Paradoxes of Ignorance: The Role of ‘Not Knowing’ in the Repository Search for Nuclear Waste

The search for a final repository for high-level radioactive waste poses a current and unprecedented challenge in the global context: How to guarantee a safe containment of material that is harmful to the environment and people for up to 1 million years? For this purpose, Germany is relying on a science-based and participatory procedure. However, time requirements due to the complexity and expense of outstanding research work are increasingly pushing the decision into the distance. While the site selection law (StandAG) originally aimed for a decision by 2031, a final selection was postponed until between 2046 and 2068.

The article provides a sociological analysis of the role of ignorance and raises the question of how specific ways of interpreting and processing the ‘unknown’ influence the site selection procedure in Germany. To answer this question, the article combines a socio-theoretical discussion and conceptualization of ignorance with empirical results of a qualitative discourse analysis.

Drawing on social constructivist theories, it is argued how non-knowledge forms an independent object in relation to knowledge, developing its own social and political relevance. Following current approaches in the field of sociology of ignorance, the article explores and discusses types and conceptions of ‘not knowing’, such as dimensions and cultures of ignorance, making it a tangible object for empirical analysis. Ignorance is conceptualized as a contingent, socially constructed definition of meaning, referring to what must, can, or should be known. The relevance and production of ignorance in the German site selection procedure are illustrated, using debates on seismic activities and temperature development as examples.

The results of an empirical discourse analysis are then presented. The analysis focuses on the legal foundations and political implementation of the site selection procedure. Various publicly available text materials were analyzed, including legal documents, position papers, expert opinions, and documented public debates.

The results illustrate how the site selection procedure oscillates between different understandings of controllability, responsibility, and the temporal stability of non-knowledge. The procedure's structures establish spatial, but not temporal, boundaries of ignorance, creating paradoxes in the relationship between knowledge and non-knowledge. The self-description of the procedure as “science-based” and “participatory,” along with its practical implementation, leads to an inability to commit to (especially temporal) boundaries and responsibilities of non-knowledge. Consequently, the procedure fails to establish an internal, socially constructed definition of the finiteness of ignorance, which is crucial for decision-making processes from a socio-theoretical perspective. This generates conflicts of ignorance, resulting in procedural paralysis, as evidenced by the political decision to postpone the site selection. 

In conclusion, the article argues for a recognition and further research on dimensions and cultures of ignorance and their essential role in the implementation of precautionary and environmental policy, as well as their implications on science-based political decision-making processes in general.