Logic and motivation in risk research: a nuclear waste test case.
After two decades of massive investigation, federal approval of a nuclear waste site is drawing to a close. Large-scale research to assure that major hazards such as this one are socially acceptable is often highly inefficient, as here. A regulatory remedy would be to require not only that risk currently assessed be acceptable, but also that risk would remain acceptable given any new information. Research to test compliance with these rules has to be cost effective. Research activities should be managed according to an explicit discipline that can be imposed on powerful conflicting interests. They might be required to (1) set targets for the first- and second-order risk assessments, (2) allocate research resources to close any gap between current and target assessments cost effectively, and (3) reallocate resources, as evolving findings dictate. The interests of license applicant (Department of Energy, DOE) and society are distinguished: the former would want the application approved; the latter would want to reject an unacceptable facility.
Brown
Rex V
RV
School of Public Policy, George Mason University, USA. rbrown@gmu.edu
D004777:Environment; D004785:Environmental Pollutants; D004787:Environmental Pollution; D006077:Government Agencies; D006256:Hazardous Waste; D008128:Logic; D009678:Nuclear Energy; D011640:Public Policy; D011848:Radioactive Pollutants; D011850:Radioactive Waste; D012037:Refuse Disposal / Q000379:methods*; D012306:Risk; D018570:Risk Assessment / Q000379:methods*; D013997:Time Factors; D014481:United States
D004785:Environmental Pollutants; D006256:Hazardous Waste; D011848:Radioactive Pollutants; D011850:Radioactive Waste