The long-term management of contaminated areas; the principles

Full text: There are three primary aspects to be considered in the remediation of areas contaminated by the accidental release of radioactivity, these are: the environment; health and well-being, including the psychological impact on the resident and adjaqent populations; the economic and social status of the affected populations. These aspects cannot be seen as independent of one another. In the case of the Chernobyl accident they have mutually interacted to produce a downward spiral in the quality of life of the affected populations. This paper will discuss the lessons that have emerged from that experience and propose ways in which. There is much, in practical terms, that can be done to manage, in both the short and the long term, the environmental aspects of the contamination, both at the collective and the individual levels. How effectively this is done and is seen to be done, will be a powerful determinant of the success in dealing with the other two primary aspects. Ring fencing the risk into the contaminated areas by the prohibition of processes that disperse the risk to populations outside the affected areas can be counterproductive for the affected population with minimal real detriment for the wider unaffected populations. In the case of the Chernobyl accident it can be argued that health and well-being have been more adversely affected by the psychosocial aspects of the accident than by the direct effects of radiation. A larger than real effect an health is perceived and this leads to the five dimensions of the psychosocial effect, social disruption of communities, illness behaviour, readiness to attribute illness to radiation, changed lifestyle habits, stress related illness. The effects of radiation exposure, if any, will appear after a few to tens of years. Their incidence should be carefully monitored in relation to the previous experience and the experience in comparable populations, in an open and objective way. The perception that health detriment will be significant has the effect of depressing economic and social development in the affected populations, in the case of Chernobyl, almost to extinction. The almost complete lack of economic activity, and consequent need for state subsidy, in the affected regions, in large measure due to the ring fencing of risk, has resulted in a dependency culture, with little perceived prospect of a return to normality, for millions of people. The combined impact of a failure to address these three priority areas properly can be clearly seen in the aftermath of the Chernobyl accident and is elaborated in the UN needs assessment report of 2002. It is clear that the early introduction of a 'recovery strategy' tailored to the specific needs of the affected communities would have been highly beneficial and likely less costly than the present policy. (author)