{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015586034912718205, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.125954198473282, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Why Not in My Backyard? A Radical Interpretation of Public Opposition to the Deep Disposal of Radioactive Waste in the United Kingdom

Public opposition to the disposal of radioactive waste in the United Kingdom has often been characterised as being largely of the “not in my backyard” (NIMBY) variety. In this paper, the history of policy for the management of radioactive waste in the United Kingdom is reviewed, highlighting the numerous shifts in policy and the combination of political and technical factors at work. It is argued that much of the public distrust of plans for radioactive waste and the public perception of the risks of the disposal of radioactive waste is heavily influenced by that history. Reviewed in particular in this paper is the recent public discussion programme on the deep disposal of radioactive wastes. With use of the writings of C Wright Mills, it is argued that public responses to that programme of discussion reflect certain ‘vocabularies of motive’ which are constrained by the broad framework of policy for the management of radioactive waste in the United Kingdom. Rather than being simply NIMBY responses, many of the public views expressed reflect a hierarchy of concerns about environmental risks: local economic impact, health and the environment, and distrust of the nuclear industry. It is argued that the NIMBY concept may be applied too readily, a convenient attribution of motive which disguises a more fundamental range of technical, environmental, and socioeconomic concerns. The NIMBY concept should therefore be rejected as distorting and unhelpful.