On the value and costs of protective actions in a nuclear emergency

This paper reviews the current orthodoxy for the prompt application of shelter and evacuation advice in the event of a nuclear emergency in the light of the reassessment of the perceived costs and benefits of these protective actions that followed the Fukushima event. In particular, it discusses the mechanisms and criteria for the withdrawal of protective action advice or their continuation for more than a few hours and their impact on public perception. It suggests that lack of thought given to this area may lead to protective actions being kept in place for longer than necessary leading to more harm than good. It also considers the language used to recommend protective actions and to modify them as the event unfolds. Would over strong language used at the start of the event to encourage compliance contribute to public concerns later? Finally, the report poses some discussion points.