Improving Participation in the German Search for a Nuclear Waste Repository Site: a WebGIS as a Transdisciplinary Approach to Support Dialogue?

Abstract

Abstract. The political and social debate on nuclear energy in Germany has been characterized for many decades by a high potential for conflict and dissatisfaction. In particular, the controversies surrounding the Gorleben salt dome achieved international attention and altered the relationship between the population and political decision makers at the local up to international levels. With the Site Selection Act from 2013 (StandAG, first revision 2017) a new approach was selected in order to find a participative, inclusive and transparent search process for the best possible site of a repository for highly radioactive waste in Germany. In connection with this a self-learning process was proclaimed, based on a white (unprejudiced) map, which aimed to give the general public an active role; however, even the first interim report of the Federal Company for Radioactive Waste Disposal (BGE) and the publication of the multicolored map, in which geologically suitable areas were extensively shown, revealed a massive potential for conflict. Many citizens and activists, who had already protested against the Gorleben salt dome, in this early phase of the process criticized the lack of transparency and opportunities to voice an opinion on possible site regions. In order to counter these criticisms, the possibilities for a web geographic information system (WebGIS) application (interactive map) as an online platform were analyzed (Walkobinger and Tauch, 2018; Brown and Kyttä, 2018). The aim was to virtualy present available geodata (Chwalisz, 2021), which enabled people to contribute to spatial information (geological, superficial) and therefore to achieve an interaction and participation option with respect to the possible site regions. For this, available geodata relevant for the site search process, such as subareas (BGE, 2020), nuclear power stations (active/inactive, research stations etc.), storage facilities (repository, central, intermediate storage etc.), historically relevant sites (sites of protest, uranium-enrichment and preparation plants etc.) and basic data on orientation were used. Based on this, two possibilities for participative interaction were analyzed: (1) the inclusion of spatially located notes that contain own experiences or local knowledge (e.g. reports, concerns, suggestions, own expert opinions) and (2) the initiation of a platform for a spatially located discussion. Against the background of transdisciplinary research, the aim was to evaluate the participative value of this application in an iterative process, in which the research process is supported by an accompanying group from civil society. For this panel we want to present our results from the transdisciplinary research process. In addition to testing the suitability of such a participation mode, we want to analyze where problems arise and which information is necessary or can lead to conflicts (Griffin, 2020). Finally, we want to gain information on how such participation modes influence the quality of the dialogue and how they contribute to an overall perception of a legally acceptable process (Rzeszewski and Kotus, 2019).