ICRP workshop on the review and revision of the system of radiological protection: a focus on research priorities-feedback from the international community.

In September 2022, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) organised a workshop in Estoril, Portugal, on the 'Review and Revision of the System of Radiological Protection: A Focus on Research Priorities'. The workshop, which was a side event of the European Radiation Protection Week, offered an opportunity to comment on a recent paper published by ICRP on areas of research to support the System of Radiological Protection. Altogether, about 150 individuals participated in the workshop. After the workshop, 16 of the 30 organisations in formal relations with ICRP provided written feedback. All participants and organisations followed ICRP's view that further research in various areas will offer additional support in improving the System in the short, medium, and long term. In general, it was emphasised that any research should be outcome-focused in that it should improve protection of people or the environment. Many research topics mentioned by the participants were in line with those already identified by ICRP in the paper noted above. In addition, further ideas were expressed such as, for example, that lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic with regards to the non-radiological social, economic and environment impacts, should be analysed for their usefulness to enhance radiological protection, and that current protection strategies and application of current radiological protection principles may need to be adapted to military scenarios like those observed recently during the military conflict in the Ukraine or the detonation of a nuclear weapon. On a broader perspective, it was discussed how radiation research and radiological protection can contribute towards the Sustainable Development Goals announced by the United Nations in 2015. This paper summarises the views expressed during the workshop and the major take home messages identified by ICRP.

Lessons being learned from the Covid-19 pandemic for radiological emergencies and vice versa: report from expert discussions.

In order to examine what lessons radiological emergency management may offer for the management of the Covid-19 pandemic, and vice versa, a series of three online webinars were conducted with leading experts, scholars and practitioners from a wide range of disciplines essential for emergency management and long-term risk governance. The first webinar debated the lessons we are learning from the Covid-19 pandemic for radiological risk communication, the second explored issues around longer-term outcomes of a crisis and how to balance these with short-term actions whilst the third focused on the key challenges of the 'transition phase', using lessons learned from the Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima Daichii (2011) accidents. This paper reviews the discussions and provides valuable lessons for the radiation protection community. Results of the discussions indicated that: (a) non-radiological and non-epidemiological consequences of emergencies, for example psychological (mental health), societal and economic, should not be underestimated; (b) multidisciplinary expertise is imperative for communication efforts and for effective emergency management, including decision-making in the application of protective measures; (c) stakeholder engagement, including the involvement of the potentially affected population, should be encouraged from an early stage; and (d) trust is increased if policy-makers and the main science agencies show a unified voice.

Assessing radiation risk perception by means of a European stakeholder survey.

It is increasingly recognised that stakeholder views can be essential for ascertaining the credibility of those entrusted with protection of the public and workers against radiation risks, the robustness of the approaches to protection and the relevance of research underpinning radiation protection (RP). The CONCERT European Joint Programme of RP research included consideration of stakeholder views. These were evaluated by means of a publicly available survey, translated into 15 languages, to encourage responses from a wide range of European countries. The survey ran in 2017 and received some 1961 responses from many countries, although response rates varied widely between countries. The survey respondents were largely highly educated, with many having a professional connection to RP or the use of radiation in medicine or industry. Survey results indicated a high level of scientific/technical knowledge relevant to RP and indicated a general trust of most actors involved in the RP field, perhaps unsurprisingly given the nature of the sampled population. Most expressed a reasonable level of satisfaction with the information available to them on radiation risk, but there is clearly room for improvement. Additionally, the survey identified potential training needs amongst the groups who responded. It is concluded that, while the survey results are limited by the non-representativeness of the respondents by comparison with the population of the European Union as a whole, it has been successful in gaining insights into areas where communication could be improved, where professional training gaps are present and where research could help to build wider trust in RP.

Radiation risks and uncertainties: a scoping review to support communication and informed decision-making.

Although radiation protection is challenged by many uncertainties, there is no systematic study investigating the definitions and types of these uncertainties. To address this gap, in this paper we offer a scoping review to comprehensively analyse, for the first time, peer-reviewed scientific articles (n = 33) related to uncertainties in the following radiation exposure situations: nuclear emergencies, decommissioning of nuclear/radiological installations and long-term radiological exposure situations (e.g. naturally occurring radioactive materials). The results suggest that firstly, there is no agreement regarding definitions of uncertainty, which is mainly defined based on its sources, types or categories rather than by its meaning. Secondly, different actors are faced with different types of uncertainties. Uncertainties of the scientific community are mostly data and methodology-driven (e.g. dose-response relationships), those of the decision-makers are related to the likely consequences of decision options and public reactions, while laypeople's uncertainties are mainly related to the trustworthiness of experts or the emotional potential of specific risk exposures. Furthermore, the majority of articles focus on the uncertainties of the scientific community, while those of the information receivers (i.e. decision-makers and laypeople) receive much less consideration. Finally, there was no difference in types of uncertainties across the different risk-related study areas analysed (radiation versus other risks). Based on these findings, we provide some preliminary recommendations regarding research on uncertainty related to radiation protection, as well as communication practices.

Towards a strategic research agenda for social sciences and humanities in radiological protection.

Reflecting a change in funding strategies for European research projects, and a commitment to the idea of responsible research and innovation in radiological protection (RP), a collective of research institutes and universities have developed a prospective Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) for Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) in radiological protection. This is the first time such a research agenda has been proposed. This paper identifies six research lines of interest and concern: (1) Effects of social, psychological and economic aspects on RP behaviour; (2) Holistic approaches to the governance of radiological risks; (3) Responsible research and innovation in RP; (4) Stakeholder engagement and participatory processes in RP research, development, policy and practice; (5) Risk communication; and (6) RP cultures. These topics were developed through broad stakeholder consultation, in conjunction with activities carried out in the framework of various projects and initiatives (EU H2020 CONCERT programme, the EU FP7 projects OPERRA, PREPARE and EAGLE, the 2015-2018 RICOMET series of conferences, and the 2014 and 2016 International Symposia on Ethics of Environmental Health); as well as through dialogues with members of the European radiation protection research communities. The six research lines open opportunities to integrate a range of key social and ethical considerations into RP, thereby expanding research opportunities and programmes and fostering collaborative approaches to research and innovation.

Information Sources as Explanatory Variables for the Belgian Health-Related Risk Perception of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident.

The media play an important role in risk communication, providing information about accidents, both nearby and far away. Each media source has its own presentation style, which could influence how the audience perceives the presented risk. This study investigates the explanatory power of 12 information sources (traditional media, new media, social media, and interpersonal communication) for the perceived risk posed by radiation released from the damaged Fukushima nuclear power plant on respondents' own health and that of the population in general. The analysis controlled for attitude toward nuclear energy, gender, education, satisfaction with the media coverage, and duration of attention paid to the coverage. The study uses a large empirical data set from a public opinion survey, which is representative for the Belgian population with respect to six sociodemographic variables. Results show that three information sources are significant regressors of perceived health-related risk of the nuclear accident: television, interpersonal communication, and the category of miscellaneous online sources. More favorable attitudes toward nuclear power, longer attention to the coverage, and higher satisfaction with the provided information lead to lower risk perception. Taken together, the results suggest that the media can indeed have a modest influence on how the audience perceives a risk.

Improved communication, understanding of risk perception and ethics related to ionising radiation.

In Europe today, institutions, media and the general public exchange information about ionizing radiation and associated risks. However, communication about ionising radiation with the general public has to be further improved, as has been previously highlighted by international responses to the 2011 accident in Japan. This article reports the main activities and findings in this field from the following three FP7 projects: EAGLE, PREPARE and OPERRA and discussed by a broad spectrum of stakeholders at the conference RICOMET 2015. These projects, among other aims, also investigate how communication about ionising radiation in different fields could be improved and harmonised, how radiological risks are perceived, how to encourage ethical considerations in all fields of nuclear applications and what kind of transdisciplinary research is needed. The projects relate to several domains; the first relates to education, training and communication, the second to nuclear emergency preparedness and response, and the third to research and development in the radiation protection field. Incorporation of stakeholder engagement activities such as the RICOMET conference broadens social and ethical aspects and takes them into account during coordination activities as well as during core scientific and nuclear research and development performed in the projects. These activities offered opportunities for moving closer to a citizen-centred ideal of risk communication in particular and nuclear research and development in general.

The limits of public communication coordination in a nuclear emergency: lessons from media reporting on the Fukushima case.

Coordination of public communication has become a key issue in management of complex emergencies, and is a matter of debate between nuclear emergency management professionals. A particular problem is when inconsistent information is sent to the media and public by official sources from different levels, which has led to calls for a more coordinated approach. The IAEA created guidelines recommending a one-voice communication approach that provides clear, consistent and coordinated information by relevant stakeholders. The reviewed theory on the emergency communication coordination and the empirical results in this paper demonstrate some challenges regarding the feasibility of the above stated goal. This paper explores the communication process in the two-month period of the Fukushima nuclear emergency by using a quantitative comparative content and discourse analysis of 1340 printed media articles on the Fukushima nuclear disaster from two major newspapers in Spain ('El País' and 'El Mundo'), Italy ('Corriere della Sera' and 'La Repubblica'), Norway ('Aftenposten' and 'Dagsavisen'), Slovenia ('Delo' and 'Vecer'), Belgium ('Le Soir' and 'De Standaard') and Russia ('Komsomolskaya Pravda' and 'Izvestiya'). The results show that it will be difficult to achieve a truly coordinated approach and one-voice communication in severe nuclear and radiological emergency due to the communication difficulties created by the dispersion of information sources, a broad and dispersed focus of the reported information, partially subjective and conflicting media reporting. The paper suggests ways to improve public communication coordination in nuclear and radiological disasters.

How did media present the radiation risks after the Fukushima accident: a content analysis of newspapers in Europe.

Any activity that might result in exposure of a population to contaminants requires communication of the associated risks. This communication is complicated by several factors including public perceptions, distrust, uncertainties in risk assessment and news media. These factors are especially prominent in communication of risks from ionizing radiation. A number of guidelines about the communication of risks related to radiation exposures have been made by national and international authorities and other stakeholders. The present paper investigates whether those guidelines were followed and evaluates how the radiation risk related information was presented in European newspapers and Russia in the aftermath of the Fukushima accident. It examines the use of measurement units and risk comparisons, the quality of the statements on radiation risk related issues and the use of visual materials in 1340 newspaper articles from Belgium, Italy, Norway, Russia, Slovenia and Spain. Our results indicated several misinterpretations and misrepresentations of radiological risks in the newspaper articles. We also show an inconsistency in the information that was reported with advice provided to risk communicators (e.g. authorities and experts) in the guidelines. The results suggest that risk communicators should improve their communication practices regarding radiological risks, in order to improve emergency management response.

Looking for citizen-centered communication: dialogues between radiological protection or nuclear safety specialists and media professionals.

What happens when radiological protection or nuclear safety officials get together with media professionals to talk about public communication on ionizing radiation risks? Do they have common views of the challenges and ways to meet these? This practical article reports on dialogue workshops organized by the EAGLE project in four European countries (France, Poland, Romania, and Slovenia). Common findings are classed and presented by themes, including inter alia: crisis versus everyday communication; mediated versus direct communication; sources, actors, roles and responsibilities; language and format; trust and confidence, balance in reporting and development of risk culture; nuclear industry promotion versus citizen-centered risk communication. The article also presents reflections from an expanded international workshop (RICOMET, June 2015). It echoes the participants in calling for a platform for ongoing dialogue between information sources and transmitters, in the interest of building solid relationships, risk culture and public understanding on ionizing radiation.

Public participation processes related to nuclear research installations: what are the driving factors behind participation intention?

This article addresses organised public participation processes related to installations for nuclear research. The aim was to determine predictors that could provide an empirical insight into the motivations underlying people's intended level of involvement. The results highlight attitude towards participation and moral norm as the strongest predictors for participation intention. Other significant predictors were time constraints, attitude towards nuclear energy, subjective and descriptive norms, and knowledge. An opposing relationship is noted between participation intention and attitude towards nuclear energy. At the same time, people who are more knowledgeable about the nuclear domain seem more willing to get involved. The analysis also revealed that financial benefits do not influence people's intended involvement in participation processes related to nuclear research installations. The results reported here are based on empirical data from a large-scale public opinion survey (N = 1020) carried out in Belgium during May-June 2011.

Measuring societal attitudes and behaviours towards radon indoors: A case study of Slovenia.

Public opinion surveys play a crucial role in assessing public awareness, knowledge, and radon risk perception in the context of national Radon Action Plans. However, many of these surveys are constructed without a solid foundation in behavioural theories, health protection theory, or social science methodology. This lack of foundation can lead to misguided priorities in radon mitigation interventions and ineffective communication strategies, ultimately resulting in low compliance with testing and mitigation in private homes. By developing and testing scales that measure a wide range of theory-based socio-psychological concepts influencing protective behaviour of individuals facing radon risk, this study provides researchers, authorities, and practitioners with a useful and versatile survey tool to explore the complexity of human behaviour in the context of radon. The results of this survey, conducted in Slovenia with a representative sample of respondents from low, middle, and high radon risk areas (N = 2012), offer a foundation for assessing gaps and strategies to increase testing and remediation of homes. The findings suggest that communication interventions need to be more precisely tailored to specific population groups and should go beyond enhancing awareness, knowledge and radon risk perception. Effective strategies should evoke emotions, share personal stories, highlight successful mitigation cases, and use personal testimonies from individuals affected by lung cancer. Moreover, incorporating positive social norms can inspire more individuals to engage in testing and mitigation measures. Assessing theory-driven socio-psychological concepts through a survey allows researchers and policymakers to craft more effective strategies aimed at promoting radon testing and mitigation, thereby enhancing overall public health.

Communication in nuclear emergency preparedness: a closer look at information reception.

Preparedness of the general population plays a key role in the effective implementation of protective actions in case of a nuclear emergency (e.g., evacuation or intake of iodine tablets). In this context, a good communication of emergency management actors with the public along the entire cycle of preparedness-response-recovery is of paramount importance. This article aims at providing a better understanding of the way people process communicated messages and the factors that may influence how they do this. In particular, it investigates information reception as part of the information processing in precrisis communication. As a case study, the precrisis communication context was chosen, as it has been tackled to a lesser extent in the literature. The empirical data used for this study originated from a large-scale opinion survey in Belgium. One topic in this survey addressed the information campaign for the distribution of iodine tablets, in the context of preparedness for nuclear emergencies. The findings of this study demonstrate that systematic predictors have a stronger influence on information reception, as compared to heuristic predictors. The latter are only to a minor extent involved in the reception of emergency preparedness information. The hypothesized pattern--that more specific knowledge about the field relates to a higher reception of information--was confirmed for precrisis communication. Contrary to expectations, results showed that people with a high perception of radiation risks were less attentive to information about protective actions. People with little confidence in authorities were also more likely to have a low reception of information.

Co-Designing Communication: A Design Thinking Approach Applied to Radon Health Communication.

Indoor radon is a natural radioactive gas and is one of the leading causes of lung cancer. Despite multiple policy and communication interventions to increase radon testing and mitigation, the uptake of these measures remains insufficient. A participatory research design was applied in Belgium and Slovenia to probe the barriers and facilitators homeowners experience regarding radon protective behavior on the one hand and co-designing communication tools on the other hand. The results show that there remains a need for interventions on all levels (i.e., policy, economic interventions, and communication). Moreover, results indicated a need for a communication strategy that follows the different steps between awareness and performing mitigation measures. Further, involving the target group in the early stages of intervention design was beneficial. Future research is needed to test the effectiveness of the proposed communication strategies in a controlled setting.

Evaluation of Radon Action Plans: Searching for a Systematic and Standardised Method.

Radon, a carcinogenic radioactive gas, is a leading cause of lung cancer according to the World Health Organization. European Member States are required to develop and implement National Radon Action Plans (RAPs) to address its dangerous health effects. However, assessing the effectiveness of these RAPs presents challenges for authorities. This study aims to explore the possibility of a systematic and standardised assessment method to evaluate the effectiveness of RAP strategies and its implementation. The method involved analysing the strategies of 27 EU Member States and the UK, conducting legal document analysis and group interviews with responsible authorities. Additionally, four regional workshops and one final European workshop were held. The research took place from March 2021 to May 2023. Findings indicate that evaluating RAP effectiveness is challenging due to limited existing common criteria or indicators. To address this, the study proposes guiding questions for each element required by the EU Directive, as well as additional questions related to education and training. This contribution benefits RAP owners and European regulatory authorities, supporting the development of effectiveness indicators for RAPs. By improving assessment methods, we can enhance the effectiveness of strategies in mitigating the risks associated with radon exposure.

A psycho-social-environmental lens on radon air pollutant: authorities', mitigation contractors', and residents' perceptions of barriers and facilitators to domestic radon mitigation.

Introduction: Radon is a major indoor air pollutant that poses a significant risk of lung cancer to those exposed in their homes. While mitigation of high radon levels in homes has been shown to be effective, home mitigation rates remain low. This study examines the barriers and facilitators to radon mitigation in homes from the perspectives of authorities responsible for radon risk management, the mitigation industry (contractors), and residents in four European countries (Belgium, Ireland, Slovenia, and the UK) with high radon risks and low mitigation rates. Methods: A multi-method approach was used to gather data from various stakeholders, including online surveys, content analysis of legal documents, group interviews, workshops, and focus groups. Results: Authorities, contractors, and residents identified various facilitators to radon mitigation, including legal requirements for mitigation, awareness campaigns, low mitigation costs, availability of financial support, accreditation of mitigation contractors, and a perception of radon as a health threat. However, barriers to mitigation were also identified, such as a lack of awareness, fragmented mitigation processes, and inadequate communication between stakeholders. Discussion: The study highlights the complexity of the radon mitigation process and suggests that interventions aimed at increasing mitigation rates should target stakeholders beyond just residents, such as constructors, health professionals, and policy makers. An integrated approach to radon mitigation, from policy to provision, is necessary to effectively lower levels of this indoor air pollutant.

Suggestions for Improvements in National Radon Control Strategies of Member States Which Were Developed as a Requirement of EU Directive 2013/59 EURATOM.

Exposure to the indoor air pollutant radon is considered to be a significant health risk globally, as has been demonstrated by many studies over time. A recent WHO statement on radon estimates that, worldwide, approximately 80,000 people may die every year due to lung cancer associated with radon exposure. The recent years have also seen huge improvements in radon policies in European countries, as a consequence of the issuing, in 2013, of the Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom. Although the protection of workers from radon exposure is well established, the protection of the general public needs more improvements. The main objective of this paper is, first, to acknowledge and recognise the improvements in radon protection policies, but also to show that there are many areas where improvements are desirable and possible. The final goal is to suggest better ways to protect the general population from exposure to radon gas. The suggestions are based on the experiences of the co-authors, who come from different disciplines related to radon management. The following fields or areas where improvements are possible are identified: risk communication, building codes, radon policies, including funding, research and protection of children. We describe the work that has been conducted, and the possible improvements and solutions in these fields.

Cure or Carcinogen? A Framing Analysis of European Radon Spa Websites.

Objectives: Radon, a radioactive gas, is among the leading causes of lung-cancer worldwide. While public health authorities emphasize radon's health risks, there are spas across Europe which claim health benefits of radon. This study investigates how websites of European radon spas frame radon gas, in order to understand the potential controversy between "radon as carcinogen" and "radon as cure," and its potential impact on public health interventions. Methods: A two-phased frame analysis of websites of radon spas (n = 26) situated in the European Union. Results: Five frames are identified, which present radon as a 1) source of health, 2) natural gas, 3) (non) risk, 4) luxury and 5) fountain of youth. These five partly overlapping frames are at times in clear contrast with the ways in which radon is presented in a public health context. Conclusion: Being aware of the existence and contents of radon frames, which potentially challenge or contradict public health interventions, helps responsible authorities in designing more effective campaigns and interventions.

Societal aspects of NORM: An overlooked research field.

While technical aspects of exposures to the naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) are well explored, social science research on NORM is scarce, poorly indexed and dispersed across peer-reviewed literature, as well as various academic disciplines. Through an exploratory review of grey literature and a systematic review of scientific peer-reviewed articles published until December 2020, this paper addresses the following questions: (a) What are the societal challenges related to NORM? (b) What type of scientific research is being conducted on the societal aspects of NORM and (c) To what extent do the findings answer the identified challenges? Unfortunately, results of this study demonstrate a research gap related to the social, economic and cultural aspects of NORM management. Although the few existing studies offer some insights, for instance in relation to risk perception and risk communication, most of the societal challenges identified have not been addressed yet. This demonstrates the strong need for evidence based social science studies in order to improve the management of NORM.

Evaluation of citizen science contributions to radon research.

In order to reduce lung cancer due to radon exposure situations, not only authorities and organisations but also citizens may meaningfully contribute to radon mitigation actions. Citizen science (CS) initiatives are recognised for their scientific, societal and policy value related to environmental issues. The purpose of this paper is to identify which CS initiatives in the field of radon exist and evaluate to what extent these CS initiatives contribute to radon research and/or radiation protection from radon. We conducted a systematic review of internet pages and scientific literature (September-December 2020) as well as expert consultation to help us identify and assess CS initiatives on radon (September 2020-February 2021). The ten principles of the European Citizen Science Association have been used as a starting point to develop indicators for the analysis of CS contributions to radon research. The results show that there are at least eight CS initiatives in the world contributing to radon related research which comply, to some degree, with each of the ten principles. In all these initiatives citizens contributed or are contributing meaningfully to radon testing and measurements. However, most of them apply the simplest form of participation (crowdsourcing) and only one focuses on radon mitigation. Moreover, unlike CS initiatives in other environmental areas, those focusing on radon are always led by the authorities and/or universities, in a top-down manner. Yet, results confirm that both the experts in radon-related fields and the citizen scientists from radon prone areas benefit from taking part in radon CS initiatives. Experiences and lessons learned in radon related to CS initiatives are identified and discussed in order to inspire future CS initiatives potentially contributing to reducing exposure to radon as well as to the implementation of national radon action plans.