. use of groundwater)
• Unfulfilled expectations
All stakeholders that should be involved were involved
This project has received funding from the Euratom research and training programme 2014-2018 under grant agreement No 662287.
Conclusion
• In-depth analysis shows that affected population, remediation experts and mass media are concerned about different issues and therefore express or are confronted with different uncertainties.
• Framing of the problem:
• mass media - “radiological contamination”,
• experts - “mixed contamination” (chemical and radiological),
• people living in an affected region - “pollution”.
• Differences in media analysis and interviews
• Media: political and financial focus
• Local population: health and environment focus