A question of balance or blind faith?: Scientists' and science policymakers' representations of the benefits and risks of nanotechnologies [Book Review]
Graduate studies at Western
NanoEthics 1 (3):243-256 (2007)
|Abstract||In recent years, in the UK and elsewhere, scientists and science policymakers have grappled with the question of how to reap the benefits of nanotechnologies while minimising the risks. Having recognised the importance of public support for future innovations, they have placed increasing emphasis on ‘engaging’ ‘the public’ during the early phase of technology development. Meaningful engagement suggests some common ground between experts and lay publics in relation to the definition of nanotechnologies and of their benefits and risks. However, views on nanotechnologies are likely to vary according to where actors stand in the technology production/consumption/assessment cycle. Drawing on data from a recent UK-based study, this article examines how scientists (‘upstream’ and ‘downstream’) and policymakers portray the benefits and risks of nanotechnologies, particularly as they relate to two major areas of predicted application, namely medicine/public health and environmental sustainability. The findings reveal that, in the main, scientists and science policymakers held a positive conception of nanotechnologies and see imminent applications, although they acknowledged particular risks, including adverse public reaction. While definitions of ‘benefit’ and ‘risk’ varied, most saw the benefits as outweighing the risks and believed that the risks could be adequately regulated once they were assessed. The difficulties of assessing risk, however, were acknowledged. The study raises a number of questions that will need to be addressed if regulations are to be developed that not only protect people’s heath and wellbeing and the environment but also engender public trust in nanotechnologies.|
|Keywords||Nanoparticles Scientists Science policymakers Risk Regulation Trust Public engagement Medicine Public health Environmental sustainability|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Annette Rid & David Wendler (2011). A Framework for Risk-Benefit Evaluations in Biomedical Research. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 21 (2):141-179.
Regula Valérie Burri (2007). Deliberating Risks Under Uncertainty: Experience, Trust, and Attitudes in a Swiss Nanotechnology Stakeholder Discussion Group. NanoEthics 1 (2):143-154.
Noela Invernizzi (2008). Visions of Brazilian Scientists on Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies. Nanoethics 2 (2):133-148.
Tee Rogers-Hayden, Alison Mohr & Nick Pidgeon (2007). Introduction: Engaging with Nanotechnologies – Engaging Differently? [REVIEW] NanoEthics 1 (2):123-130.
Phil Macnaghten (2010). Engaging Narratives and the Limits of Lay Ethics: Introduction. [REVIEW] Nanoethics 4 (2):133-140.
Sven Ove Hansson (2004). Weighing Risks and Benefits. Topoi 23 (2):145-152.
Alfred Nordmann & Phil Macnaghten (2010). Engaging Narratives and the Limits of Lay Ethics: Introduction. [REVIEW] Nanoethics 4 (2):133-140.
Janet Malek (2007). Understanding Risks and Benefits in Research on Reproductive Genetic Technologies. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (4):339 – 358.
Joachim Schummer & Elena Pariotti (2008). Regulating Nanotechnologies: Risk Management Models and Nanomedicine. [REVIEW] NanoEthics 2 (1):39-42.
Alan Petersen (2009). Introduction: The Ethical Challenges of Nanotechnologies. [REVIEW] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 6 (1):9-12.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #170,132 of 739,406 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?