Graduate studies at Western
Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):81-96 (2009)
|Abstract||Despite the amount of public investment in nanotechnology ventures in the developed world, research shows that there is little public awareness about nanotechnology, and public knowledge is very limited. This is concerning given that nanotechnology has been heralded as ‘revolutionising’ the way we live. In this paper, we articulate why public engagement in debates about nanotechnology is important, drawing on literature on public engagement and science policy debate and deliberation about public policy development. We also explore the significance of timing in engaging the public, and we make some suggestions concerning how to effectively engage publics. Our conclusions indicate the significance of scientific researchers, policy makers and representative consumer groupings in public reasoning towards a better public policy framework for debate about technological development.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Brice Laurent (2011). Technologies of Democracy: Experiments and Demonstrations. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):649-666.
Alison Mohr (2011). Publics in the Making: Mediating Different Methods of Engagement and the Publics These Construct. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):667-672.
Alan Petersen & Alison Anderson (2007). A Question of Balance or Blind Faith?: Scientists' and Science Policymakers' Representations of the Benefits and Risks of Nanotechnologies. [REVIEW] NanoEthics 1 (3):243-256.
Regula Valérie Burri (2007). Deliberating Risks Under Uncertainty: Experience, Trust, and Attitudes in a Swiss Nanotechnology Stakeholder Discussion Group. NanoEthics 1 (2):143-154.
Summer Johnson (2007). Making Public Bioethics Sufficiently Public: The Legitimacy and Authority of Bioethics Commissions. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 17 (2):143-152.
Matthew Kearnes & Brian Wynne (2007). On Nanotechnology and Ambivalence: The Politics of Enthusiasm. [REVIEW] NanoEthics 1 (2):131-142.
Ulrike Felt & Maximilian Fochler (2010). Machineries for Making Publics: Inscribing and De-Scribing Publics in Public Engagement. Minerva 48 (3):219-238.
Kristen Lyons & James Whelan (2010). Community Engagement to Facilitate, Legitimize and Accelerate the Advancement of Nanotechnologies in Australia. Nanoethics 4 (1):53-66.
Craig Cormick (2009). Why Do We Need to Know What the Public Thinks About Nanotechnology? Nanoethics 3 (2):167-173.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads12 ( #101,459 of 752,081 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,163 of 752,081 )
How can I increase my downloads?