The Process Matters: Fairness in Repository Siting For Nuclear Waste
Krütli, Pius ; Stauffacher, Michael ; Pedolin, Dario ; Moser, Corinne ; Scholz, Roland
In: Social Justice Research, 2012, vol. 25, no. 1, p. 79-101
Ajouter à la liste personnelle- Summary
- Siting contested infrastructure such as repositories for nuclear waste very often faces strong local resistance. One major reason for this opposition may arise because siting processes do not appropriately consider fairness issues such as transparency, the availability of options, or the sufficient involvement of concerned and affected people. The aim of this study was to analyze people's concerns related to justice in siting nuclear waste. Besides procedural aspects, both distributive justice and outcome valence are considered important and therefore the "total fairness model” by Törnblom and Vermunt (Soc Justice Res 12:39-64, 1999) was used as a framework. In three quasi-experimental studies (N 1=53; N 2=56; N 3=83) applying conjoint analysis, respondents ranked 11 vignettes with the three attributes procedural justice, distributional justice, and outcome valence. Each vignette represents a realistic scenario of a site selection process for the disposal of nuclear waste in Switzerland. All the three studies yield a consistent result: vignettes representing a situation with a fair process are top-ranked by respondents; situations with negative outcome valence are ranked lowest; distributive issues turned out to be of minor importance. We conclude that procedural fairness should be given more attention in any kind of contested infrastructure siting and that real-world examples like the one discussed here can inform justice research