Technological Politics in the Nuclear Age

Journal of International Political Theory

This Introduction presents the seven closely interlinked papers that explore the theme of this Special Issue, and one of the enduring existential questions for International Relations: the nuclear condition in the twenty-first century. The Special Issue is the second to come from two workshops sponsored by a UK Leverhulme grant, and it builds upon the first, more theoretical Special Issue, which brought Classical Realist and Critical Theory texts into dialogue. The major concern in the first Special Issue—the focus on modernity, crises, and humanity—is taken up here in more grounded practical terms, framed around the existential fears of nuclear annihilation. Each of the contributions re-assess the contemporary nuclear condition from within the theoretical frameworks provided by Classical Realism and Critical Theory. The engagement with both traditions allows the contributors to diagnose what is new, and what remains constant, in the contemporary nuclear condition.

An essay from the 1980s on the nuclear confrontation of East and West basing itself on the Frankfurt School critique of technology.

The Impact of Disaster: Social and Cultural Approaches to Fukushima and Chernobyl. Berlin: EB-Publishers, 2015. S. 25-49., 2015

This paper analyses the rationality of nuclear power. Based mainly on an analysis of the time-scale of nuclear energy production, it argues that there are no available agents who can take on the responsibility for the utilisation of this technology. In the absence of responsible agents, nuclear energy utilisation takes on the form of organised irresponsibility. Because this is not accidental but inevitable, the choice in favour of nuclear energy is intrinsically irrational.

The relationship between nuclear energy and society in European countries has been fraught with controversy and mutual miscomprehension. In the majority of countries the controversy remains unresolved and the positions of those supporting nuclear power and those against it seem entrenched. A view into the history of the conflict offers the chance to learn what motivates these people, facilitate mutual comprehension and to improve societal engagement with this technology – and with modern technologies more generally. This brochure offers for the first time a comparative overview of the diverse national histories of nuclear energy and societies in 22 countries in Europe – North and South, East and West – and overseas. The short presentations assembled in this brochure are based on more substantive short country reports on the issue. This brochure presents the first results of the three year international, interdisciplinary Horizon 2020 research project "HoNESt - History of Nuclear Energy and Society" (www.honest2020.eu). It is funded by the Euratom Research and Training Programme 2014-2018 and started in September 2015. Its ambition is threefold: First, to provide an analytic overview of the rich and diverse historical experience of the relations between the nuclear energy sector and society in the past 60 years across 20 countries. Second, to draw more systematic conclusions on the mechanisms of successful public engagement between the nuclear sector and society. Finally, HoNESt’s research is not for the ivory tower. Indeed, HoNESt researchers will share and discuss their findings with the many stakeholders involved in this issue – from the nuclear sector, industry, associations, and civil society. The goal is to help learn from the experience and enhance the ways and modes of decision making about new technologies in democratic societies.

1984

Since the technical risk and the perception of risk towards nuclear energy in particular is an important factor for the acceptance of nuclear energy we try to elaborate this topic in some detail. Further it is necessary to evaluate values associated with energy production in order to concentrate on essentials when introducing nuclear energy into to energy system of a country. It is, moreover, helpful to show the differences in attitudes towards nuclear energy in industrialized and developing countries, and finally to present a review of public attitudes towards nuclear energy in German'y since the end of World War II. It may be possible to take advantage of the experience gained in our country. As a result of these investigations we present a proposal for a special programme for information and education to facilitate the introduction of nuclear energy in developing countries and to create a level of acceptance which is necessary for this step of development in the field of ener...

History and Technology, 2015

2012

Minerva, 2009

STS research has devoted relatively little attention to the promotion and reception of science and technology by non-scientific actors and institutions. One consequence is that the relationship of science and technology to political power has tended to remain undertheorized. This article aims to fill that gap by introducing the concept of “sociotechnical imaginaries.” Through a comparative examination of the development and regulation of nuclear power in the US and South Korea, the article demonstrates the analytic potential of the imaginaries concept. Although nuclear power and nationhood have long been imagined together in both countries, the nature of those imaginations has remained strikingly different. In the US, the state’s central move was to present itself as a responsible regulator of a potentially runaway technology that demands effective “containment.” In South Korea, the dominant imaginary was of “atoms for development” which the state not only imported but incorporated into its scientific, technological and political practices. In turn, these disparate imaginaries have underwritten very different responses to a variety of nuclear shocks and challenges, such as Three Mile Island (TMI), Chernobyl, and the spread of the anti-nuclear movement.

International Journal of Nuclear Governance, Economy and Ecology, 2012

Today, can we really ascertain whether Humanity has effectively derived more good than evil from the discovery of radioactivity a century ago? The answer hinges on the judgement that we and our fellow-citizens make about the impact of the applications of nuclear physics, by reference to a number of fundamental values: the concern to preserve our planet, its inhabitants and its environment; the need to avoid the risk of conflicts; and the guideline of the development of all peoples. At the collective level, an ethic must enable every social group, every nation and, perhaps, humanity, to form a community of behaviours. This places us at the very heart of the nuclear debate.