Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This policy-oriented manuscript translates recent social science and humanities research (2020-2025) into evidence-based recommendations for policymakers managing societal aspects of radon and naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM). By bridging the gap between researchers and decision-makers, the work ensures that radon and NORM policies are informed by robust evidence, context-sensitive insights, and tested approaches. The recommendations are structured across nine key fields: (1) advancing citizen science initiatives; (2) strengthening evidence-based decision-making with quantitative data; (3) enhancing policy guidance through qualitative insights; (4) improving communication strategies on radon and NORM; (5) addressing societal complexities of radon spas; (6) managing social challenges of radiological risks in geothermal energy; (7) incorporating social considerations in regulation of NORM-containing building materials; (8) reducing societal uncertainties in remediation of NORM and legacy sites; and (9) promoting sustainable, circular approaches to radon and NORM management. The recommendations were developed through review of recent research and validated through broad stakeholder consultation. Together, they provide a comprehensive roadmap for integrating science into policy, fostering resilience, sustainability, and public trust in the governance of radon and NORM across Europe.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Perko et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: