EDP Sciences 1776652492 20260420 fre

laboutique.edpsciences.fr-R002845 03 01 01 R002845 00 ED E107 00 01 01 The Co-Expertise Process An Inclusive and Sustainable Risk Governance Approach for Post-Nuclear Accident Recovery 01 eng 08 273 03 22 5463080 17 01 P1 EDP Sciences 01 01 P1 EDP Sciences 17 avenue du Hoggar - PA de Courtaboeuf - 91944 Les Ulis cedex A http://publications.edpsciences.org/ 11 00 20260420 02 01 003019 03 9782759839681 15 9782759839681 03 01 D1 EDP Sciences 29 https://laboutique.edpsciences.fr/open_access_download/3019/2845 45 03 laboutique.edpsciences.fr-003019 03 01 01 003019 03 9782759839681 15 9782759839681 10 EA E107 10 00 01 R002845 ED E107 1 10 01 02 Hors Collection - 01 01 The Co-Expertise Process An Inclusive and Sustainable Risk Governance Approach for Post-Nuclear Accident Recovery 1 B15 01 A2449 Jacques Lochard Lochard, Jacques Jacques Lochard Jacques Lochard has a background in economics. He joined the Nuclear Protection Evaluation Centre (CEPN), a non-profit research and study organization in radiation protection, in 1977 and served as its director from 1989 to 2016. He was ideally positioned as Vice- President of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) from 2013 to 2021 to influence the introduction of the fundamental and procedural values of radiation protection, as well as the co-expertise process in ICRP publications 138 and 146. 2 B15 01 A2450 Thierry Schneider Schneider, Thierry Thierry Schneider Thierry Schneider is the Director of Nuclear Protection Evaluation Centre (CEPN), France since 2017. He is member of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) since 2017. Since April 2025, he is also Professor of radiological protection and risk communication at Department of Disaster Resilience and Science, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute of Nagasaki University. 3 B15 01 A2451 Noboru Takamura Takamura, Noboru Noboru Takamura Noboru Takamura is a full Professor in the Department of Disaster Resilience and Science, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute of Nagasaki University since 2008. In April 2020, he was appointed as the first director of the Great East Japan Earthquake and Nuclear Disaster Memorial Museum in the town of Futaba close to the Fukushima nuclear power plant established to share the lessons learned from the complex disaster that occurred in Japan. 01 eng 08 271 03 01 24 Izibook:Subject Nucléaire 24 Izibook:SubjectAndCategoryAndTags |Nucléaire| 20 Chernobyl;Fukushima;nuclear accident;contamination;post-accident recovery 10 2011 SCI055000 29 CLIL3058 01 530 06 06 03 00 <blockquote>This book, dedicated to the implementation of inclusive risk management processes involving citizens and experts in the post-nuclear accident reconstruction phase, is the result of extensive experience gained by researchers and practitioners in the areas contaminated by the Chernobyl accident in Belarus, Norway and the United Kingdom, and the Fukushima accident in Japan. Coming from diverse backgrounds, they enthusiastically shared their experiences, while adhering to rigorous scientific standards, to write thirteen essays that shed light on the challenges of restoring living conditions after a major nuclear event. Building on the recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, a series of analyses and testimonies are offered to students and researchers, as well as to professionals in the social sciences and humanities committed to risk governance and cooperation with public and private sector stakeholders.</blockquote>“In a time when expertise alone no longer guarantees legitimacy, this book shows how co-expertise ― sustained dialogue and shared responsibility ― can reshape post-accident recovery. A thoughtful and timely contribution to the future of risk governance”. Christopher Clement, ICRP Scientific Secretary and IRPA President“The co-expertise process offers profound insights and courage to all those who live in a risky society. It is a ‘technology of humility’ for safeguarding human values and for jointly building the future”. Toshimitsu Homma, co-author of ICRP Publication 146“Scientific rigor is essential in the co-expertise process, but it is the respect for human dignity that really makes a difference. Each chapter stands as a testament to this simple truth”. Nobuhiko Ban, former Commissioner NRA Japan<div> </div> 02 00 This book is dedicated to the implementation of inclusive risk management processes involving citizens and experts in the post-nuclear accident reconstruction phase ; it is the result of extensive experience gained by researchers and practitioners in  contaminated areas (esp. Chernobyl and Fukushima).  04 00 Acknowledgments. 1Preface . 3Prologue. Living in contaminated areas after a nuclear accident . 7Part IThe co-expertise process in practice: the Chornobyl experienceChapter 1.The emergence of the co-expertise process in the ETHOS project in Belarus after the Chornobyl accident. 15Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151. The strategic context of the ETHOS project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162. The practical implementation of the ETHOS project. . . . . . . . . . . . . 213. The extension of the ETHOS project and the concluding International Seminar. . . . . . . . . . . . 34Concluding remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Chapter 2.The CORE Programme in Belarus after the Chornobyl accident . 41Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411. The governance and operating principles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 422. The commitment of local actors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473. The priority areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47Concluding remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58Annexe: Declaration of principles on the CORE programme. 60Chapter 3.The co-expertise experience in Norway after the Chornobyl accident . 71Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 711. Impacts on reindeer herding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 722. Cultural, psychosocial and socioeconomic aspects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 773. Stakeholder engagement and co-expertise process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814. Lessons learned for the co-expertise process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84Chapter 4.The co-expertise experience of upland sheep farmers in the UK after the Chornobyl accident. 871. Historical context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872. The response by the authorities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903. The human dimensions of the situation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 914. The co-expertise process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935. Evolution of the co-expertise process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966. Main lessons learned for the co-expertise process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99Part II The co-expertise process in practice: the Fukushima experienceChapter 5.The Kawauchi co-expertise experience in Japan after the Fukushima accident . 103Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031. Dialogue activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1052. Measurement activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1073. Local project activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084. Diffusion of the Kawauchi experience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115. Lessons Learnt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113Chapter 6.The Suetsugi district co-expertise experience in Japan after the Fukushima accident . 115Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151. The initial steps of the co-expertise process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1172. The diffusion and transmission of experience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1233. Some lessons from the Suetsugi experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130Chapter 7.The Yamakiya co-expertise experience in Japan after the Fukushima accident . 133Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1331. Environmental surveys and dialogue in the Yamakiya district of Kawamata. . . .. . . . . . 1352. The Yamakiya School interactive learning and exchange program . . . . 1383. Effectiveness of the Yamakiya School. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1424. The Fukushima Dialogue in Yamakiya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1465. Epilogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149Chapter 8.The Kashiwa co-expertise experience in Japan after the Fukushima Accident . 151Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1511. The Round-Table project in Kashiwa city. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1532. The role of dialogue between stakeholders and the contribution of sociology. . . . .. . . . . . . . 1563. Local project: understanding radiation protection as an everyday activity? . . . . .. . . . . . 1584. Radiation protection culture in a competitive market environment. . . . 160Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163Part III The three pillars of the co-expertise process and their scientific and ethical foundationsChapter 9.The role of the dialogue in the co-expertise process after a nuclear accident : the power of narrative. 167Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1671. The post-nuclear accident disruption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1692. Dialogue as a narrative framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1703. The role of testimonies in the dialogue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1724. Dialogue and the use of facilitation techniques. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177Chapter 10.The role of measurements in the co-expertise process after a nuclear accident : a contribution to mediating the reality. 181Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1811. The measurement process: making the invisible visible. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 1822. Taming the rays: the D-Shuttle experience in Japan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1863. The main ethical aspects of measurements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1894. Measurement as mediation to reality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192Concluding remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195Chapter 11.The role of local projects in the co-expertise process after a nuclear accident : fostering self-confidence and building the future together. . . . . . . . . .. . 197Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1971. The variety of local projects implemented after Chornobyl and Fukushima. . . .. . . . . 1982. Contribution of local projects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211Chapter 12.The scientific foundations of the co-expertise process : from risk assessment and management to risk governance . 215Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2151. The basis of radiation protection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2172. Stakeholder involvement and the ethical foundations of the system of protection . . .. . . . . 2203. Risk communication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2204. Risk governance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227Chapter 13.The ethical dimensions of the co-expertise process after a nuclear accident . 231Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2311. Co-expertise as a site of ethical reflection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2322. The ethics of the co-expertise process in practice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246Epilogue. “The path is built by walking” : the co-expertise process as a technology of humility. 2491. Historical perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2502. About the technology of humility. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254Biographies. 257 21 00 06 01 https://laboutique.edpsciences.fr/produit/1565/9782759839681/the-co-expertise-process 01 00 03 02 https://laboutique.edpsciences.fr/system/product_pictures/data/009/983/600/original/9782759839681-Co-expertise_COUV.jpg 17 14 20260415T104011+0200 01 P1 EDP Sciences 01 01 P1 EDP Sciences 17 avenue du Hoggar - PA de Courtaboeuf - 91944 Les Ulis cedex A http://publications.edpsciences.org/ 04 11 00 20260420 01 00 20260420 19 00 20260420 2026 06 3052868830012 01 WORLD 13 03 9782759839698 15 9782759839698 WORLD 08 EDP Sciences 04 01 00 20260420 03 01 D1 EDP Sciences 20 04 05 01 02 1 00 01 EUR