Search results

Der Beitrag setzt sich mit der Frage auseinander, ob die Forschung von Elinor Ostrom zur Commons Governance neue Deutungsmöglichkeiten in Bezug auf derzeitige Institutionalisierungs­prozesse im Verfahren der Standortsuche und generell für den Um­gang mit hochradioaktiven Abfällen eröffnen kann. Basierend auf teil­nehmenden Beobachtungen werden Hypothesen entwickelt, inwieweit dabei Logiken des Commoning verfolgt werden und erste Ergebnisse präsentiert.

Since 2013 the site search for a repository for highly radioactive waste has been taking place in Germany within the framework of a new governance architecture and under new political guidelines. Based on experiences with nuclear politics in the past, Jungk (1977) coined the term hard nuclear state , characterized by decisions made in a top-down manner. The Decide-Announce-Defend (DAD) strategy, which branded the nuclear state at that time, led to conflicts, mistrust of authorities and blockages. In particular, massive resistance developed against the planned final repository site at Gorleben. Nowadays, after more than 60 years deploying nuclear energy, the (energy) political balance of power has fundamentally changed. Parts of the anti-nuclear movement have been integrated into the political party system and have contributed significantly to the nuclear phase-out. In the course of this, the unfinished task of final disposal has been readdressed: with the Repository Site Selection Act (StandAG, 2017), which was passed in 2013 and amended in 2017, an ongoing process of public participation is stated. The site selection process is required to be learning, self-questioning, science-based, reversible, and participatory. The StandAG § 5 not only provides a basis for a fundamental dialogue between the regulator, the operator, and the public, but also for "co-design" by common citizens. The StandAG considers various elements from different participation-friendly theories of democracy as well as specific governance concepts, which we refer to collectively as the soft nuclear repository state (cf. Brunnengräber, 2021). Its characteristics need to be worked out, as the StandAG only provides some indications, but no criteria, for what good and sufficient participation in the site selection process means and what its conditions for success should be. Based on preliminary considerations on democratic theory and governance aspects (part 1), we present what good participation could mean in the current procedure and what the framework conditions for good participation could be (part 2). Additionally, we present main findings from participatory observations from the ongoing site search process and identify conditions and indications of a successful future participation process based on the ongoing process (part 3). In the résumé, we turn to the question of which of the democracy-theoretical elements of the soft repository state are already recognizable in the present procedure, but also whether the current procedure provides additional indications towards the soft nuclear repository state (part 4).

Since 2013 the site search for a repository for highly radioactive waste has been taking place in Germany within the framework of a new governance architecture and under new political guidelines. Based on experiences with nuclear politics in the past, Jungk (1977) coined the term hard nuclear state, characterized by decisions made in a top-down manner. The Decide-Announce-Defend (DAD) strategy, which branded the nuclear state at that time, led to conflicts, mistrust of authorities and blockages. In particular, massive resistance developed against the planned final repository site at Gorleben. Nowadays, after more than 60 years deploying nuclear energy, the (energy) political balance of power has fundamentally changed. Parts of the anti-nuclear movement have been integrated into the political party system and have contributed significantly to the nuclear phase-out. In the course of this, the unfinished task of final disposal has been readdressed: with the Repository Site Selection Act (StandAG, 2017), which was passed in 2013 and amended in 2017, an ongoing process of public participation is stated. The site selection process is required to be learning, self-questioning, science-based, reversible, and participatory. The StandAG § 5 not only provides a basis for a fundamental dialogue between the regulator, the operator, and the public, but also for "co-design" by common citizens. The StandAG considers various elements from different participation-friendly theories of democracy as well as specific governance concepts, which we refer to collectively as the soft nuclear repository state (cf. Brunnengräber, 2021). Its characteristics need to be worked out, as the StandAG only provides some indications, but no criteria, for what good and sufficient participation in the site selection process means and what its conditions for success should be. Based on preliminary considerations on democratic theory and governance aspects (part 1), we present what good participation could mean in the current procedure and what the framework conditions for good participation could be (part 2). Additionally, we present main findings from participatory observations from the ongoing site search process and identify conditions and indications of a successful future participation process based on the ongoing process (part 3). In the résumé, we turn to the question of which of the democracy-theoretical elements of the soft repository state are already recognizable in the present procedure, but also whether the current procedure provides additional indications towards the soft nuclear repository state (part 4).

Frontmatter --Inhalt --Vorwort --Konzepte und Maßnahmen zum Umgang mit soziotechnischen Herausforderungen bei der Entsorgung radioaktiver Abfälle --Teil I: Konzeptionelle und geschichtliche Einblicke --Welche Unterscheidungen braucht die Endlagerforschung? --Nukleare Technopolitik in der BRD -- zwischen technischer Utopie und sozialer Dystopie --Vom starken zum weichen Atomstaat --Der Atommüll -- eine soziotechnische Tatsache --Soziotechnische Analoga als Erfahrungshintergrund für ein Endlager --Teil II: Regulierung und Interdependenzen --Pfadabhängigkeiten in der Endlagerpolitik --Rolle und Entwicklung politischer Beratungs- und Begleitgremien nach dem Konzept des Science-Policy Interfaces --Arenen zur Austragung von Dissensen in der Endlagerpolitik --Zum politischen Umgang mit Expert*innendissens --Der socio-technical divide im Endlagerdiskurs --Institutionelle Herausforderungen bei der Endlagerung hochradioaktiver Abfälle --Teil III: Reversibilität in Entscheidungsprozessen --Reversibilität im Kontext der Entsorgung hochradioaktiver Abfälle --Expert*innendissens und das reversible Verfahren der Suche nach einem Endlagerstandort für hochradioaktive Abfälle --Reversibilität in Entscheidungsprozessen --Teil IV: Planungs- und Langzeitprozesse --Robuste Langzeit-Governance und Notwendigkeiten neuer Navigation --Das Lernen in Organisationen --Raumsensible Long-term Governance zur Bewältigung komplexer Langzeitaufgaben --Achtsamkeit und Fehlerkultur als notwendige Sicherheitsleistung --Die Gestaltung robuster Governanceprozesse: Unter welchen Bedingungen kann sie gelingen? --Biographische Angaben zu den Beitragsautor*innen