The Crucial Role of Nomothetic and Idiographic Conceptions of Time: Interdisciplinary Collaboration in Nuclear Waste Management

Risk Analysis

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 138-154

  Moser, Corinne ^a   Stauffacher, Michael ^a   Krütli, Pius ^a   Scholz, Roland W ^a  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Interdisciplinary collaboration; Nuclear waste management; Representation of extensive time scales

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY; HIGH LEVEL WASTE; INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLABORATIONS; INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAMS; NATURAL SCIENTISTS; NUCLEAR WASTE; NUCLEAR WASTE MANAGEMENT; RESEARCH APPROACH; RISK COMMUNICATION; SAFETY ASSESSMENTS; SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINE; SOCIOTECHNICAL; TECHNICAL EXPERTS; TIME-SCALES;

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; COMMUNICATION; MANAGEMENT; RADIOACTIVE WASTES; RATING; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAFETY ENGINEERING; SOCIAL SCIENCES; SPENT FUELS; TIME MEASUREMENT; WASTE DISPOSAL;

RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL;

ASSESSMENT METHOD; INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH; PSYCHOLOGY; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIOACTIVE WASTE; TIMESCALE; WASTE DISPOSAL;

ARTICLE; COOPERATION; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; RADIOACTIVE WASTE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; TIME; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; HUMANS; RADIOACTIVE WASTE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; TIME FACTORS; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

EID: 84855334277     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01639.x     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Nagra. Project Opalinus Clay. Safety Report: Demonstration of Disposal Feasibility of Spent Fuel, Vitrified High-Level Waste and Long-Lived Intermediate-Level Waste. Wettingen: Nagra, 2002.
2. Junker B, Flueeler T, Stauffacher M, Scholz RW. Description of the Safety Case for Long-Term Disposal of Radioactive Waste: The Iterative Safety Analysis Approach as Utilized in Switzerland. Zürich: NSSI / ETH Zürich, 2008.
3. Flueeler T. Decision Making for Complex Socio-Technical Systems: Robustness from Lessons Learned in Long-Term Radioactive Waste Governance. Dordrecht: Springer, 2006.
4. IAEA. Classification of Radioactive Waste: A Safety Guide. Vienna: IAEA, 1994.
5. Krütli P, Flueeler T, Stauffacher M, Wiek A, Scholz RW. Technical safety vs. public involvement? A case study on the unrealized project for the disposal of nuclear waste at Wellenberg (Switzerland). Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences, 2010; 7(3):229-244.
6. Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science, 1987; 236(4799):280-285.
7. Flynn J, Slovic P, Mertz CK. Decidedly different: Expert and public views of risks from a radioactive waste repository. Risk Analysis, 1993; 13(6):643-648.
8. Fischhoff B. Risk perception and communication unplugged: 20 years of process. Risk Analysis, 1995; 15(2):137-145.
9. Sjöberg L. Limits of knowledge and the limited importance of trust. Risk Analysis, 2001; 21(1):189-198.
10. Siegrist M, Earle TC, Gutscher H (eds). Trust in Cooperative Risk Management: Uncertainty and Scepticism in the Public Mind. London: Earthscan, 2007.
11. NEA. Strategic Areas in Radioactive Waste Management: The Viewpoint and Work Orientations of NEA Radioactive Waste Management Committee. Paris: OECD/NEA, 1999.
12. Krütli P, Stauffacher M, Flueeler T, Scholz RW. Functional-dynamic public participation in technological decision making: Site selection processes of nuclear waste repositories. Journal of Risk Research, 2010; 13(7):861-875.
13. Stern PC, Fineberg HF (eds). Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 1996.
14. Greenberg MR. NIMBY, CLAMP, and the location of new nuclear-related facilities: US national and 11 site-specific surveys. Risk Analysis, 2009; 29(9):1242-1254.
15. Scholz RW, Stauffacher M, Boesch S, Krütli P, Wiek A (eds). Entscheidungsprozesse Wellenberg. Lagerung radioaktiver Abfälle in der Schweiz [Decision Processes Wellenberg. Disposal of Radioactive Waste in Switzerland]. Zürich/Chur: Rüegger, 2007.
16. Stauffacher M, Krütli P, Scholz RW (eds). Gesellschaft und radioaktive Abfälle. Ergebnisse einer schweizweiten Befragung [Society and Radioactive Waste: Results of a Survey in Switzerland]. Zürich/Chur: Rüegger, 2008.
17. IRGC. Risk Governance: Towards an Integrative Approach. White Paper No. 1. Geneva: International Risk Governance Council, 2005.
18. Renn O. Risk Governance: Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World. London: Earthscan, 2008.
19. Greenhalgh J, Flynn R, Long AF, Tyson S. Tacit and encoded knowledge in the use of standardised outcome measures in multidisciplinary team decision making: A case study of in-patient neurorehabilitation. Social Science & Medicine, 2008; 67(1):183-194.
20. Haas PM. Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 1992; 46(1):1-35.
21. Stauffacher M, Moser C. A new "epistemic community" in nuclear waste governance? Theoretical reflections and empirical observations of some fundamental challenges. Catalan Journal of Communication and Cultural Studies, 2010; 2(2):197-211.
22. Fischer ARH, de Jong AEI, de Jonge R, Frewer LJ, Nauta MJ. Improving food safety in the domestic environment: The need for a transdisciplinary approach. Risk Analysis, 2005; 25(3):503-517.
23. Petts J, Owens S, Bulkeley H. Crossing boundaries: Interdisciplinarity in the context of urban environments. Geoforum, 2008; 39(2):593-601.
24. Lorenzoni I, Pidgeon NF, O'Connor RE. Dangerous climate change: The role for risk research. Risk Analysis, 2005; 25(6):1387-1398.
25. Jasanoff S. Bridging the two cultures of risk analysis. Risk Analysis, 1993; 13(2):123-129.
26. Thompson KM, Deisler PF, Schwing RC. Interdisciplinary vision: The first 25 years of the Society for Risk Analysis (SRA), 1980-2005. Risk Analysis, 2005; 25(6):1333-1386.
27. SRA. Vision Statement of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2009. Available at:, Accessed on October 10, 2009.
28. Horlick-Jones T, Sime J. Living on the border: Knowledge, risk and transdisciplinarity. Futures, 2004; 36(4):441-456.
29. Althaus CE. A disciplinary perspective on the epistemological status of risk. Risk Analysis, 2005; 25(3):567-588.
30. Kümmerer K. The ecological impact of time. Time & Society, 1996; 5(2):209-235.
31. Greenaway F (ed). Time and the Sciences. Paris: UNESCO, 1979.
32. McGrath JE, Tschan F. Temporal Matters in Social Psychology: Examining the Role of Time in the Lives of Groups and Individuals. Washington: APA, 2004.
33. Slife BD. Time and Psychological Explanation. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993.
34. Wittmann M. The inner experience of time. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 2009; 364(1525):1955-1967.
35. Frederick S, Loewenstein G, O'Donoghue T. Time discounting and time preference: A critical review. Journal of Economic Literature, 2002; 40(2):351-401.
36. Hendrickx L, Nicolaij S. Temporal discounting and environmental risks: The role of ethical and loss-related concerns. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2004; 24(4):409-422.
37. Gattig A, Hendrickx L. Judgmental discounting and environmental risk perception: Dimensional similarities, domain differences, and implications for sustainability. Journal of Social Issues, 2007; 63(1):21-39.
38. Adam B. Timescapes of Modernity: The Environment and Invisible Hazards. London/New York: Routledge, 1998.
39. Lewin K. Field Theory in Social Science. New York: Harper, 1951.
40. Liberman N, Trope Y. The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal construal theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1998; 75(1):5-18.
41. Trope Y, Liberman N. Temporal construal. Psychological Review, 2003; 110(3):403-421.
42. Scholz RW. Cognitive Strategies in Stochastic Thinking. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1987.
43. Henderson MD, Trope Y, Carnevale PJ. Negotiation from a near and distant time perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006; 91(4):712-729.
44. Henderson MD, Trope Y. The effects of abstraction on integrative agreements: When seeing the forest helps avoid getting tangled in the trees. Social Cognition, 2009; 27(3):402-417.
45. Svenson O, Karlsson G. Decision-making, time horizons, and risk in the very long-term perspective. Risk Analysis, 1989; 9(3):385-399.
46. Drottz-Sjöberg B-M. Perceptions of nuclear wastes across extreme time perspectives. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, 2010; 1(4):231-253.
47. Patton MQ. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002.
48. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative Data Analysis. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994.
49. Morgan MG, Fischhoff B, Bostrom A, Atman CJ. Risk Communication: A Mental Models Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
50. ATLAS.ti. User's Guide and Reference. 2nd ed. Berlin: ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development GmbH, 2004.
51. Müller U, Giesbrecht GF. Psychological models of time: Arrows, cycles and spirals. Culture & Psychology, 2006; 12(2):221-229.
52. Yamada Y, Kato Y. Images of circular time and spiral repetition: The generative life cycle model. Culture & Psychology, 2006; 12(2):143-160.
53. Overton WF. The arrow of time and the cycle of time: Concepts of change, cognition, and embodiment. Psychological Inquiry, 1992; 5(3):215-237.
54. Windelband W. Präludien. Aufsätze und Reden zur Einleitung in die Philosophie [Preludes, Essays and Speeches to Introduce Philosophy]. 3rd ed. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1907.
55. Nussbaum S, Liberman N, Trope Y. Predicting the near and distant future. Journal of Experimental Psychology-General, 2006; 135(2):152-161.
56. Nagra. Project Opalinus Clay. Models, Codes and Data for Safety Assessment: Demonstration of Disposal Feasibility of Spent Fuel, Vitrified High-Level Waste and Long-Lived Intermediate-Level Waste. Wettingen: Nagra, 2002.
57. NEA. Considering Timescales in the Post-Closure Safety of Geological Disposal of Radioactive Waste. Paris: OECD, 2009.
58. IAEA & NEA. Geological Disposal of Radioactive Waste. Vienna: IAEA, 2006.
59. Held M. Sustainable development from a temporal perspective. Time & Society, 2001; 10(2-3):351-366.
60. Nesselroade JR. Intraindividual variability in development within and between individuals. European Psychologist, 2001; 6(3):187-193.
61. NRC. One Step at a Time: The Staged Development of Geologic Repositories for High-Level Radioactive Waste. Washington: National Academies Press, 2003.
62. SKI. Transparency and Public Participation in Radioactive Waste Management: RISCOM II Final Report. Stockholm: Swedish Radiation Safety Authority, SSM (former SKI), 2004.
63. Janis IL. Victims of Group Think. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972.
64. BFE. Sectoral Plan for Deep Geological Repositories. Conceptual Part. Bern: UVEK, 2008.
65. Horlick-Jones T, Prades A. On interpretative risk perception research: Some reflections on its origins; its nature; and its possible applications in risk communication practice. Health Risk & Society, 2009; 11(5):409-430.
66. Gilbert GN, Mulkay M. Warranting scientific belief. Social Studies of Science, 1982; 12(3):383-408.
67. Flueeler T. Options in radioactive waste management revisited: A proposed framework for robust decision making. Risk Analysis, 2001; 21(4):787-799.