A Risk Management Perspective on Climate Change: Lessons Learned from the Nuclear Industry.

Despite the widely acknowledged role of the anthropogenic drivers of climate change, there has been little success in developing a clear overview of the strengths and weaknesses of counter-measures or developing a consensus on their application. Problems with conventional approaches arise from the strongly coupled, multidisciplinary issues involved and the long timescales (centuries or more) over which some key processes operate. Here we outline an alternative approach based on experience gained in risk assessment for an area with similar challenges-the geological disposal of radioactive waste. Utilization of such risk assessment approaches and tools to facilitate a holistic, top-down synthesis of the interactions between the key features, events and processes driving climate change and constraining responses to it, are illustrated. We especially focus on visual presentations that encourage dialog between both specialists and non-technical stakeholders. These can thus form a basis to assist balancing responses in terms of energy policy, modified socio-economic boundary conditions and environmental management.

Risk management for pandemics: a novel approach: "Hindsight is 20/20" English proverb.

The impacts of the current COVID-19 pandemic illustrate the global-level sensitivity to such threats. As understanding of major hazards is generally based on past experience and there is a lack of good historical precedents, approaches and models currently employed to assess risks and guide responses generally lack transparency and are often associated with huge, unspecified uncertainties. Fundamental challenges arise from the strongly coupled nature of the impacts of a pandemic (i.e. not only on health, but also on the entire socio-economic infrastructure) and their long-term evolution with recovery likely to take many years or, potentially, decades. Here, we outline experience gained in risk assessment within the nuclear industry, which has experience facing similar challenges (assessing long-term impacts in a strongly coupled technical system subject to socio-economic constraints), and assess options for knowledge transfer that may help manage future pandemics and other high-impact threats.

Scientific justifications for the political decision-making on environmental remediation carried out after the Fukushima nuclear accident.

The Japanese government decided to implement environmental remediation after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (termed "1F" in Japan) accident on 11th March 2011. As the initial additional annual dose target was set to be 1 mSv or less as a long-term goal, we examined the decision-making process undertaken by the then leaders, particularly the Minister of the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) who was responsible for the final decision. We found that technically based assessment of dose targets, health effects and risk-based approaches justified by scientific experts were not communicated to the then Minister and officials of the MOE before the remediation strategy was decided. We defined how such a decision was made based on leadership theories such as the Role Theory and the Cognitive Resources Theory. Academic leaders could have examined the Windscale accident (UK, 1957), which could be considered as the closest analogue (at least in terms of radionuclide releases) to the 1F accident. Environmental remediation could have been planned and implemented more effectively whilst still maintaining the highest possible safety standards and balancing the environmental and economic burden. Appropriate scientific input should have been provided by academic leaders to political and administrative leaders and such scientific justification should have been disclosed to the general public (especially the residents of Fukushima Prefecture) so that the general public could have developed greater trust in their leaders and have more readily accepted the decisions made.

Testing repository safety assessment models for deep geological disposal using legacy contaminated sites.

An important property of locations selected to host deep geological repositories for higher level radioactive wastes is their capacity to retard the movement of any radionuclides released from engineered barriers. Site characterization cannot measure this characteristic directly and hence models form the essential link between field observations and supporting laboratory rock/water/radionuclide interaction studies. However, residual uncertainties always remain, associated with the complexity of radionuclide interactions in natural environments and the extrapolations in time and space that are included in safety assessments. An under-used resource that could help to strengthen the safety cases that utilize such information, is the knowledge base available from anthropogenically contaminated sites. These have the potential to combine relevant geological settings with the radionuclides of interest and timescales in the order of decades allow typically slow processes to be better quantified. This paper provides an overview of the range of options available, critically reviews some relevant examples where radionuclide migration models could be tested and outlines work that could facilitate utilization of this potential resource in order to strengthen the safety case for geological repositories.