Co-creating Nano-imaginaries

Abstract

In the first phase of the research project Nanotechnologies for Tomorrow's Society (www.nanosoc.be), the research consortium explored a variety of futuristic visions or technoscientific imaginaries. This exploration took the form of a Policy Delphi, adapted to the particular objective of jointly constructing nano-imaginaries, taking participants' personal visions of possible future applications and societal issues as a starting point. The participants were nanoresearchers, as well as societal experts and primary involved citizens. In this article, the authors describe the theoretical frame that inspired their methodological approach, present the analytical results obtained, and bring some reflections to the fore that arose as a result of the performance and analysis of this Delphi-exercise.

Avoiding the Trust Deficit: Public Engagement, Values, the Precautionary Principle and the Future of Nanotechnology

“…Creating nanotechnology futures in this way has been shown to have both normative and predictive value. A focus on future-oriented knowledge and the relationships between events and decision points can guide key choices and long-term decision-making, generate alternative trajectories for research and development, and create an action-plan and networks for action (Deblonde et al 2008). …”

Knowledge transfer from citizens’ panels to regulatory bodies in the domain of nano-enabled medical applications

“…Nano-imaginaries are ''futuristic visions or techno-scientific imaginaries'' situated around 2025 and were constructed in interaction by participants in the first round of the NanoSoc project. They were not developed to have predictive value, but served to function as communication and reflection tools for participants of different backgrounds in a debate about potential nanotechnology developments (Deblonde et al 2008). To make the panel workshop as concrete as possible for the participants, the research team, comprising the project's TA researchers, ethicists, nanoscientists and two externally hired facilitators, selected two scenarios in advance within each imaginary, consisting of a relatively simple plot 4 and one main character.…”

Questioning ‘Participation’: A Critical Appraisal of its Conceptualization in a Flemish Participatory Technology Assessment

“…The language of 'co-construction'(and 'co' in general) pervades NanoSoc publications; for instance in phrases like ''[the] collective construction of possible technological trajectories'' (NPD (Nanotechnologies for Tomorrow's Society Project Description) 2005) and in an article on the first NanoSoc round, entitled ''Co-creating nano-imaginaries''(Deblonde et al 2008), to give two examples. The notion of 'coconstruction' is closely linked to that of ''co-responsibility''(Goorden et al 2008a, b), which implies that both technology promoters and demanders contribute to the development of technology and should therefore endeavor to share the responsibility of promoting the ''reflexive co-evolution of technology and society''(Goorden et al 2008b).…”