atw - International Journal for Nuclear Power | 02.2020

atw Vol. 65 (2020) | Issue 2 ı February
a) Bar chart with error bars b) Box-whisker type plot c) Continuous variable with upper and lower bound
| Fig. 7.
Beta Probability Distributions.
be needed for each option generated,
ahead of the second workshop, which
focussed on the option evaluation.
Members of the project team
designed the CompariCube® study in
advance of the second workshop. A set
of five common key metrics was
identified which could be used to
compare the options on an equivalent
basis. In order to best capture the
relative merits of the four options, a
large set of detailed questions was
created by which to evaluate each
option. The study, which was presented
and completed during the
workshop, evaluated a total of one
hundred and thirty-six questions
across the five metrics.
The evaluation and prioritisation
stage resulted in a list of options
ordered by acceptability to stakeholders
(as shown in Figure 10), with
the yellow colour used to indicate
‘ acceptable to the customer/other
stakeholders’ and the dark orange
colour used to indicate ‘not meeting
customer requirements’. An Uncertainty
Index was also made available
for each option. This prioritised
options list was subsequently used
to inform the waste management
strategy for the fuel sampling programme
going forwards.
relevance to stakeholders on a country-specific
basis, allowing public engagement
activities to be tailored
within member states. A future use
of CompariCube® is proposed for
creating public-engagement specific
studies based on the concept of the
materiality matrix. The benefits of
using CompariCube® for such a purpose
would be in producing a clear
visible output allowing stakeholder
issues and priorities to be readily
compared.
CompariCube® could also be incorporated
into and support other types
of public engagement techniques,
such as the ‘Hybrid Forum’ [10], and
the ‘Backcasting’ technique used
in a proposed social sustainability
framework for energy infrastructure
decisions [11].
The Hybrid Forum concept has
previously been used to make a decision
on the best flooding mitigation
strategy for a town in the UK, which
involved “experts” and “laypersons”
working together to find a solution
[12]. The principles underpinning
Hybrid Forums see all stakeholders as
equals who have valuable expertise
and knowledge, they facilitate the cocreation
of new knowledge between
“experts” and “laypersons” and they
work on the basis that all issues are
not known in advance of the forums.
Issues instead emerge through
dialogue and can lead to unforeseen
solutions to problems and establish
partnerships between stakeholders
that previously held opposing
positions. It is proposed that
CompariCube® could incorporate
input from various stakeholders, no
matter their area of expertise, and is
flexible enough to include new metrics
as they emerge and make the output
understandable to a wide range of
stakeholders allowing the co-creation
of knowledge and understanding
between “experts” and “laypersons”,
where everyone’s input adds value to
the decision-making process, and the
ENERGY POLICY, ECONOMY AND LAW 79
Public engagement
As illustrated in Figure 3, the local
community are a key stakeholder in
the decision-making process. The
Corporate Social Responsibility Group
within Finnish nuclear power company
(Teollisuuden Voima Oyj) (TVO)
uses a Materiality Matrix tool, which
is used to identify the aspects of social
responsibility with the greatest
relevance for the company’s stakeholders
and business operations [9].
This tool provides valuable insight
into areas which hold the most
| Fig. 9.
CompariCube® Graphical output showing preferred Option.
Energy Policy, Economy and Law
An Integrated Approach to Risk Informed Decision Management ı Howard Chapman, Maria Cormack, Caroline Pyke, John-Patrick Richardson and Reuben Holmes