In the heart of Accra, Ghana, a quiet revolution is underway. Inside a small town hall, community leaders, government officials, and nuclear experts gather—not to argue over nuclear energy, but to listen. These conversations are not scripted or ceremonial. They are real, messy, and necessary. For Ghana, which is preparing to launch its first nuclear power programme by 2030, such exchanges are more than a civic duty. They are essential. Because the future of nuclear energy here—and anywhere—depends on one fragile but vital element: trust.
Ghana is not alone in facing this challenge. Countries across Africa and around the world are eyeing nuclear power as a solution to climate change and unreliable electricity. But time and again, progress runs up against a wall of public fear—of radiation, accidents, and nuclear waste. And it is not just fear of the unknown. It is also fear of being excluded from the decisions that shape lives.
The Real Risk Is Losing Public Trust
Nuclear energy promises low-carbon power and long-term energy security. But it also carries a legacy of disasters and secrecy that is hard to shake. So when officials launch a new programme, the biggest risk is not technical—it is social. Trust does not come from building flawless reactors. It comes from building real relationships with the communities they will serve.
Ghana is already trying to flip the script. Working with the International Atomic Energy Agency and other partners and CSOs, the country has developed an approach that puts people at the center of its nuclear planning. Instead of pushing decisions from the top down, the government invites local leaders, women’s groups, educators, and young people into the process early on. These are not token gestures. These are seats at the table—spaces where concerns are aired and plans are reshaped in response. The result? Former skeptics are becoming active supporters.
Why NGOs Matter More Than Ever
In the delicate business of nuclear governance, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) often serve as the bridge between the government and the public. They can translate technical jargon into plain language, raise red flags, and—when respected—add legitimacy to the process.
Finland’s experience with the Onkalo spent nuclear fuel repository offers a powerful example. It was not just the technology or safety protocols that won public approval—it was the years spent listening to NGOs and integrating their feedback. Environmental groups did not just comment on the project; they influenced its design. By taking concerns about groundwater contamination, transport routes, and community compensation seriously, Finnish authorities built something far stronger than infrastructure. They built consent.
The takeaway? When NGOs are treated as watchdogs, they will act like critics. But when they are treated as partners, they become part of the solution.
Talk Honestly. People Can Handle It.
Technical communication often falls flat because it tries too hard to reassure. But people do not want empty promises. They want clear explanations and honest answers. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) stresses this in its guidelines: good risk communication is not about spin—it’s about clarity.
Dr. Simmon Adu, a Ghanaian nuclear engineer, says it best: “People do not fear what they understand. Our job is to demystify nuclear energy, not defend it.” That means putting aside the jargon. It means saying, “Here is what we know. Here is what we do not know. And here is what we are doing about what we do not know.”
Public confidence grows not from silence or spin, but from candor. If governments are willing to talk straight about radiation safety, accident prevention, and long-term waste storage, people will listen. More importantly, they will respond in kind—with questions, with suggestions, and with trust.
Where Energy Meets Everyday Life
Big strategies are one thing. But real change happens in the small stories—in market stalls, classrooms, and kitchen tables. In Nigeria, where rolling blackouts are part of daily life, the promise of nuclear energy hits close to home.
Aisha Mohammed, a trader in Kano, remembers when the idea first surfaced. “We heard stories about radiation and accidents,” she says. “I was scared. But after the scientists came and explained everything, I started to see it differently. This could bring cheaper electricity for my shop.” For Aisha, a personal conversation made the difference. And she’s not alone.
But not every story ends that way. In some places, myths and misinformation spread faster than facts—especially online. Combating that takes more than press releases. It takes targeted outreach, like radio call-ins in local languages, partnerships with religious leaders, and science clubs in rural schools. It takes meeting people where they are, not where policymakers wish they were.
Engagement Isn’t Optional
If you are an international donor or development partner, the message is simple: do not treat stakeholder engagement as an afterthought. It is not the final item on a checklist. It’s the foundation on which everything else rests.
Want to help? Start with capacity-building. Fund training for local communicators, teachers, and regulators. Help communities ask better questions—and demand better answers.
Next, invest in spaces where people can speak freely. Not staged “consultations,” but real dialogue: town halls, community-led panels, even WhatsApp groups moderated by local leaders. These platforms can expose tensions early and build lasting consensus.
And do not underestimate the role of technology. Virtual town halls, mobile surveys, and live-streamed Q&As are making it easier than ever to reach more people. Digital tools, especially when combined with face-to-face interaction, can democratize access to information and decision-making.
The IAEA’s International Conference on Stakeholder Engagement for Nuclear Power Programmes, set for 26–30 May 2025, is a chance to bring these ideas to the global stage. Countries can share what is working—and what is not. And if the right lessons are lifted up, others can adapt them to their own context.
Conclusion
Nuclear power will not take root because of slick presentations or perfect engineering. It will succeed when people believe in it—when they feel heard, respected, and informed. Trust is not granted from above. It is earned, day by day, in conversation after conversation.
For countries like Ghana, this journey is just beginning. But it is already clear that the road to nuclear energy runs through communities, not just control rooms. And as Dr. Adu reminds us, “We’re not just building power plants. We are building confidence.”
In the end, that might be the most powerful energy source of all.
