1. Heidrun Åm (2014). Quibbling and the Fallacy of Critical Scholarship: Response to Thorstensen. NanoEthics 8 (3):251-254.
    In this text, I respond to a paper by Erik Thorstensen entitled “Public Involvement and Narrative Fallacies of Nanotechnologies.” In his paper, Thorstensen critically reviews a previous ELSA project on engagement and nanotechnology known by the acronym DEEPEN. While I agree that the ELSA community could benefit from the critical examination of earlier research, I believe the approach taken by Thorstensen is not a constructive one. My response deals with three main issues: the character of the paper, narrative theory, and (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Heidrun Åm (2011). Trust as Glue in Nanotechnology Governance Networks. NanoEthics 5 (1):115-128.
    This paper reflects on the change of relations among participants in nanotechnology governance through their participation in governance processes such as stakeholder dialogues. I show that policymaking in practice—that is, the practice of coming and working together in such stakeholder dialogues—has the potential for two-fold performative effects: it can contribute to the development of trust and mutual responsibility on the part of the involved actors, and it may bring about effects on the formation of boundaries of what is sayable and (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation