Environment and Sustainability Negotiation Role-Play: Radwaste II

TitleEnvironment and Sustainability Negotiation Role-Play: Radwaste II
Publication TypeMiscellaneous
Year of Publication1984
AuthorsLoofbourrow, T, Susskind, L, Madigan, D, Rundle, W
KeywordsADR, agreement, BATNA, bluffing, coalition, competition, consensus, cooperation, decision making, dispute, environmental dispute resolution, environmental disputes, hitana, Hitana Bay Development Simulation, HNI, interests, litigation, mediating, mediation, negotiate, negotiating, negotiating strategies, negotiation, negotiations, negotiator, negotiators, PON, reservation price, Siting an Asphalt Plant in the City of Madrona, tactics

Six-party, multi-issue negotiation among state and local government, enviromental, and industry representatives to select one of three sites for low-level radioactive waste disposal.

Full Text

The state is required by federal law to site a low-level radioactive waste (LLW) facility within a year. The state’s Public Management Authority (PMA), responsible for constructing and operating the facility, has identified three candidate sites. One of these sites must be chosen. The PMA is empowered to impose a site selection decision, but would prefer to see the six other stakeholder groups negotiate an agreement on one of the sites. If at least five of the six can reach agreement on a site, that site will be chosen. In the absence of an agreement, the PMA will select a site on its own. The six other stakeholders are: the town of Alford where Site A is located; the town of Bellman where Site B is located; the town of Crandon where Site C is located; a coalition of environmental groups; the Radioactive Waste Generators’ Association; and the Governor’s representative. The negotiations are divided into two rounds (though the players do not know this at the outset). In Round 1, the parties attempt to negotiate an agreement taking into account only the technical merits of each site. In Round 2, the negotiators are empowered to introduce other considerations, including financial compensation to the host community, legislative and administrative actions to reduce the level of LLW generated in the state, shared management and control of the LLW facility, and litigation assistance to parties involved in other environmental disputes.