TY - JOUR
T1 - Wat valt er te leren uit meer dan 30 jaar nucleaire controverse in België (en waarom trekt men zo weinig lessen)?
AU - Laes, Erik
AU - Meskens, Gaston
AU - Eggermont, Gilbert
AU - Chayapathi, Lakshmi
A2 - Hardeman, Frank
N1 - Score = 2
PY - 2006/6
Y1 - 2006/6
N2 - We first discuss three broad approaches to (social) learning (autonomous technology, communicative rationality and constructivism) and argue in favour of a constructivist approach to controversial technological topics. A historical account of the nuclear controversy in Belgium paints a picture of difficult relationships, unstructured debates and strained learning opportunities. This is explained by the dynamics of polarisation, the ‘social constitution’ of nuclear power and the role of governance authorities. In a concluding section of this paper we propose (in a programmatic way) some innovations which might be helpful in order to avoid reproducing the antagonistic dynamics of the past. Accepting the principle of ‘sustainable development’ as a ‘thick and vague theory of the good’ guiding future energy policy might help in reframing the (nuclear) energy debate in new and unaccustomed terms. We argue in favour of the creation of specific loci where the implications of this principle can be discussed. In any case history will matter, as actors in the nuclear debate tend to frame their expectations regarding possible future developments in light of experienced trajectories of past claims and promises.
AB - We first discuss three broad approaches to (social) learning (autonomous technology, communicative rationality and constructivism) and argue in favour of a constructivist approach to controversial technological topics. A historical account of the nuclear controversy in Belgium paints a picture of difficult relationships, unstructured debates and strained learning opportunities. This is explained by the dynamics of polarisation, the ‘social constitution’ of nuclear power and the role of governance authorities. In a concluding section of this paper we propose (in a programmatic way) some innovations which might be helpful in order to avoid reproducing the antagonistic dynamics of the past. Accepting the principle of ‘sustainable development’ as a ‘thick and vague theory of the good’ guiding future energy policy might help in reframing the (nuclear) energy debate in new and unaccustomed terms. We argue in favour of the creation of specific loci where the implications of this principle can be discussed. In any case history will matter, as actors in the nuclear debate tend to frame their expectations regarding possible future developments in light of experienced trajectories of past claims and promises.
KW - nuclear energy controversy
KW - energy policy
KW - social learning theory
UR - http://ecm.sckcen.be/OTCS/llisapi.dll/open/ezp_33723
UR - http://knowledgecentre.sckcen.be/so2/bibref/3728
M3 - Article
SN - 1373-0975
VL - 9
SP - 45
EP - 74
JO - Ethiek en Maatschappij
JF - Ethiek en Maatschappij
IS - 1
ER -