IAEA and Nuclear Security: An Evolutionary Perspective

In the view of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the decision-making of safety supervision of civil nuclear facilities needs independence. In order to deeply evaluate and review a series of issues related to the safety of civil nuclear facilities, national regulatory authorities usually need to consult independent institutions or external committees with professional capabilities. Such organizations providing technical services are called Technical Support Organizations (TSO), which can be national laboratories, research institutions or consulting units. In some cases, support from professional organizations in other countries may also be required. Most of the world’s major nuclear power countries adopt an independent nuclear safety supervision model. All along, China has continuously strengthened the construction of nuclear safety supervision capacity, and the safety supervision capacity has been gradually improved. China has established a nuclear and radiation safety supervision system, including National Nuclear Safety Administration (NNSA) as the decision-making department for nuclear and radiation safety supervision, six regional nuclear and radiation safety supervision stations, Nuclear and Radiation Safety Center (NSC) and other units. China has established a nuclear safety expert committee, and mainly relies on the National Nuclear and Radiation Safety Supervision Technology R & D Base (R & D Base) as the central level test, verification and R & D platform to provide consultation and technical support. The R & D base has completed the construction of some test, verification and R & D functions. China has built a series of important laboratories in the R & D base, it still has not formed R & D system. In the future, China need to improve the technical support capacity of nuclear safety supervision. In short, the independence of nuclear safety regulatory decision-making requires to enhance from institutional independence to capability independence. The independence of China’s nuclear safety regulatory authority has been basically established. In the future, it is more important to improve the regulatory capacity. Only by establishing a perfect technology R & D system can nuclear safety decision-making be based on sufficient scientific basis.

On 7 November 1996, the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD/NEA) initiated a series of international nuclear emergency exercises (INEX-2) involving specific Member country nuclear facilities. The first of these exercises is to be conducted in conjunction with a regional exercise (FORTUNA) in Switzerland and south-western Germany. The sponsorship of such exercises by the OECD/NEA started in 1993 with INEX-1.

The success of any new build project is reliant upon all stakeholders — applicants, vendors, contractors and regulatory agencies — being ready to do their part. Over the past several years, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) has been working to ensure that it has the appropriate regulatory framework and internal processes in place for the timely and efficient licensing of all types of reactor, regardless of size. This effort has resulted in several new regulatory documents and internal processes including pre-project vendor design reviews. The CNSC’s general nuclear safety objective requires that nuclear facilities be designed and operated in a manner that will protect the health, safety and security of persons and the environment from unreasonable risk, and to implement Canada’s international commitments on the peaceful use of nuclear energy. To achieve this objective, the regulatory approach strikes a balance between pure performance-based regulation and prescriptive-based regulation. By utilizing this approach, CNSC seeks to ensure a regulatory environment exists that encourages innovation within the nuclear industry without compromising the high standards necessary for safety. The CNSC is applying a technology neutral approach as part of its continuing work to update its regulatory framework and achieve clarity of its requirements. A reactor power threshold of approximately 200 MW(th) has been chosen to distinguish between large and small reactors. It is recognized that some Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) will be larger than 200 MW(th), so a graded approach to achieving safety is still possible even though Nuclear Power Plant design and safety requirements will apply. Design requirements for large reactors are established through two main regulatory documents. These are RD-337 Design for New Nuclear Power Plants, and RD-310 Safety Analysis for Nuclear Power Plants. For reactors below 200 MW(th), the CNSC allows additional flexibility in the use of a graded approach to achieving safety in two new regulatory documents: RD-367 Design of Small Reactors and RD-308 Deterministic Safety Analysis for Small Reactors. The CNSC offers a pre-licensing vendor design review as an optional service for reactor facility designs. This review process is intended to provide early identification and resolution of potential regulatory or technical issues in the design process, particularly those that could result in significant changes to the design or analysis. The process aims to increase regulatory certainty and ultimately contribute to public safety. This paper outlines the CNSC’s expectations for applicant and vendor readiness and discusses the process for pre-licensing reviews which allows vendors and applicants to understand their readiness for licensing.

An international regime may broadly consist of a ‘set of purposes, norms, rules and procedures’, which are intended to affect, channel, contain and shape patterns of behaviour. Such a “‘regime is cither a conscious creation’ of actors or at least is recognised and consciously used by them regardless of its manner of creation.”1 The nuclear non-proliferation regime which the Nuclear Weapons States (NWS)—USA, USSR and UK, had sought to establish ever since the 1960s fulfils most of the parameters of the international regime. The germs of the non-proliferation regime can be traced back to the policy of denial and secrecy adopted by the United States and the Soviet Union in the early phases of the development of nuclear energy and technology. The Western Suppliers’ Group (WSG), a precursor of the 1975 Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), formed in 1954 at the initiative of the United States, was meant even at that time to control the sales of uranium to prevent the spread of nuclear capabilities. The WSG consisted of South Africa, Britain, Canada, France, Belgium, Australia and the United States. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which was established in 1957 with the concurrence and explicit support of the Soviet Union, was on the one hand meant to provide the peaceful use of nuclear energy and on the other to create an international safeguards system to check and control the diversion of nuclear materials for non-peaceful purposes. Over the years the IAEA with all its safeguard measures has emerged as the key component and instrument of the international non-proliferation regime.

Problem setting. The pace of in Ukraine affects all state institutions through systemic changes in state regulation mechanisms. In terms of scope and content, the mechanisms of state regulation lead to profound social transformations, which allow us to assert that Ukraine is undergoing a new stage of qualitative changes that can produce other social practices, including in the field of nuclear energy. The responsibility for the successful implementation of these is exacerbated by the fact that they occur against the background of the obvious crisis of the world order, systemic internal and external challenges - the need to counter hybrid terrorist threats to territorial integrity and sovereignty, economic and man-made society. which leads to a focus on profitable economic activity and disrupts the natural course of social development. Under the outlined conditions, the development of the nuclear industry is impossible without the effective application of methods of state regulation that fully take into account its features and specifics, which will comprehensively and timely ensure nuclear and radiation safety. In this regard, the existing regulatory framework, which is a hierarchical system of legal norms, becomes a priority for Ukraine in the development of the legal mechanism of state regulation of the safe use of nuclear energy. Therefore, the scientific search for existing ways to improve, as well as conceptualize and implement new for Ukraine mechanisms of state regulation in the field of nuclear energy, consistent with the approaches of the European Union (EU) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), become especially relevant and important. A special place in this process is occupied by the legal mechanism of state regulation in the field of nuclear energy use in Ukraine. Recent research and publications analysis. It should be noted that issues related to the study of management mechanisms in recent decades are in the field of scientific interests of many scientists, such as V. Averyanov, G. Atamanchuk, V. Afanasyev, V. Bakumenko, E. Grigonis, L. Grigoryan. , N. Yesypchuk, V. Knyazev, M. Koretsky, O. Korotych, M. Kruglov, P. Nadolishny, N. Nyzhnyk, O. Obolensky, G. Odintsova, Y. Tikhomirov, L. Yuzkov and a number of other scientists. However, despite the applicability of this definition, approaches, content and structure are interpreted differently: there is both identification with the mechanism of the state, economic or economic mechanism, and the opposition of the essence of the concept. A significant contribution to the development of certain legal aspects of the problem under study was made by legal scholars, in particular: H. Balyuk researched the formation and formation of nuclear law in Ukraine and conceptual and legal reforms in the field of ecology in Ukraine and modern challenges; S. Yershova researched legal regulation of economic relations (relations) of nuclear power plants of Ukraine; S. Plachkova studied the state regulation of nuclear and radiation safety in Ukraine. Analysis of recent research and publications shows that government regulation in the field of nuclear energy has been studied in part, from different scientific points of view. The paper objective – to carry out analysis of the theoretical and methodological foundations of the legal mechanism of state regulation of safe use of nuclear energy and identify factors that contribute to improving the efficiency of the process of targeted state influence in this area. Main material. State regulation in the field of nuclear energy can be defined as supporting and regulatory activities of the state, implemented on the basis of theoretical and methodological principles (doctrines, concepts, values, principles, guidelines, goals, objectives) through a system of organized, targeted, comprehensive actions (measures) and mechanisms for achieving them (means, methods, levers and tools of influence) and aimed at creating favorable conditions and environment for nuclear and radiation safety, human protection from radiation, through the priority of banning certain activities and state supervision in the field of use nuclear energy. Development and legal consolidation of norms and rules of relations of subjects of state regulation in the field of nuclear energy use, establishment of requirements to forms of legal regulation, gives to state regulation internal coherence which is provided by timeliness of their acceptance and application, completeness and stability. Direct influence is exercised through instruments of administrative and legal nature, which regulate the activities of the executive body. the functional sphere of state regulation in the field of nuclear energy use is manifested through the process of purposeful influence on facilities that are not necessarily subordinated to the relevant executive body. Accordingly, state regulation in the field of nuclear energy use is a dynamic process of state influence on facilities operating in the field of nuclear energy use and providing technical support to the executive branch. Conclusions of the research. The study found that government regulation in the field of nuclear energy is aimed at protecting life, health, property, length protection, as well as establishing ways to organize the organization of activities, licensing rules, location of activities and provision of services. In other words, state regulation in the use of nuclear energy involves organized systemic actions to ensure sustainable and balanced functioning of the economic, environmental, social subsystem, aimed at ensuring nuclear and radiation safety of the population and the environment. Approaches to understanding the essence of state regulation determine the ways of organizing relations between the state and the subjects of activity, the choice of which is based on the specifics of the sphere and the goals of the state that are implemented.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the key multilateral global nuclear governance body, describes itself as the ‘global platform’ for nuclear security efforts, with a ‘central role’ in facilitating international cooperation in the field. After initial contestation among member states about whether the IAEA’s mandate encompassed it, nuclear security has now been universally accepted as a valuable mainstream IAEA activity. Although states still insist that nuclear security is primarily their responsibility, the Agency’s programme continues to evolve and grow and can barely meet demand for its services. It has been particularly effective in promulgating recommendations for enhancing nuclear security at the national level and in advising and assisting states in striving for higher standards. Since the end of the Nuclear Security Summit process in 2016, the IAEA has taken on the role of principal conference convenor, involving a ministerial meeting and increasingly creative technical presentations and side events. The Agency faces the usual dilemmas of international organizations in being constrained by what its member states will allow and by financial and technical limitations. This can result in modest advances after painstaking negotiations and lowest-common-denominator approaches. With a more expansive mandate, sharper prioritization and evaluation of its activities, and guaranteed funding through the regular budget, the IAEA could make a significantly greater contribution to preventing nuclear terrorism.

The issue of international responsibility arising from nuclear activities is one of the fundamental challenges in international law due to the wide-ranging impacts of nuclear incidents on humans and the environment. Despite advancements in the development of international treaties such as the Vienna and Paris Conventions, these frameworks still suffer from significant limitations and shortcomings, underscoring the need for substantial reforms. This article first examines ambiguities in legal definitions, including the lack of precise definitions for nuclear damage and hazardous activities, and then analyzes the deficiencies in international treaty systems, such as weak enforcement mechanisms and geographical and legal discrepancies between treaties. Furthermore, the conflict between customary rules and international treaties and the imbalance in the distribution of responsibilities between states and nuclear operators are assessed as barriers to the fair implementation of nuclear liability. Solutions such as designing a comprehensive liability system combining civil and criminal responsibility, establishing international compensation funds, strengthening oversight of nuclear activities through transparent and independent mechanisms, and imposing legal sanctions on violators are proposed. The necessity of enhancing international cooperation through strengthening the role of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and creating comprehensive conventions with robust enforcement mechanisms is also emphasized. The article concludes that reforming international treaties and designing an efficient and comprehensive legal framework not only improves the management of nuclear crises but also enhances global trust in the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

This chapter clarifies the content and operation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which works to ensure the peaceful use of nuclear energy. It examines the content and status of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), better known as the Iran Nuclear Deal, including the concomitant situation in Iran. It also outlines the role of the United Nations (UN) Security Council with respect to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea). The chapter talks about the operation of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MCTR), which was initiated by like-minded countries in order to address the increasing proliferation of nuclear weapons. It covers the development and use of nuclear weapons and mentions new technologies under development for their delivery.

Angela Merkel received her degree in physics from the University of Leipzig and her Ph.D. from the Central Institute for Physical Chemistry, Academy of Sciences, in East Berlin. Since 1990, she has been a member of the German Parliament, and since 1994, she has been the Minister for the Environment, Nature Conservation, and Nuclear Safety. She is the author of Der Preis des Uberlebens. Gedanken und Gesprache uber zukunftige Aufgaben der Umweltpolitik (Deutsche Verlangsanstalt, Stuttgart, 1997). ![Figure][1] G lobal change is creating enormous challenges for humanity. The world's population is expected to grow from nearly 6 billion today to 8.5 billion by the year 2025. Global energy requirements will continue to increase. The newly industrialized countries of Asia and Latin America are experiencing very rapid economic growth that is bringing modern society's environmental problems, including air and water pollution and waste problems, to wider areas of the globe. The ecological problems caused by human economic activity are worsening and taking on global dimensions. Climate change, ozone-layer depletion, and loss of forest cover are important examples. At the same time, social conditions continue to worsen in many developing countries. It is estimated that more than 1 billion people now live in poverty without sufficient food, adequate educational opportunities, or any possibility of political participation. Although financial and economic markets are becoming more and more interconnected and we like to think in terms of a “global village,” our efforts to enshrine environmental protection and development as the common task and responsibility of all countries have just begun to make headway. The key aim for the 21st century is “sustainable development,” which the international community embraced at the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development. Sustainable development seeks to reconcile environmental protection and development; it means nothing more than using resources no faster than they can regenerate themselves, and releasing pollutants to no greater extent than natural resources can assimilate them. If we are to move toward sustainable development, the industrialized countries will have to accept special responsibility—not only because of their past ecological sins, but also because of their present technological know-how and financial resources. Yet, one must keep in mind that sustainable production and consumption involve not merely technical progress, but also cultural patterns of individual behavior and values. The German government has chosen the socio-ecological market economy (okologische und soziale Markwirtschaft) as the framework for shaping production and consumption in keeping with sustainable development, while at the same time encouraging innovation in industry and society. The key is to sever the traditional link between economic growth and the consumption of resources, which increasingly threatens the natural basis for life and the preservation of natural and landscape diversity. There are several possible ways to achieve environmental compatibility in lifestyles and economies. Technical and scientific innovations provide excellent prospects for environmental protection. As we approach the end of the 20th century, industrial society is becoming a knowledge-based society. It is vital that we use our growing knowledge and capabilities responsibly, and that we use them in the interest of environmentally appropriate development. Science must play an important role in the pursuit of sustainable development, especially in the following categories: ![Figure][1] Energy use. The key technologies of sustainable development include new energy and propulsion technologies that will help reduce emissions of climate-damaging greenhouse gases. Simply to stabilize atmospheric greenhouse-gas concentrations at twice their preindustrial levels, we will have to reduce current global greenhouse emissions by over 50%. Germany has set a goal of reducing CO2 emissions by 25% by the year 2005, with respect to the 1990 level. Achieving this goal involves focusing on improved thermal insulation in buildings, on the use of heat/power cogeneration, and on efficient support for the use of renewable energies. Currently the most progress is found in the area of wind energy; in the medium term, the use of solar energy, with photovoltaic technology, will continue to grow in significance. An honest consideration of our options indicates that we cannot afford to discontinue peaceful use of nuclear energy. Closure of substance cycles. Modern microsystems and control technologies are also providing new opportunities to design environmentally friendly production processes. While filter and wastewater-treatment technologies have considerably enhanced air and water quality in recent years, they are never more than the second-best solution, and have been surpassed by integrated environmental technology, that is, technology that optimizes the use of materials and energy. This involves material-efficient, energy-efficient production processes as well as the manufacture of environmentally compatible products, especially those that generate little waste. We have created the necessary framework for this with the Closed Substance Cycle and Waste Management Act, which came into force in 1996. Instruments such as eco-audits, which help identify the saving potentials from environmental protection investments, also promote development of such “clean” technologies. Environmentally compatible mobility. Environmentally compatible traffic concepts are a particularly important category for innovation. In Germany, the automobile industry now accounts for about 20% of all industrial investments in research and development. “Three-liter cars” (that is, cars consuming less than 3 liters of gasoline per 100 km), natural-gas engines, electric cars, hydrogen engines, and fuel-cell engines can all play a role in eliminating motor-vehicle emissions. Telematics can enable traffic to move more efficiently. Information and communication technologies can eliminate the need for physical transports in some areas, and computerized logistics in goods transports can reduce total transport distances. Biotechnology. Biotechnology is expected to bring important advances in medical diagnosis and therapy, in solving food problems, in energy saving, in environmentally compatible industrial and agricultural production, and in specially targeted environmental protection projects. Genetically altered microorganisms can break down a wide range of pollutants by being used, for example, in bio-filters and wastewater-treatment facilities, and in the clean-up of polluted sites. Genetically modified organisms can also alleviate environmental burdens by reducing the need for pesticides, fertilizers, and medications. Sustainability, as a strategic aim, involves optimizing the interactions between nature, society, and the economy, in accordance with ecological criteria. Political leaders and scientists alike face the challenge of recognizing interrelationships and interactions between ecological, economic, and social factors and taking account of these factors when seeking solution strategies. To meet this challenge, decision-makers require interdisciplinary approaches and strategies that cut across political lines. Environmental discussions must become more objective, and this includes, especially, debates about the risks of new technologies, which are often ideologically charged. In light of the complex issues involved in sustainable development, we need clearer standards for orienting and assessing our environmental policies. In this context I consider the current work on indicator models as a means to assess and monitor the success of sustainability strategies, to be of great significance. Sustainable development can succeed only if all areas of the political sector, of society, and of science accept the concept and work together to implement it. A common basic understanding of environmental ethics is needed to ensure that protection of the natural foundation of life becomes a major consideration in all political and individual action. A dialogue among representatives of all sectors of society is needed if appropriate environmental policies are to be devised and implemented. In the long term, “progress” works against us if it continues to be detrimental to nature. This realization will find increasing acceptance. Environmental protection will play a central role in the 21st century and will be a major challenge for politicians and scientists alike. [1]: pending:yes

The Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (DOE/NNSA) provides advanced capabilities to simulate the uranium enrichment process to support international negotiations on the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Uranium isotope separation centrifuges connected in a cascade configuration can produce the low-enriched uranium needed for nuclear power. However, those same centrifuges connected in a different configuration can also produce highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons. Having the capability to assess cascade operations and identify nefarious activities promotes the peaceful uses of nuclear energy while restricting nuclear weapons proliferation. DNN R&D's Nonproliferation Stewardship Program Adaptive Computing Environment and Simulations (ACES) project is creating a modern, sustainable ecosystem of physics-based models and data-analytics tools that enables analysts to model uranium enrichment systems, simulate operational scenarios, and apply various policy options to explore potential outcomes.

The article is an attempt to explain the IAEA’s critical role in ensuring global nuclear safety and on the global nuclear governance system. The objective of the Agency’s operation is promotion of the peaceful use of nuclear energy, including the use of energy to produce electricity, along with establishment of a system of safeguards to ensure that the countries do not use the peaceful assistance for military purposes.The aim of the article is to present the principles of the internationalsystem of nuclear safeguards and the role of the IAEA in maintaining nuclear peace and nuclear challenges of non-proliferation regime reform. The duality of nuclear technology (dual use) causes the need of strengthening the competence-control and institutional resources of the IAEA. It is necessary to oblige the Member States to cooperate with the Agency’s inspectors. The Agency should also develop a procedure to standardize the rules, structure, and legal restrictions. In addition the UN Security Council should react faster in the case of non-compliance detection. A separate issue is the internationalization of the fuel cycle.

The chapter examines how states develop nuclear security systems as they navigate the lengthy journey of building a new civilian nuclear sector. It outlines the steps set out by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which states must follow sequentially to establish a civilian nuclear industry. In so doing, the chapter focuses on the hurdles states have needed to overcome to establish national regulatory and legal frameworks and implement physical protection systems for the first time, and also highlights where opportunities have arisen. Accordingly, the chapter considers the gap between the ideal and the reality, comparing the standards set by the IAEA with what individual states have been able to accomplish. In order to highlight differences in national approaches, the chapter utilizes two case studies: Turkey and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). At the time of writing, Turkey is in the final stages of operationalizing its first nuclear power plant (NPP), while the UAE’s first reactor went online in 2020. The development of the nuclear industry in each country is explored in order to understand how nuclear security systems might diverge. While implementation inevitably differs between states, nuclear security is an intrinsic and non-delineable aspect of the broader nuclear sector. In this process, what might be considered ‘norms’ of the global nuclear security regime are established, although perceptions about security might also evolve.

Securing radioactive sources has become increasingly important given the rising threat of radiological terrorism. While radiation safety has long been established in most applicable industries, the importance of nuclear and radiological source security has lagged behind in nonnuclear material specific industries, such as academic institutions and medical facilities. To evaluate the attitudes and behaviors regarding nuclear security culture, an assessment of nuclear and radiological material practices was developed and conducted on 73 radioactive material users at a university. The survey portion of the assessment was comprised of a series of questions segregated into four categories: policy, enforcement, leadership, and behavior. Nuclear security awareness questions formed a subset of the questionnaire. Users were classified by their radioactive material experience and work classification: student, faculty, or other staff. Of the users surveyed, 9% were also interviewed face-to-face to further expand on their views of nuclear security culture. Results of the assessment showed that students from the work classification group as well as the cohort of radioactive material users with 2-5 y of experience possessed a greater degree of awareness towards nuclear security compared to faculty and other more experienced radioactive material users. Relative to students and faculty, other staff from the work classification group faced some difficulty judging the enforcement of policies, adequacy of inspection, and job performance review related to nuclear security. The response from all three groups emphasized the need to enhance threat-response preparedness and greater communication among stakeholders.

A cornerstone of both nuclear safeguards and the State system of accounting for and control of nuclear material (SSAC) is nuclear material accountancy of which nuclear material accounting is a key component. In 2008, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) published Nuclear Material Accounting Handbook for use by States and their organisations in their application of nuclear material accounting. Recognising the important role of Nuclear Material Accounting and Control (NMAC) in nuclear security, in 2015 the IAEA published an implementation guide 'Use of nuclear material accounting and control for nuclear security purposes at facilities'. The aim of this paper is to bring out important features of both the publications; one for safeguards and another for nuclear security. This paper also highlights some of the challenges that member States may come across in applying NMAC as we understand from safeguards directed to nuclear security.

Постановка проблеми. Пошук конструктивних дій процесу становлення й розвитку демократичних засад політичного, економічного, соціального та культурного життя в Україні, визначає першість у забезпеченні владою обґрунтованого та ефективного публічного управління. Особливого значення набувають світоглядні та правові засади, відповідно до яких здійснюється публічно-управлінська діяльність у сфері використання ядерної енергії. Тож важливим нормативно-регулюючим чинником постає вимога щодо переваги аксіологічного підходу у специфіці державного регулювання безпекового використання ядерної енергії, що має співвідноситися з гуманістичними орієнтирами суспільства, забезпечуючи його ціннісну дію. Аналіз останніх публікацій за проблематикою та визначення невирішених раніше частин загальної проблеми. Ціннісні аспекти процесу публічного управління активно досліджуються сучасними вітчизняними вченими, зокрема: ціннісний аспект організаційної культури публічного управління в умовах становлення інформаційного суспільства (Гайдученко, 2016); значущість системи суспільних цінностей у процесі державного регулювання стратегічного розвитку регіону (Лукашов, 2017); ціннісно-культурний аспект щодо особливостей поняття «безпека» у європейському дискурсі (Марутян, 2017); ціннісні орієнтири у контексті забезпечення безпеки і стабільності суспільства в сучасних умовах (Орел, 2017); світоглядні та еколого-правові засади взаємодії людини і природи (Балюк, 2017); аксіологічний підхід щодо сучасних тенденцій розвитку організаційної системи публічного управління (Гук, 2018); роль цінностей у здобутті авторитету керівника як «третій силі» сучасного українського суспільства (Новаченко, Афонін, 2019). Значний внесок у розробку окремих правових аспектів проблеми, що досліджується, зробили вчені-юристи, зокрема щодо: формування та становлення ядерного права в Україні (Балюк, 2000); правового регулювання господарських зв’язків (відносин) атомних електростанцій України (Єршова, 2000); державного регулювання ядерної та радіаційної безпеки в Україні (Плачкова, 2003); концептуально-правових «реформ» у сфері екології в Україні та сучасні виклики (Балюк, 2016). Проведено аналіз опублікованих наукових досліджень, що пов’язані з державним регулюванням безпекового використання ядерної енергії, а саме: пріоритетних напрямів удосконалення державного управління процесами поводження з радіоактивними відходами у Дніпропетровському регіоні (Кринична, 2013); ролі громадськості щодо розвитку ядерної енергетики в Україні (Барбашов, 2010); сучасного стану та перспектив інноваційного розвитку атомної енергетики України (Копішинська, Широкова, 2019); формування культури безпеки у студентів атомних спеціальностей у закладах вищої освіти України (Барбашов, 2019); урахування проєктних загроз у розбудові державної системи захисту критичної інфраструктури (Бобро, 2017); удосконалення системи радіаційно-гігієнічного моніторингу об’єктів довкілля в зонах спостереження українських атомних електростанцій як основи радіаційної безпеки (Хоменко, Закладна, 2019 ); соціальних аспектів енергетичної політики та енергетичної безпеки України (Земляний, 2013); ефективності застосування спеціальних методів державного управління захистом населення в радіаційно небезпечних ситуаціях (Кринична, Чекмарьова, 2015). Репрезентований аналіз досліджень вітчизняних науковців щодо ціннісних аспектів публічного управління дає підстави стверджувати про їх різноманітність, однак державне регулювання безпекового використання ядерної енергії в контексті аксіологічного підходу розробляється недостатньо. Мета дослідження – аналіз теоретичних засад державного регулювання безпекового використання ядерної енергії з позицій аксіологічного підходу як системи соціальних цінностей гуманістичної спрямованості. Виклад основного матеріалу. У статті розглядається і аналізується аксіологічний контекст системи державного регулювання безпекового використання ядерної енергії. Розкривається актуальність та необхідність застосування аксіологічного підходу до регулюючого процесу безпекового використання ядерної енергії в Україні. Державному регулюванню притаманні функції, які є складовою механізму державної влади та процесом її реалізації. Зокрема, державне регулювання безпекового використання ядерної енергії спрямовано на захист життя людей, їх здоров’я, майна, охорону довкілля, а також на встановлення способів організації чи ведення діяльності, правил ліцензування, місця здійснення діяльності та надання послуг тощо. Акцентовано на тому, що внаслідок економічної та техногенної діяльності суспільства відбувається дисгармонія з природою, що призводить до орієнтації на прибуткову господарську діяльність та порушує природний перебіг суспільного розвитку. Тож для усунення протиріч у відносинах між людською діяльністю і природою особливе місце займають цінності, які мають спрямовувати соціальну поведінку людей. Відповідно до аксіологічного підходу політика державного регулювання у сфері безпекового використання ядерної енергії спрямовується на формування стратегічного курсу держави шляхом правового регулювання, посилення можливостей і забезпечення засобів її ефективного використання, зміцнення безпеки, сприяння захисту людини та навколишнього середовища, входження України у світовий безпековий простір. Висновки і перспективи подальших розвідок. Аксіологічний підхід у державному регулюванні безпеки використання ядерної енергії дав змогу розглянути процеси державного регулювання як раціональну діяльність, спрямовану на розбудову ціннісної парадигми суспільної свідомості. Для отримання результату нами було окреслено тенденції світоглядних засад гуманістичної спрямованості суспільства та визначення аксіологічного (соціально-ціннісного) виміру державного регулювання безпекового використання ядерної енергії в Україні. Перспективами подальшого наукового пошуку щодо аксіологічного підґрунтя державного регулювання безпекового використання ядерної енергії є розроблення демократичних механізмів розвитку системи професійних цінностей в публічному управлінні.