New nuclear requires strong governance to avoid making old mistakes
University of Michigan researchers call for policies to ensure that small modular reactors serve the public interest without creating and worsening familiar problems.
Experts
Denia Djokić
Nuclear energy has long been considered essential for meeting growing global energy demands, but the potential expansion of advanced nuclear energy systems, like small modular reactors, creates—and in some cases reinforces—problems that technological solutions alone will not be able to fix.
Video transcript
Text on Screen: What are small modular nuclear reactors?
Dania: Small modular reactors, or SMRs, are a new type of advanced nuclear reactor that people say will address many of the challenges of nuclear power today. They’re marketed as cheaper, safer, producing less waste, and reducing the risk of nuclear materials being used for weapons. I’m Dania Djokić, a nuclear engineer and research scientist at the University of Michigan.
Text on Screen: Why are people excited about this technology?
There’s a lot of excitement and hope that SMRs will help address the climate crisis and meet growing energy demands.
However, if we’re not careful, SMRs could reproduce many of the global and local harms they’re meant to solve.
Text on Screen: What are the risks of SMRs?
We want to ensure the SMR industry doesn’t prioritize profit over the public good, worsen global disparities, or increase environmental harms.
Text on Screen: How do we ensure ethical use of SMRs?
If we want the promised benefits of SMRs to outweigh their potential risks, we need strong governance that ensures fair labor practices, protects the environment, and empowers communities. We don’t want to repeat the mistakes of the past, so it’s essential that we govern these energy technologies as responsibly as possible.
A new report from the University of Michigan lays out implications of the widespread adoption of small modular reactors and other advanced nuclear reactors. It also provides policy recommendations for the governance of SMRs and the uranium supply chain to maximize public benefit from this stable, carbon-free electricity source while minimizing harm. A webinar on the report will be held at noon ET Dec. 11, 2025.
“Unfairness acts through technology in ways that are often invisible, and our research helped us see the complex challenges that advanced nuclear energy introduces, and which demand proactive governance,” said Denia Djokić, assistant research scientist in nuclear engineering and radiological sciences and principal investigator of the project.
“By learning from history, this report offers policy frameworks that align with democratic values, prioritizing societal equity and environmental protection while mitigating negative consequences. We aim to hold energy policy to high standards so that SMRs serve the public interest and don’t harm the most vulnerable. If implemented effectively, this could help mitigate public mistrust of new nuclear technology.”
Nuclear energy:
fission and fusion
Advancing nuclear energy
from discovery to deployment
The report by the Technology Assessment Project of the Science, Technology, and Public Policy (STPP) program at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy uses a method that examines cases of past technologies to anticipate the implications of emerging technologies. The effort was funded by the U-M Graham Sustainability Institute Carbon Neutrality Acceleration Program.
“We tend to assume that we cannot anticipate the implications of novel technologies like SMRs, and therefore cannot avoid their risks and harms,” said Shobita Parthasarathy, a senior author of the report, director of STPP and the Technology Assessment Project and a professor of public policy. “But this is incorrect. There are patterns in how technologies are built and affect society, and understanding this and acting proactively enable us to steer technologies toward maximum benefit.”
To make good on their promises, policies should ensure that the global nuclear industry protects the public and the environment and shares in the benefits. This includes oversight of technologies, incentive structures and regulation, such as:
- Fully managing safety and risk for both humans and the environment, protecting communities around reactor sites and mining operations from environmental harms
- Ensuring that energy companies bear the cost of environmental clean-up
- Limiting private funding and foreign investment so that influence over the project stays local and democratic
- Protecting regulatory agencies from industry influence
These projects should also offer direct benefits to communities and the power to decide what risks they will tolerate, through mechanisms like:
- Engaging local communities around nuclear sites to negotiate consent and benefits such as discounted electricity rates and formal profit sharing agreements
- Worker training programs to ensure that local people benefit economically from nearby nuclear sites
- Listening to local and Indigenous voices, including community veto power
- Responsible uranium sourcing, including labor practices that prioritize health, safety and fair pay for workers
Rather than treading familiar ground in the nuclear industry, such as Fukushima, Chernobyl or Three Mile Island, the research team looked for analogies from other fields, collecting about 40 historical case studies of technologies in society—similar to advanced nuclear energy in form, function or potential impacts. They showed both the many ways technology creates negative, unintended consequences as well as regulations that proved effective.
“This project shows that it is possible to anticipate the implications of new technologies, and gives new perspective on how we can make meaningful change in the face of looming problems,” said Nora Lewis, first author of the report and a graduate of the public policy program at the U-M Ford School.
Based on patterns in the case studies, the report finds that while SMRs have the potential to benefit countries and communities, without robust governance they are likely to have significant negative social impacts, including:
- Increasing the gap between rich countries and poor countries
- Prioritizing market interests over the public good
- Overlooking local and Indigenous knowledge
- Intensifying environmental injustices
- Abandoning promises of local development and empowerment
“Technology needs to work, but the most important thing is that it works for people,” said Txai Sibley, a co-author of the report and recent graduate in materials science and engineering at the U-M College of Engineering.
Additional authors of the report are Nicholas Stubblefield, a graduate of nuclear engineering and radiological sciences; Michael Redmond, a graduate of climate and space sciences and engineering; and Molly Kleinman, managing director of STPP.
Report: The Reactor Around the Corner: Understanding Advanced Nuclear Energy Futures