Too Little, Too Late? Research Policies on the Societal Implications of Nanotechnology in the United States

Bennett, Ira; Sarewitz, Daniel

doi:10.1080/09505430601022635

Cited by 69 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 2000 there was very little attention paid to nanotechnology among the community of scholars that studies science and technology from a societal perspective (Bennett and Sarewitz 2006). Research, education, and professional activities in the societal aspects of nanotechnology, supported by the NNI agencies, have made significant progress in a short period of time.…”

Section: Governance Of Nanotechnologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovative and Responsible Governance of Nanotechnology for Societal Development

Roco

Harthorn

Guston

et al. 2011

Nanotechnology Research Directions for Societal Needs in 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Governance of nanotechnology is essential for realizing economic growth and other societal benefits of the new technology, protecting public health and environment, and supporting global collaboration and progress. The article outlines governance principles and methods specific for this emerging field. Advances in the last 10 years, the current status and a vision for the next decade are presented based on an international study with input from over 35 countries.Keywords Nanoscale science and engineering Á Nanotechnology innovation and commercialization Á Responsible development, Global governance, Emerging technologies Á Societal implications Á Ethical and legal aspects Á Nanotechnology market Á Public participation Á International perspective Vision for the next decadeChanges in the vision over the last 10 years Nanotechnology has been defined as ''a multidisciplinary field in support of a broad-based technology to reach mass use by 2020, offering a new approach for education, innovation, learning, and governance' ' (Roco et al. 1999). The governance of nanotechnology development for societal benefit is a challenge with many facets ranging from fostering research and innovation to addressing ethical concerns and long-term human development aspects. The U.S. nanotechnology governance approach has aimed to be ''transformational, responsible, and inclusive, and [to] allow visionary development'' (Roco 2008). Both domestically and globally, the approach to nanotechnology governance has evolved considerably in the last 10 years:• The viability and societal importance of nanotechnology applications has been confirmed, while extreme predictions, both pro and con, have receded.

show abstract

Section: Governance Of Nanotechnologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovative and Responsible Governance of Nanotechnology for Societal Development

Roco

Harthorn

Guston

et al. 2011

Nanotechnology Research Directions for Societal Needs in 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The meanings of these and similar expressions, as used by government committees, agencies and even legislatures, are fluid, diverse and contested. Yet, compared to more established science and technology policymaking models, they can be striking in their suggestiveness of a greater range of participants within a broad range of decision processes (e.g., Barben et al 2008;Bennett and Sarewitz 2006;de Melo-Martin 2009;Fisher 2007;Fisher and Mahajan 2006; 1 Science and technology studies (STS: Hackett et al 2008;Jasanoff et al 1995) is an interdisciplinary research field that seeks to understand how science, technology and innovation shape and are shaped by society, culture and politics. 2 Distinctions between citizens and experts are, if indispensable, notoriously difficult to maintain.…”

Section: Science Policies For Public Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Editorial Overview

Fisher

2011

Sci Eng Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science policy mandates across the industrialized world insinuate more active roles for publics, their earlier participation in policy decisions, and expanded notions of science and technology governance. In response to these policies, engaged scholars in science studies have sought to design and conduct exercises aimed at better attuning science to its public contexts. As demand increases for innovative and potentially democratic forms of public engagement with science and technology, so also do the prospects for insights from science studies to contribute to policy agendas and institutional capabilities. This collection brings together an international set of scholars in science, technology and society who inquire into the meaning, efficacy and responsibility of engaged science studies scholarship as a public matter.Keywords Public engagement Á Responsible innovation Á Integration Á Engaged scholarship Á Science and technology studies Á Science and technology policy A Doubly Transformative AgendaAs governments around the world invest in new and emerging forms of science and technology, often adorning their agendas with the language and imagery of profound social transformation, many are also recasting the means by which they publicly reckon with the social and ethical aspects of these policy decisions. Nestled alongside high-level program goals and routine funding procedures for nanotechnology, biotechnology and other arenas of strategic interest, sit provisions for enhancing the participation of publics and for broadening the practices of experts in both knowledge making and decision making. Unlike established policy models,

show abstract

“…Moreover, it has been explicitly conceived in close connection to core science and engineering research activities, and in distinct contrast to prior forms of Ethical, Legal and Social Implications (ELSI) research associated with genomic program (Bennett and Sarewitz, 2006;Fisher, 2005;Winner, 2003). Finally, an emphasis on the productive and transformative quality of socio-technical integration is the distinct focus of a coordinated series of studies supported by the National Science Foundation and managed by the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University (e.g., Conley, 2011;Ellwood and Pandza, forthcoming;Fisher, 2007;Flipse et al, 2012;Schuurbiers, 2011).…”

Section: Integrated Research In the United Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Policy mandates for sociotechnical integration have been documented in the United States (Bennett and Sarewitz, 2006;Fisher and Mahajan, 2006a), the United Kingdom (Macnaghten et al, 2005;Owen and Goldberg, 2010), Canada (Genome British Columbia, 2011;Ommer and the Coasts Under Stress Research Project Team, 2007), and throughout Europe (Stegmaier, 2009;Goorden et al, 2008). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating science and society in European Framework Programmes: Trends in project-level solicitations

Rodríguez

Fisher

Schuurbiers³

2013

Research Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As part of a larger trend across industrialized nations, European research policy discourse has placed increasing emphasis on socio-technical integration: the explicit incorporation of activities devoted to broader social aspects into scientific activities. In order to compare these high-level integration discourses against patterns at the level of resource allocation, we analyze nearly 2,500 research solicitations from the three European Framework Programmes for R&D during the period 1998-2010. We identify four distinct types of integration (socioethical, stakeholder, socio-economic and industrial) that occur either as core or parallel components of R&D solicitations. Quantitative analysis reveals an overall trend towards increasing integration, with requests integrating industrial and socio-economic aspects substantially outnumbering those integrating socio-ethical and stakeholder aspects-by a 2 to 1 margin. Meanwhile, calls for socio-technical integration have become slightly more extensive (ranging across a broader range of research areas addressed), significantly more pervasive (shifting from the periphery to the core of R&D practices), and arguably less diverse (involving a wider variety of integration types) over time. The relative lack of attention to socio-ethical aspects and stakeholder participation in European research is particularly notable given that we focus on potentially controversial areas (life sciences, energy, and nanotechnology), which likely overemphasizes the prevalence of integration throughout the Framework Programmes.

show abstract

Too Little, Too Late? Research Policies on the Societal Implications of Nanotechnology in the United States

Cited by 69 publications

References 17 publications

Innovative and Responsible Governance of Nanotechnology for Societal Development

Innovative and Responsible Governance of Nanotechnology for Societal Development

Editorial Overview

Integrating science and society in European Framework Programmes: Trends in project-level solicitations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About