Dynamics of stakeholder involvement in the development of a handbook on practical radiation protection for areas contaminated for prolonged periods

1
Dynamics of stakeholder involvement in the
development of a handbook on practical radiation
protection for areas contaminated for prolonged
periods
Anne Nisbet Julie Mercer, Céline Bataille,
Pascal Crouaïl, Irene Fiedler
2
Presentation Outline

• Background
• The SAGE handbook
• Why stakeholder engagement
• Who are the stakeholders
• The stakeholder consultation process
• Feedback on the handbook
• Evaluation of consultation process
• Conclusions

3
Background

• Former Soviet Union
• ETHOS project
• Inclusive radiation monitoring
• Need for strategies guidance

4
The SAGE handbook
Points of entry
Technical sheets
The householder The health professional The
measurement professional The stakeholder advisory
board
Radioactivity Exposure routes Radiation
monitoring Practical tools
5
Why stakeholder engagement?

• Top down approaches can lead to loss of
  social trust

• Innovative approaches involving stakeholders
  at national local levels

• UK Recovery Handbook

• Rehabilitation in Stolyn
• district Belarus

6
Who are the stakeholders?
NGOs Teachers Consumer association Monitoring
laboratory Farmers Union Public pressure
group Public health group Academics experts in
risk communication Help for Gomel Fireman
GOs Radiological protection Health
protection Environmental protection Medical
doctors Social services Food control
7
The stakeholder panels
8
The stakeholder panels
Health protection unit
Public health group
Public pressure group
Head teacher
Experts in risk communication
9
Stakeholder consultation process

• Five meetings
• Practical sessions
• Presentations
• Discussions iterative feedback

10
Stakeholder consultation process

• Three meetings
• Presentations
• Discussions iterative feedback

11
Stakeholder consultation process

• Three meetings
• Presentations
• Four/five satellite panels
• Discussions iterative feedback

12
Stakeholder consultation process

• The Questionnaire
• Format
• structure, language, clarity, level of
  technical detail
• General applicability of the handbook
• philosophy, fit with current systems, other
  contaminants
• Practicability and appropriateness of
  information/ guidance provided
• target audience, relevance, availability of
  equipment training
• Adapting the handbook
• irrelevant sections, missing topics

13
Stakeholder feedback on the handbook

• 1 Format, structure and content
• Common language
• Easily understood front end technical
  sheets at the back
• Information illustrations for Western Europe
• Additional sections - reference situations,
  stochastic risks
• Glossary

14
Stakeholder feedback on the handbook

• 2 Concern over the role of doctors
• Doctors would be overstretched
• Extend role to all health professionals
  (public health physicians, staff of hospitals,
  nurses, pharmacists, psychologists, school
  doctors and company doctors)
• Emphasise need for education training

15
Stakeholder feedback on the handbook

• 3 Concern over measurements
• Ambient dose rates, measurements in food
  whole body
• How much to involve the people?
• Need for calibrated equipment, collection
  preparation of samples, training
• Results should always discussed with experts
• Importance of measurements from different
  sources (plurality)
• Openness/availability of individual data

16
Final reflections on the handbook

• Two years was insufficient to develop the
  handbook
• Provides first principles of how to live in
• Generic, based on a virtual territory
• Biased to rural environments
• Needs to be adapted to specific countries,
  territories and environments
• Belarussian panel welcomed work of Western
  European panels re format content were keen
  to adapt to Belarussian context

17
Final reflections on the handbook

• Useful reference tool concepts generally
  applicable to other contaminants
• Requires political will and funding
• Western European panels agreed to produce
  leaflets for members of the public
• Requirement for other types of handbooks,
  strategies guidance for management of early
  late phases these must be consistent with the
  principles set out for long-term rehabilitation

18
Evaluation of consultation process

• 1st time for this type of consultation on
  rehabilitation
• Successfully engaged all of the key
  stakeholders
• Establishment of satellite panels efficient
  mechanism
• Mix of practical sessions, presentations
  discussion maintain interest
• Stakeholders felt empowered

19
Evaluation of consultation process

• Stakeholders have had a significant influence
  on scope, format content of handbook
• Process raised profile of rehabilitation
  issues
• Authorities starting to understand issues
• Some making plans for tackling deficiencies
  in national infrastructure

20
Conclusions

• Good example of participative inclusive
  governance
• Dynamics of process significant positive
  influence on handbook development
• Good representation of GO and NGOs
• Health professionals play key role
• Need for training and investment essential

21
Acknowledgements

• The contribution made by members of all the
  stakeholder panels
• Financial support from the European Commission
  Fifth Framework Programme (Nuclear Fission,
  Radiation Protection) under Contract No
  FIS5-2002-00040.