A Sociotechnical Readiness Level Framework for the Development of Advanced Nuclear Technologies

References

• “Nuclear Power in a Clean Energy System,” International Energy Agency (2019); https://www.iea.org/reports/nuclear-power-in-a-clean-energy-system.
   Google Scholar
• A. VAYA SOLER et al., “Small Modular Reactors: Challenges and Opportunities,” Nuclear Energy Agency, OECD Publishing (2021).
   Google Scholar
• J. BUONGIORNO et al., “Nuclear Energy in a Carbon-Constrained World: Big Challenges and Big Opportunities,” IEEE Power Energy. Mag., 17, 69 (Mar.-Apr. 2019); http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MPE.2018.2885250.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. HOELZLE, Nuclear Fuel Cycle Demographic Analysis, Fastest Path to Zero (2020).
   Google Scholar
• “Cleanup Basics,” Energy Communities Alliance; https://www.energyca.org/cleanup-basics.
   Google Scholar
• “State of Play: Siting of Nuclear Projects,” Good Energy Collective (Oct. 14, 2022); https://www.goodenergycollective.org/policy/state-of-play-siting-of-nuclear-projects.
   Google Scholar
• C. SCHROER, “Host Communities and Nuclear Energy: Benefits for Some, Risks for Others,” Good Energy Collective (June 29, 2022).
   Google Scholar
• K. JENKINS et al., “Energy Justice: A Conceptual Review,” Energy Res. Social Sci., 11, 174 (2016); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.10.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. A. MCGEE and P. T. GREINER, “Renewable Energy Injustice: The Socio-Environmental Implications of Renewable Energy Consumption,” Energy Res. Social Sci., 56, 101214 (2019); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.05.024.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. P. WHYTE, “On the Role of Traditional Ecological Knowledge as a Collaborative Concept: A Philosophical Study,” Ecol. Processes, 2, 7 (2013); http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2192-1709-2-7.
   Google Scholar
• “Why Local Governments and Communities Support New Nuclear Development,” Energy Communities Alliance (2022).
   Google Scholar
• N. VOJVODICH et al., “Outer Planet Atmospheric Entry Probes—An Overview of Technology Readiness,” presented at the Conf. on the Exploration of the Outer Planets, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (1975).
   Google Scholar
• F. H. SAMONSKI, “Atmosphere Revitalization for Manned Spacecraft—An Assessment of Technology Readiness,” Proc. Int. Conf. on Environmental Science Technologies (1976).
   Google Scholar
• R. F. CARLISLE and J. M. ROMERO, “Space Station Technology Readiness,” J. Eng. Ind., 106, 260 (1984); http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.3185946.
   Google Scholar
• Technology Readiness Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Evaluating the Readiness of Technology for Use in Acquisition Programs and Projects, U.S. Government Accountability Office (reissued with revisions on Feb. 11, 2020).
   Google Scholar
• Defense Acquisition Guidebook, U.S. Department of Defense ( Sep. 16, 2013); https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/docs/TEMPGuide/DefenseAcquisitionGuidebook.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• M. F. AUSTIN and D. M. YORK, “System Readiness Assessment (SRA) an Illustrative Example,” Procedia Comput. Sci., 44, 486 (2015); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.03.031.
   Google Scholar
• P. H. KOBOS et al., “Timing Is Everything: A Technology Transition Framework for Regulatory and Market Readiness Levels,” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 137, 211 (2018); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. VIK et al., “Balanced Readiness Level Assessment (BRLa): A Tool for Exploring New and Emerging Technologies,” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 169, 120854 (2021); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120854.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. DAS et al., “What Do We Mean When We Write About Ethics, Equity, and Justice in Engineering Design?” J. Mech. Des. N. Y., 145, 061402 (2023); http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4057056.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. DAS et al., “Auditing Design Justice: The Impact of Social Movements on Design Pedagogy at a Technology Institution,” Des. Stud., 86, 101183 (2023); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2023.101183.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. K. OSTROWSKI et al., “Ethics, Equity, & Justice in Human-Robot Interaction: A Review and Future Directions,” Proc. 2022 31st IEEE Int. Conf. on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), p. 969 (2022).
   Google Scholar
• A. VERMA, “What Can Nuclear Engineers Learn from Design Research? A Review of the Theory and Evidence from Contemporary American and French Nuclear Reactor Design Projects,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 379, 111114 (2021); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2021.111114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. VERMA and D. DJOKIĆ, “Reimagining Nuclear Engineering,” Issues Sci. Technol., XXXVII, 3 (2021).
   Google Scholar
• L. T. M. BLESSING and A. CHAKRABARTI, DRM, A Design Research Methodology, pp. 13–42, L. T. M. BLESSING and A. CHAKRABARTI Eds. Springer London (2009).
   Google Scholar
• S. R. DALY, E. A. MOSYJOWSKI, and C. M. SEIFERT, “Teaching Creativity in Engineering Courses,” J. Eng. Educ., 103, 417 (2014); http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jee.20048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. A. SCHÖN, The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action, Routledge (2017).
   Google Scholar
• G. HECHT, The Radiance of France, New Edition: Nuclear Power and National Identity after World War II, MIT Press (2009).
   Google Scholar
• S. D. SCHMID, Producing Power: The Pre-Chernobyl History of the Soviet Nuclear Industry, MIT Press (2015).
   Google Scholar
• L. MUMFORD, Technics and Civilization, University of Chicago Press (2010).
   Google Scholar
• S. JASANOFF, “Technologies of Humility: Citizen Participation in Governing Science,” Wozu Experten? Ambivalenzen der Beziehung von Wissenschaft und Politik, pp. 370–389, A. BOGNER and H. TORGERSEN Eds. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften (2005).
   Google Scholar
• B. WYNNE, “Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science: Chernobyl, Sellafield, and Environmental Radioactivity Sciences,” Radioactivity in the Environment, Vol. 19, p. 283, Elsevier (2013).
   Google Scholar
• B. SARAÇ-LESAVRE, “Deep Time Financing? ‘Generational’ Responsibilities and the Problem of Rondez-Vous in the U.S. Nuclear Waste Programme,” J. Cult. Econ., 14, 435 (2021); http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2020.1818601.
   Google Scholar
• N. CROSS, “Expertise in Design: An Overview,” Des. Stud., 25, 427 (2004); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.06.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. C. YANG and J. G. CHAM, “An Analysis of Sketching Skill and Its Role in Early Stage Engineering Design,” J. Mech. Des., 129, 476 (2006); http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.2712214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. GERBER and M. CARROLL, “The Psychological Experience of Prototyping,” Des. Stud., 33, 64 (2012); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.06.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. LUCK, “Inclusive Design and Making in Practice: Bringing Bodily Experience into Closer Contact with Making,” Des. Stud., 54, 96 (2018); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2017.11.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. COSTANZA-CHOCK, Design Justice: Community-Led Practices to Build the Worlds We Need, MIT Press (2020).
   Google Scholar
• M. COOLEY, “Human-Centered Design,” Information Design, p. 59, MIT Press (2000).
   Google Scholar
• C. ABRAS, D. MALONEY-KRICHMAR, and J. PREECE, “User-Centered Design,” Bainbridge, W. Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 37, pp. 445–456, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2004).
   Google Scholar
• S. CHOU and J. AUSTIN-BRENEMAN, “Prototyping Methods for a Small-to-Medium Manufacturing Enterprise in a Resource-Constrained Setting: A Case Study,” Proc. International Design Engineering Technical Conf. and Computers and Information in Engineering Conf, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection (2017); http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/DETC2017-68281.
   Google Scholar
• S. E. FAWCETT and M. A. WALLER, “Designing the Supply Chain for Success at the Bottom of the Pyramid,” J. Bus. Logist., 36, 233 (2015); http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12096.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. VERMA, “Frugal Innovation in Complex Systems: Evidence from Nuclear Reactor Design and Development in India,” DS 92: Proc. DESIGN 2018 15th (2018).
   Google Scholar
• N. MANDERS-HUITS, “What Values in Design? The Challenge of Incorporating Moral Values into Design,” Sci. Eng. Ethics, 17, 271 (2011); http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-010-9198-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. M. TURNER, D. WOOD, and A. VERMA, “Antiracism & Technology Design: Considering Dual/Multi-Use Technology Sectors and Fostering Epistemic and Institutional Equity,” presented at the AGU Fall Mtg. 2021, American Geophysical Union (2021).
   Google Scholar
• L. TEMPER and D. DEL BENE, “Transforming Knowledge Creation for Environmental and Epistemic Justice,” Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustainability, 20, 41 (2016); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.05.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Technology Readiness Assessment Guide, U.S. Department of Energy (2011).
   Google Scholar
• C. PERROW, Normal Accidents: Living with High Risk Technologies, Princeton University Press (1999).
   Google Scholar
• T. P. HUGHES, “The Evolution of Large Technological Systems,” The Social Construction of Technological Systems, MIT Press (1987).
   Google Scholar
• A. DAVIES and T. BRADY, “Organisational Capabilities and Learning in Complex Product Systems: Towards Repeatable Solutions,” Res. Policy, 29, 931 (2000); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00113-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. M. MALEK, “Analytical and Interpretive Practices in Design and New Product Development: Evidence from the Automobile Industry,” Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2001).
   Google Scholar
• M. FRANÇOIS et al., “Automotive HMI Design and Participatory User Involvement: Review and Perspectives,” Ergonomics, 60, 541 (2017); http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2016.1188218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L. K. ROLAND et al., “P for Platform. Architectures of Large-Scale Participatory Design,” Scand. J. Inf. Syst., 29, 1 (2017).
   Google Scholar
• H. R. LEE et al., “Steps Toward Participatory Design of Social Robots: Mutual Learning with Older Adults with Depression,” Proc. 2017 ACM/IEEE Int. Conf. on Human-Robot Interaction, p. 244, Association for Computing Machinery (2017).
   Google Scholar
• C. D’IGNAZIO et al., “A Feminist HCI Approach to Designing Postpartum Technologies: ‘When I First Saw A Breast Pump I Was Wondering if It Was a Joke’,” Proc. 2016 CHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems, p. 2612, Association for Computing Machinery (2016).
   Google Scholar
• M. J. AZIZ et al., “A Co-Design Framework for Wind Energy Integrated with Storage,” Joule, 6, 1995 (2022); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2022.08.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• T. KAISERFELD and A. KAIJSER, “Changing the System Culture: Mobilizing the Social Sciences in the Swedish Nuclear Waste System,” Nucl. Technol., 207, 1456 (2021); http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2020.1832815.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. GUPTA et al., “Integrating Socially Led Co-Design into Consent-Based Siting of Interim Storage Facilities,” U.S. Department of Energy (2022).
   Google Scholar