Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “SOCIAL FACTOR”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

616 records · Page 35
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Community Engagement - A Citizen-Centric Approach to Seeking a Social License - 20017

The long regulatory road has finally been completed-after years of effort a Record of Decision has been signed and a Permit to Construct has been granted or a Permit to Operate has been obtained. But what about the other road that should be taken in parallel-community engagement? Working with the public is not a sequential activity, rather it is a consequential one and needs to be integrated with overall project planning. Unless you have effectively, meaningfully, and patiently engaged with the project's communities of impact, you may find your project trying to obtain a social license or a social license to operate (SLO). The SLO has its origins in the mining industry and its roots in the business model of corporate social responsibility and sustainability. These latter practices are well known to the US DOE and its contractor community. Aspects of the SLO are emerging as individuals and communities are becoming more informed and have increased expectations for being able to influence and shape decisions. When local community issues are not sought out, listened to, or addressed early, and questions are left unanswered, they can become agenda items for larger unaffiliated groups, and project loss (through delays and/or cancellation) can occur. Issues can transition from resolvable to intractable, a type of SLO face-off. Social media campaigns, serial negative media coverage, and protest signs at project sites opposing regulatory decisions already made are no longer anomalies. These types of incidents demonstrate the increasingly delicate relationship between approved regulatory/technical decisions and public acceptance of those decisions. A SLO is not a requirement. However, the building-blocks of a SLO - working with members of affected communities to build understanding, potentially to obtain and maintain community acceptance or even gain approval or support - are evidence of leadership by project sponsors. Actions taken, or not taken, by project sponsors truly have the ability to influence an outcome. While projects are not assured of success or failure, engaging the community in an empowered process is an investment of time and resources toward success for the project and thus for the communities of impact. Authors Note: Extensive literature searches were performed in developing this paper. The majority of the published literature on SLO as a 'movement' was found from sources in Canada, the European Union (Germany and France in particular), South Asia, South Korea, and many Latin American countries. The literature addressed resource development (mining), infrastructure, and energy projects. Articles written by US sources often spoke to origins and structural theory, specific project issues such as Not in My Back Yard (NIMBY) and to protests/demonstrations related to those projects, rather than systemic opposition/conflict phenomena. For these reasons many international SLO experiences and sources are cited in the discussion. The authors recognize these non-US experiences with SLO as having a 'forecast' value to US projects, especially those related to nuclear projects of any type, waste treatment and disposal, energy development (especially fossil fuels as well as alternative sources), mining, and infrastructure. The body of future SLO experiences in the US will shape the future responses to it. (authors)

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2013

Biofuels and Food Security. A report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition

In October 2011, the UN Committee on World Food Security (CFS) recommended a ''review of biofuels policies -- where applicable and if necessary -- according to balanced science-based assessments of the opportunities and challenges that they may represent for food security so that biofuels can be produced where it is socially, economically and environmentally feasible to do so''. In line with this, the CFS requested the HLPE (High Level Panel of Experts) to ''conduct a science-based comparative literature analysis taking into consideration the work produced by the FAO and Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) of the positive and negative effects of biofuels on food security''. Recommendations from the report include the following. Food security policies and biofuel policies cannot be separated because they mutually interact. Food security and the right to food should be priority concerns in the design of any biofuel policy. Governments should adopt the principle: biofuels shall not compromise food security and therefore should be managed so that food access or the resources necessary for the production of food, principally land, biodiversity, water and labour are not put at risk. The CFS should undertake action to ensure that this principle is operable in the very varied contexts in which all countries find themselves. Given the trend to the emergence of a global biofuels market, and a context moving from policy-driven to market-driven biofuels, there is an urgent need for close and pro-active coordination of food security, biofuel/bioenergy policies and energy policies, at national and international levels, as well as rapid response mechanisms in case of crisis. There is also an urgent need to create an enabling, responsible climate for food and non-food investments compatible with food security. The HLPE recommends that governments adopt a coordinated food security and energy security strategy, which would require articulation around the following five axes/dimensions: Adapt to the change to global, market-driven dynamics; Address the land, water and resource implications of biofuel policies; Foster the transition from biofuels to comprehensive food-energy policies; Promote research and development; and, Develop methods and guidelines for coordinated food, Biofuels, and bio-energy policies at national and international levels.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2019

Positive Social License Solicitation and Affiliation Development through Non-Traditional Engagement Vectors - 19423

Generally speaking, the nuclear industry is very effective at accepting the positive and educated merits of 'all things nuclear,' including rationales for nuclear power supply, fuel, and waste-related considerations. However, the general public on average tends to be invariably wary of the nuclear industry, especially when it comes to waste management considerations, and furthermore, is greatly swayed by public sentiment and influences that suggest that 'nuclear is ominous.' This stance is especially true when it comes to waste management. This paper is based on the premise that traditional engagement and social license solicitation initiatives are at best, marginally effective at influencing the favorability within public opinion. However, there is tremendous opportunity and untapped potential to engage in a more meaningful and effective manner, by adopting a more holistic and fundamental approach to social engagement and public influence. This paper elaborates on this approach by presenting sustainable, effective strategies for practical methods of non-traditional social engagement to introduce, expose, educate, inform, develop, and influence a non-biased appreciation for nuclear industry considerations. Starting from a belief that early exposure and awareness of the nuclear industry through indirect engagement manifests a non-threatening, positive affinity for the subject matter, a sustained, deliberate, and multi-vector engagement campaign is effective at establishing a pro-nuclear disposition. Additionally, rather than relying on a few established and known (and perhaps perceived as biased) advocacy entities, this paper establishes a methodology of mobilizing a varied and wide range of indirect stakeholders to disseminate and manifest the desired-and unbiased-message. In effect, rather than coming from a position where traditional industry advocacy sources vie and lobby for disseminating the merits and realities of the industry, this strategy establishes a means to have non-biased, non-nuclear agents 'tell the story' about the nuclear industry. Practical examples will be provided detailing how some of the proposed methodologies have been successfully deployed. This includes hosting a province- (state)-wide technical competition for 100+ elementary school children, using the context and narrative of a spent-fuel removal and storage-handling system. This specific experience resulted from introducing complex nuclear concepts and environments in a very accessible manner to the young students, while also capitalizing on the curiosity of the their parents, teachers, friends, and community in an open and engaging information and awareness initiative that they would not have otherwise encountered through the traditional engagement vectors. With continued similar experiences, this cohort will become part of the desired voting demographic faced with questions and decisions around nuclear power, waste handling, and storage. Drawing upon their early engagement and deliberate exposure to the subject matter, over time, this audience will invariably result in a much more engaged, educated, informed, and positively-inclined demographic. In summary, a positive shift in the prevailing general public sentiment can be achieved through a a broad, long-term, and wide-reaching early engagement strategy. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

The Role of Indian Tribes in the Safe, Secure, and Routine Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste - 19463

Far too often federally recognized Indian Tribes are the last stakeholders invited to the table to discuss a particular issue with potentially wide-ranging impacts. Indian tribes were the first governments on this continent. With respect to the future transportation of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) or high-level radioactive waste (HLW), Indian tribes are potentially impacted in a myriad of ways: economics, cultural, environmental, health and safety. Yet few regulators fully understand and appreciate the legal and political standing of Indian tribes. This paper will examine the ways in which Indian tribes must be involved with the planning for safe, secure and routine SNF and HLW shipments and the ways in which the federal government is obligated to involve tribes. Indian tribes are similar to states in that they are responsible for the health and safety of its members (which they themselves define). Tribes, like states, make, implement, interpret, and enforce laws, and provide public services - healthcare, public education, social services, drug treatment, public safety and emergency management, transportation, managing natural resources, public housing, and environmental and cultural preservation. Many tribes also operate economic enterprises - manufacturing, farming, forestry, and gaming. The most basic principle of Indian law is the principle of 'sovereignty,' that is, an Indian tribe possesses all the powers of any sovereign state. Tribal governments are not subject to state or local jurisdiction but are subject to federal jurisdiction. The tribes enjoy a government-to-government relationship (and expectation) with the federal government (i.e., agencies, like the Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission). Of paramount concern to Indian tribes is the doctrine of Trust Responsibility, the general principle that the federal government's conduct 'in dealing with the Indians should therefore be judged by the most exacting fiduciary standards.' With respect to SNF/HLW this means that the federal government has an obligation (or a Trust Responsibility) to ensure that tribal people, lands and resources are protected. Equally important is the expectation that federal agencies will work with the Indian tribes on a government-to-government basis before undertaking any action with potential negative consequences on the tribe's people, land or resources. The concept of government-to-government consultation between Indian tribes and the United States is long standing and well recognized. As expressed in Executive Order 13175, 'Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments': 'Consultation - Each federal agency must have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.' The purpose of consultation is to ensure that Indian tribes are consulted before government officials make decisions that may have an impact on their lives and territories. The three agencies involved with SNF and HLW transportation - the US Department of Transportation (DOT), the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and the US Department of Energy (DOE) - have had various degrees of success with respect to direct consultation with Indian tribes. Given that there is plenty of lead-time before the first shipments commence, there should be ample time to develop a strategy for ensuring that tribes are equal partners when planning and preparing for shipments of SNF and HLW to the first interim storage facility. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗