Imagining "engagement": A hands-on experiment

Using participatory mapping techniques, social scientists at the 2018 Radiation Protection Week in Rovinj (Croatia) invited conference attendees to write and draw their thoughts about stakeholder engagement in radiation protection on a giant tableau. In the course of three days, a full map emerged assembling stakeholder names, relationships, practices, and visions of stakeholder engagement for the future. The map and the process that accompanied its construction are an integral part of the EU-ENGAGE project, which seeks to address key difficulties and opportunities for stakeholder engagement in exposures to ionizing radiation

A Holistic Understanding of Integrational Support from University Students’ Perspective Through Appreciative Inquiry

AbstractStudent integration into the academic community is a primary condition for student success and achievement. This research explores the potential enhancements of supportive activities and key peer facilitator traits to maximize social and academic integration of first year university students. Focus group interviews (n=16) were conducted with first-year students (n=93) coming directly from secondary school. Using Appreciative Inquiry, participants indicate that current informally organized support activities in a university environment during the first semester of the academic year are highly desirable (e.g. welcome activities, extra-curricular activities, co-curricular activities). The need for support in social integration in the beginning of the year and the need for support in academic integration at the end of the first semester clearly arise out of this study. When addressing some specific criteria related to the objectives, form and design, this paper suggests that peer-assisted support activities are particularly useful in increasing sustainable informal peer support and integration among students. This article aims to prompt further discussion on the potential, value and purpose of department-specific structural peer assisted support and peer learning approaches for integration of first year university students

How would citizens react to official advice in a nuclear emergency? Insights from research in three European countries

publishedVersio

TERRITORIES: a holistic approach of long-lasting radiological exposure situations

International audienceBackgroundTERRITORIES, part of the H2020 Program CONCERT, is a 3-year-project (2017-2019), involving 11 partners, from 8 European countries. The scope of this project includes existing exposure situations due to NORM, and due to nuclear accident (long-term).MethodsAll deliverables are published on the TERRITORIES website, https://territories.eu/. Among them, 7 were due end of June 2019:•D9.63: Guidance about exposure scenario (not developed here, cf. a case-study presented by Bertho et al., RICOMET session 10),•D9.64: Social and ethical aspects linked to monitoring and modelling: a Socio-Technical Integration Research approach (cf. part of the work also presented by Lopez-Asensio et al., RICOMET session 3),•D9.66: Results of a stakeholders panel about an hypothetical post-accidental situation,•D9.67 and D9.68: Results of 2 stakeholders panels about NORM situations (cf. part of the work also presented by Sala et al., RICOMET session 7, and a related review by Popic et al., same session),•D9.69: Results of a Pathway Evaluation Process (PEP) session organized with stakeholders about an hypothetical post-accidental situation,•D9.70: Framework for socio-economic analysis, i.e. Cost-benefit Analysis (CBA) and Multi-Criteria Decision Aiding (MCDA)ResultsHolism (from Greek ὅλος "all, whole, entire") is the idea that a system and its properties should be viewed as a whole, not just as a collection of parts. In the context of the TERRITORIES project, this is for example understood as:•a multi-disciplinary approach, e.g. having social scientists and scientists involved in monitoring and modelling working together, for their mutual benefit, cf. D9.64,•assessing as a whole all of the decision criteria (or costs and benefits, including non-monetary ones) for decision-making about remediation, cf. D9.70,•engagement of all stakeholders, through various tools to structure dialogue, cf. D9.66 to D9.70,•considering all aspects of life in contaminated territories, including quality of life (cf D9.66), dignity of life (cf. D9.69), or recovery of sustainable socio-economic activity (cf. D9.66)

TERRITORIES: a holistic approach of long-lasting radiological exposure situations

International audienceBackgroundTERRITORIES, part of the H2020 Program CONCERT, is a 3-year-project (2017-2019), involving 11 partners, from 8 European countries. The scope of this project includes existing exposure situations due to NORM, and due to nuclear accident (long-term).MethodsAll deliverables are published on the TERRITORIES website, https://territories.eu/. Among them, 7 were due end of June 2019:•D9.63: Guidance about exposure scenario (not developed here, cf. a case-study presented by Bertho et al., RICOMET session 10),•D9.64: Social and ethical aspects linked to monitoring and modelling: a Socio-Technical Integration Research approach (cf. part of the work also presented by Lopez-Asensio et al., RICOMET session 3),•D9.66: Results of a stakeholders panel about an hypothetical post-accidental situation,•D9.67 and D9.68: Results of 2 stakeholders panels about NORM situations (cf. part of the work also presented by Sala et al., RICOMET session 7, and a related review by Popic et al., same session),•D9.69: Results of a Pathway Evaluation Process (PEP) session organized with stakeholders about an hypothetical post-accidental situation,•D9.70: Framework for socio-economic analysis, i.e. Cost-benefit Analysis (CBA) and Multi-Criteria Decision Aiding (MCDA)ResultsHolism (from Greek ὅλος "all, whole, entire") is the idea that a system and its properties should be viewed as a whole, not just as a collection of parts. In the context of the TERRITORIES project, this is for example understood as:•a multi-disciplinary approach, e.g. having social scientists and scientists involved in monitoring and modelling working together, for their mutual benefit, cf. D9.64,•assessing as a whole all of the decision criteria (or costs and benefits, including non-monetary ones) for decision-making about remediation, cf. D9.70,•engagement of all stakeholders, through various tools to structure dialogue, cf. D9.66 to D9.70,•considering all aspects of life in contaminated territories, including quality of life (cf D9.66), dignity of life (cf. D9.69), or recovery of sustainable socio-economic activity (cf. D9.66)