Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42557475›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental management2026

An Integrated Approach to Nuclear Risk Governance in Decommissioning with a Major Focus on Stakeholder Risk Philosophies.

Sally Njogu, Leslie Mabon, Gareth Neighbour

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental management, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sally NjoguSchool of Engineering and Innovation, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK. salgattei@gmail.com.
Leslie MabonSchool of Engineering and Innovation, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.
Gareth NeighbourSchool of Engineering and Innovation, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper addresses how nuclear risk governance can ensure long-term safety, societal trust and ethical responsibility in managing nuclear waste under conditions of uncertainty. This challenge is shaped by increasing policy demands for transparency, sustainability and meaningful public engagement following major nuclear incidents. Existing approaches to risk governance draw on a range of theoretical perspectives, spanning technical, social and ethical domains. However, these are often applied in isolation, resulting in fragmented governance models that fail to capture the full socio-technical complexity of nuclear risk. To address this gap, the study critically synthesises key perspectives, including technical risk-based approaches, social and cultural theories of risk perception, decision and economic models and ethical frameworks concerned with justice and responsibility. The findings show that while each perspective offers valuable insights, none is sufficient on its own to achieve comprehensive governance, understood as an integrated approach that accounts for technical, social, ethical, institutional and uncertainty-related dimensions of risk. In response, the paper develops a pluralistic approach that brings these perspectives together into a coherent framework. This enables more adaptive, inclusive and context-sensitive risk governance. The study contributes a conceptual stakeholder-oriented framework to support policymakers in designing governance systems that are not only technically robust but also socially legitimate and ethically grounded in the context of nuclear waste management and decommissioning.

Indexed as

Radioactive WasteRisk ManagementWaste ManagementRadioactive Waste

Identifiers

PMID42557475
PMCPMC13442568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.