Article published in the Journal of Radiological Protection written by SHARE members.

The article has been published on IOPscience.

SHARE SRA Research line 1: Social, political, psychological, historical and economic factors influencing perceptions, expectations and behaviours
regarding radiological protection and applications of ionising radiation 

Liutsko, L., Ohba, T., Cardis, E., Schneider, T., & Oughton, D. (2018). Socio-economic, historical and cultural background: implications for behaviour after radiation accidents and better resilience, Chapter of book in: Environmental Health Risks: Ethical Aspects (Zölzer F and Meskens G, Eds.), Chapter 3, pp. 28- 42, UK: Routledge, Oxford.

Oughton, D. (2016). Societal and ethical aspects of the Fukushima accident. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 12(4), 651-653.

Latré, E., Perko, T., & Thijssen, P. (2017) Public opinion change after the Fukushima nuclear accident: the role of national context revisited. Energy policy, ISSN 0301-4215-104, 124-133

Latré, E., Thijssen, P., & Perko, T. (2019) The party politics of nuclear energy: Party cues and public opinion regarding nuclear energy in Belgium.Energy Research & Social Science(47), 192-201.

Perko, T., Adam, B., & Stassen, K. R. (2015) The differences in perception of radiological risks: lay people versus new and experienced employees in the nuclear sector. Journal of Risk Research, 18(1 ), 40-54.

Perko, T. (2014) Radiation Risk Perception: A Discrepancy Between the Experts and the General PopulationJournal of Environmental Radioactivity, 133, 86-91.

Turcanu, C., Sala, R., Perko, T., Abelshausen, B., Oltra, C., Tomkiv, Y., . . . Zeleznik, N. (2020). How would citizens react to official advice in a nuclear emergency? Insights from research in three European countriesJournal of Contingency and Crisis Management.

Turcanu, C., Perko, T., & Laes, E. (2014). Public participation processes related to nuclear research installations: What are the driving factors behind participation intention?Public Understanding of Science, 23(3), 331–347.

Turcanu, C., Prades, A., Sala, R., Perko, T. and Oltra, C., 2020. Fusion energy: A deeper look into attitudes among the general public. Fusion Engineering and Design161, p.111891.

Hoti, F., Perko, T., Thijssen, P. and Renn, O. (2021) Radiation risks and uncertainties: a scoping review to support communication and informed decision-making Journal of Radiological Protection  (40) 612

Hoti, F., Perko, T., Tafili, V., Sala, R., Zeleznik, N., Tomkiv, Y., Turcanu, C., Thijssen, P., Renn, O. (2021) Knowing the unknowns: Uncertainties during radiological emergencies International Journal of Disaster Reduction (59)

Železnik, N., Constantin, M., Schneider, N., Mays, C., Zakrzewska, G., Diaconu, D. (2016). Lay public mental models of ionizing radiation: Representations and risk perception in four European countries. Journal of Radiological Protection 36, 2.

SHARE SRA Research line 2: Holistic approaches to governance of ionising radiation exposure situations

Malone, J. (2020) X-rays for medical imaging: Radiation protection, governance and ethics over 125 years. Physica Medica 79:47-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.09.012

Zölzer, F. (2015) Evacuation in case of a nuclear power plant accident – Discussion of some ethical questions Kontakt 17:177-182

Malone, J. and Zölzer, F. (2016) Pragmatic ethical basis for radiation protection in diagnostic radiology Br. J. Radiol. 89, 20150713 doi: 10.1259/bjr.20150713

Zölzer, F. and Meskens, G. (Eds) (2018) Ethics of Environmental Health, Routledge, Oxford

Zölzer, F. and Meskens, G. (Eds) (2019)  Environmental Health Risks. Ethical Aspects. Routledge, Oxford

Zölzer, F. (2020) Ethics of radiological protection – recent developments Public Health (Oxf) 42, 183-187 doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdy069.

Zölzer, F. and Zölzer, N. (2020) Empathy as an ethical principle for environmental health Sci. Tot. Env. 705, 135922 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135922

Ohba, T., Liutsko, L., Schneider, T., Barquinero, J.F., Crouaïl, P.; Fattibene, P., Kesminiene, A., Laurier, D., Sarukhan A, Skuterud, L., Tanigawa, K., Tomkiv, Y., Cardis, E. (accepted). The SHAMISEN Project: challenging historical recommendations for preparedness, response and surveillance of health and well-being in case of nuclear accidents: lessons learnt from Chernobyl and Fukushima, Environment International, 146,

Oughton, D., Albani, V., Barquinero, J.F., Chumak, V., Clero, E., Crouail, P., Fattibene P., Kesminiene, A., Laurier, D., Liutsko, L., Ohba, T., Ostroumova, E., Pirad, Ph., Rogel, A., Sarukhan, A., Schneider, T., Tanigawa, K., Tomkiv, Y., Vale, L., & Cardis E. on behalf of the SHAMISEN Consortium (2017). Recommendations and procedures for preparedness and health surveillance of populations affected by a radiation accident.  [technical report]

Cléro, É., Ostroumova, E., Demoury, C., Grosche, B., Kesminiene, A., Liutsko, L., Mottref, Y., Oughton, D., Pirard, P., Rogel, A., Van Nieuwenhuyse, A., Laurier, D., Cardis, E. (accepted). Lessons learned from Chernobyl and Fukushima on thyroid cancer screening and recommendations in case of a future nuclear accident, Environment International146, 

Mihók, P. 2020. Understanding political institutional support for completing the Mochovce nuclear power plant. In: Progress in Nuclear Energy 120(1).

Perko, T. & Martell, M. (2020) Communicating nuclear and radiological emergencies to the public: How and to what extent are European countries prepared? International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 50.

Tomkiv, Y., Perko, T., Sala, R., Zeleznik, N., Maitre, M., Schneider, T., & Oughton, D. (2020) Societal uncertainties recognised in recent nuclear and radiological emergencies. Radioprotection,

Rossignol, N., Delvenne, P., & Turcanu, C. (2015). Rethinking vulnerability analysis and governance with emphasis on a participatory approach. Risk Analysis, 35(1), 129-141.

Rossignol, N., Turcanu, C., Fallon, C., & Zwetkoff, C. (2014) “How are you vulnerable?”: Using participation for vulnerability analysis in emergency planning. Journal of Risk Research, 1-20.

Schröder, J., Rossignol, N., & Van Oudheusden, M. (2016). Safety in long term radioactive waste management: insight and oversight. Safety science, 85, 258-265.

Molyneux-Hodgson, S. and Hietala, M., 2015. Socio-technical Imaginations of Nuclear Waste Disposal in UK and Finland. The Fukushima Effect: A New Geopolitical Terrain, pp.141-161.

SHARE SRA Research Line 3: Responsible Research and Innovation in radiological protection and applications of ionising radiation

SHARE SRA Research line 4: Stakeholder engagement practices in relation to radiological protection and applications of ionising radiation

Liutsko, L., Montero, M., Trueba, C., Sala, R., Gallego, E., Sarukhan, A., & Cardis, E. (2020). Stakeholder participation in nuclear and radiological emergency preparedness and recovery in Spain: benefits and challenges of working together. Journal of Radiological Protection, 40(1), N1. doi:

Perko, T.; Martell, M. and Turcanu, C. (2020) Transparency and stakeholder engagement in nuclear or radiological emergency management, Radioprotection, 1-6

Bergmans, A. & Verhaegen, M. (2016). How stakeholder and citizen participation influences evaluation criteria for megaprojects. The case of the Belgian LILW repository. In: Lethonen, M., Joly, P-B., Aparicio, L. (eds.) Socioeconomic evaluation of megaprojects. Dealing with uncertainties. London/New York: Routledge – Earthscan, 111-133. ISBN 9781138656116

Turcanu C., Abelshausen B., Geysmans R., Van Oudheusden M., Meskens G., Schieber C., Schneider T., Zeleznik N., Pölzl-Viol C. (2019) Final report of the ENGAGE project, CONCERT deliverable 9.94.

Geysmans. R, Zeleznik, N., Abelshausen, B., Duranova, T., Schieber, C., Schneider, T., . . . Cantone, M. C. (2020) Broadening and strengthening stakeholder engagement in emergency preparedness, response and recovery Radioprotection, 55 HS2 doi:

Turcanu, C., Schieber, C., Schneider, T., Fallon, C., Geysmans, R., Perko, T., & Pölzl-Viol  (2020) Stakeholder engagement in the management of indoor radon exposures. Radioprotection,, 1-7.

Turcanu, C., Van Oudheusden, M., Abelshausen, B., Schieber, C., Schneider, T., Zeleznik, N., . . . Polzl-Viol, C. (2020). Stakeholder engagement in radiological protection: Developing theory, practice and guidelines. Radioprotection, 55(HS2), S211-S218. doi:10.1051/radiopro/2020036

Perko, T., Monken-Fernandes, H., Martell, M., Zeleznik, N., & O’Sullivan, P. (2017). Societal Constraints Related to Environmental Remediation and Decommissioning Programmes. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, published on line  doi: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2017.06.014.

Mays, C. (2020). Going up: riding the risk escalator with Ortwin. Journal of Risk Research. DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2020.1738531

Mays, C. (2014). Sustainable Management of Radioactive Waste: What Can India Learn from Stakeholder Engagement in the West? In R. Moor & M.V.R. Gowda (eds) India’s Risks: Democratizing the Management of Threats to Environment, Health, and Values. New Delhi: Oxford University Press India.

SHARE SRA Research line 5: Risk and health communication 

Malone, J. (2020) X-rays for medical imaging: Radiation protection, governance and ethics over 125 years. Physica Medica 79:47-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.09.012

Grilo, A.M.; Vieira, L.; Carolino, E.; Ferreira, J. and Neves, M. (2019) Addressing the patient experience in myocardial perfusion scintigraphy, Trends Med (19) 1-4 doi: 10.15761/TiM.1000175

Grilo, A.M.; Vieira, L.; Carolino, E.; Oliveira, C.; Pacheco, C.; Castro, M. and Alonso, J. (2017) Anxiety in Cancer Patients during 18F-FDG PET/CT Low Dose: A Comparison of Anxiety Levels before and after Imaging Studies, Nursing Research and Practice Volume 2017, 1-9,

Grilo, A. M.; Vieira, L.; Carolino, E.; Costa, M.; Galaio, S.; Melo, I.; Geão, A.; Santos, A. and Colarinha, P. (2020) Cancer Patient Experience in a Nuclear Medicine Department: Comparison Between Bone Scintigraphy and 18F-FDG PET/CT, JNMT, Volume 48(3): 254-264 . doi: 10.2967/jnmt.119.239285

Perko, T.; Monken-Fernandes, H.; Martell, M.; Zeleznik, N.; O’Sullivan, P. (2019) Societal constraints related to environmental remediation and decommissioning programmes. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity (196) 171-180

Scheer, D., Benighaus, C., Benighaus, L. et al. (2014) The Distinction Between Risk and Hazard: Understanding and Use in Stakeholder Communication. Risk Analysis, 34 (7) 1270-1285

Perko, T. and Turcanu, C. (2020) Is internet a missed opportunity? Evaluating radon websites from a stakeholder engagement perspective. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 212.

Gallego, E., Cantone, M. C., Oughton, D., Perko, T., Prezelj, I., & Tomkiv, Y. (2017). Mass media communication of emergency issues and countermeasures in a nuclear accident: Fukushima reporting in European newspapers. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, 173, 163-169. doi:doi:10.1093/rpd/ncw334

Turcanu, C., El Jammal, M. H., T., P., Baumont, G., Latré, E., & Choffel de Witte, I. (2016). Satisfaction with information about ionising radiation: a comparative study in Belgium and France. Journal of Radiological Protection, 36, 122–142.

Vyncke, B., Perko, T., & Van Gorp, B. (2017). Information Sources as Explanatory Variables for the Belgian Health-Related Risk Perception of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident. Risk Analysis, 37, 570-582. doi:10.1111/risa.12618

Prezelj, I., Perko, T., Cantone, M. C., Gallego, E., Tomkiv, Y., & Oughton, D. H. (2016). The limits of public communication coordination in a nuclear emergency: lessons from media reporting on the Fukushima case. Journal of Radiological Protection, 36, 45–63.

Perko, T., Benighaus, L., Tomkiv, Y., & Wolf, H. V. (2020). Guidance on communicating about uncertainties in nuclear emergency management. Radioprotection, 55, 2020028. doi:

Perko, T., & Martell, M. (2020). Communicating nuclear and radiological emergencies to the public: how and to what extent are European countries prepared? International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 50. doi:

Perko, T., Mays, C., Valuch, J., & Nagy, A. (2015). Mass and New Media: Review of Framing, Treatment and Sources in Reporting on Fukushima. Journal of  Mass Communication & Journalism, 5, 252. doi:10.4172/2165-7912.1000252

Perko, T. (2016). Risk Communication in the Case of the Fukushima Accident: Impact of Communication and Lessons to Be Learned. Integr Environ Assess Manag., 12(4), 683-686. doi:10.1002/ieam.1832

Perko, T., Tomkiv, Y., Oughton, D. H., Cantone, M. C., Gallego, E., Prezelj, I., & Byrkina, E. M. (2015). Units related to radiation exposure and radioactivity in mass media: The Fukushima case study in Europe and Russia. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, 164 (1-2), 154-159.

Perko, T., Tomkiv, Y., Prezelj, I., Cantone, M. C., Gallego, E., & Oughton, D. H. (2016). Communication with Media in Nuclear or Radiological Emergencies: General and Practical Recommendations for Improvement. Journal of Radiation Protection, 51(HS2), S163-S169DOI: 10.1051/radiopro/2016057

Perko, T. (2015). How to Communicate about Radiological Risks? A European Perspective. Fukushima Global Communication Programme; Working Paper Series, 19, 1-13.

Perko, T., Thijssen, P., Turcanu, C., & Van Gorp, B. (2014). Insights into the reception and acceptance of risk messages: nuclear emergency communication. Journal of Risk Research, 17(9), 1207-1232.

Perko, T., & Turcanu, C. (2013). Reporting on Fukushima. Nuclear Engineering International, 58 (704), 38-40.

Perko, T., van Gorp, B., Turcanu, C., Thijssen, P., & Carlé, B. (2013). Communication in Nuclear Emergency Preparedness: A Closer Look at Information Reception. Risk Analysis, 10.1111/risa.12048. doi:10.1111/risa.12048

Perko, T., Zeleznik, N., Turcanu, C., & Thijssen, P. (2012). Is Knowledge Important? Empirical Research on Nuclear Risk Communication in Two Countries. Health Physics, 102(6), 614-625. doi:10.1097/HP.0b013e31823fb5a5

Perko, T., Turcanu, C., & Carlé, B. (2012). Media Reporting of Nuclear Emergencies: The Effects of Transparent Communication in a Minor Nuclear Event. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 20, 52-56.

Perko, T. (2011). Importance of Risk Communication During and After a Nuclear Accident. Integrated Environmental Assesement and Management, 7(3), 388–392.

Mays C., Valuch J., Perko T., Daris I., Condi C., Miskiewicz A., Zakrzewska G., Constantin M., Diaconu D., Kralj M., Železnik N. (2016). Looking for citizen-centered communication: Dialogues between radiological protection or nuclear safety specialists and media professionals. Journal of Radiological Protection 36, 2. DOI: 10.1088/0952-4746/36/2/S143


SHARE SRA Research line 6: Radiological protection culture

Schneider T, Maître M, et al. (2019) The role of radiological protection experts in stakeholder involvement in the recovery phase of post-nuclear accident situations: Some lessons from the Fukushima-Daïchi NPP accident. Radioprotection 54(4): 259–270

Schieber, C.; Pölzl-Viol, C.; Cantone, M.C.,; Železnik, N.; Economides, N.; Gschwind, R.; Abelhausen, B.; Savu, D., Lafage, S.; Liutsko, L.; Charron, S.; Turcanu, C. and Geysmans, R. (2020)  Engaging health professionals and patients in the medical field: role of radiological protection culture and informed consent practices Radioprotection 55(HS2), S235–S242

Barraza, F.; Cardis, E.; Cantone, M.C.; Charron, S.; Doremus, P.; Duranova, T.; Economides, S.; Gschwind, R.; Lafage, S.; Liutsko, L.; Murith, C.; Schieber, C. and Schneider, T. (2020) ENGAGE Project: Final report on case studies, including recommendations and guidelines on building and enhancing radiation protection culture CONCERT Deliverable 9.87

Rossignol, N., & Van Oudheusden, M. (2017). Learning from Incidents and Incident Reporting: Safety Governance at a Belgian Nuclear Research Center. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 42(4), 679-702.

Rossignol, N. (2015). Practices of incident reporting in a nuclear research center: a question of solidarity. Safety science, 80, 170-177.

Glesner, C., Van Oudheusden, M., Turcanu, C., & Fallon, C. (2020). Bringing symmetry between and within safety and security cultures in high-risk organizations. Safety Science, 132, 104950.