Volume 55, May 2020Coping with uncertainties for improved modelling and decision making in nuclear emergencies. Key results of the CONFIDENCE European research project
|Page(s)||S135 - S143|
|Section||DEVELOPMENT OF COUNTERMEASURE STRATEGIES INVOLVING STAKEHOLDERS|
|Published online||15 May 2020|
Towards an improved decision-making process to better cope with uncertainties following a nuclear accident
IRSN – Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Institute,
2 CEPN – Nuclear Protection Evaluation Centre, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France
3 CIEMAT – Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Tecnológicas, Madrid, Spain
4 APA – Portuguese Environment Agency, Amadora, Portugal
5 IST-C2TN – Instituto Superior Técnico, Centro de Ciências e Tecnologias Nucleares, Lisbon, Portugal
6 EPA – Environmental Protection Agency, Dublin, Ireland
7 EEAE – Greek Atomic Energy Commission, Athens, Greece
8 RIVM – Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
9 WFSR – Wageningen Food Safety Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands
10 VUJE – VUJE a.s., Trnava, Slovak Republic
* Corresponding author: email@example.com
An emergency situation is subject to multiple sources of uncertainties which should be identified in advance in order to improve the emergency and recovery management, and so optimally foster the living conditions of the population and the quality of their environment. In this context, the Work Package 4 of the European Research Project CONFIDENCE aimed at identifying and reducing uncertainties which could emerge in decision-making processes, in order to improve the preparedness and response after a nuclear accident. To that end, stakeholder panels have been set up in several European countries to collect their views and concerns regarding the decisions to be taken in the event of a nuclear crisis (e.g. evacuation, food restrictions, etc.). More particularly, the implementation of these panels allowed the researchers to (i) identify the main uncertainties that may hamper decision-making processes and to (ii) evaluate the influence of prior decisions made during the emergency phase over the medium to long-term evolution of the situation. Based on these discussions, the various types of uncertainties raised by the national panels have been analysed in order to suggest recommendations to better consider them and to improve the decision-making processes. This paper aims to detail the recommendations resulting from the panels discussions.
Key words: nuclear accident / emergency and transition phases / uncertainties / decision-making process / recommendations / emergency preparedness and response / post-accident recovery
© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences 2020
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.