Science communication is commonly framed as a battle with ignorance and the field of radiological protection is not exempt from this tendency. By correcting deficits in the public’s understanding of science, the expert is often imagined to be able to convince the public of its objective safety (‘anzen’), thereby inspiring a sense of calm (‘anshin’). In the wake of the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi disaster, however, the International Commission on Radiological Protection has sought to break with this tradition by organising a series of participatory seminars in which experts engage those affected by the disaster as equals. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork, this article suggests that the Dialogue seminars can be best understood using the metaphor of therapy; using it to describe the premise, form, and objectives of the Dialogues with a view to identifying good practice for future radiological protection scenarios.     «

Science communication is commonly framed as a battle with ignorance and the field of radiological protection is not exempt from this tendency. By correcting deficits in the public’s understanding of science, the expert is often imagined to be able to convince the public of its objective safety (‘anzen’), thereby inspiring a sense of calm (‘anshin’). In the wake of the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi disaster, however, the International Commission on Radiological Protection has sought to break with this t...     »