(De)politicization through safetization? Decision-making on nuclear waste management in Finland and France
Authors: Kojo Matti , Lehtonen Markku , Kari Mika , Litmanen Tapio 
Published: September 2023

Abstract. While both Finland and France are seen as forerunners in
final disposal of nuclear waste, there are striking differences between the
countries in public and policy discussion on the safety of the project. This
paper studies safety-related arguments in national-level decision-making on
final disposal of nuclear waste in Finland and France, using selected
parliamentary documents as the empirical material. The paper adopts
safetization in decision-making on nuclear waste management as its central
concept. By safetization we refer to a process whereby, first, images of
risks and uncertainties are either created or explained away to give
assurance of safety. Second, current practices are normalized, or various –
sometimes even exceptional – measures are demanded in order to change
current practices and thereby solve the issue and ensure safety. Thus,
prevailing views of safety can be supported to build further trust and
confidence or alternatively challenged in order to achieve more robust
understanding regarding the issue. As a result of safetization, political
power will be re-distributed between key actor groups such as implementers,
regulators, and politicians. Our empirical analysis explores such processes
whereby members of parliament frame, politicize, and depoliticize safety. We
employ four data corpuses, two from both case-study countries. The Finnish
data consist of the minutes of two plenary sessions of the Finnish Parliament. The
first, held in 2001, concerned the Council of State Decision-in-Principle on
Posiva's application for the construction of a spent nuclear fuel disposal
facility, whereas the second, in 2015, discussed the Statement by the Prime
Minister on Nuclear Waste Management Research and Safety Assessment. The
French data consist of the debates in preparation for two specific acts on
nuclear waste: the first (from 2006) on the framework law on the management
of radioactive material and waste and the second (from 2016) on the law
defining the conditions for the creation of a reversible deep geological facility for
high-level waste (HLW) disposal. The focus of the analysis is on the identification of frames and four frame functions. The functions are as follows. (1) Definition of a
situation, issue, or problem related to final disposal. (2) Diagnosis of
causes or reasons for the situation as it is portrayed in the data or in a
speech. (3) Evaluation or judgement concerning the situation and possibly the
actors involved. (4) Suggested course of action. We argue that safety is not
only an outcome of scientific research and technical competence, but that
efforts to ensure safety also include framing of safetization and
de-safetization in political and public debate. Research on energy policy
should integrate safetization as a key topic alongside issues such as
energy security and climate change mitigation, given that safetization
involves similar politicization and de-politicization processes and the exercise of
power.