4 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
Matthew Kearnes [4]Matthew B. Kearnes [1]
  1. Matthew Kearnes (2013). On Guidebooks, Lists and Nanotechnology. Minerva 51 (4):513-519.
    Much like an exotic city, a computer programme or an artistic exhibition, new technologies often require guidebooks. This is particularly the case for nanotechnology, a multifaceted and diverse research programme characterised by canonical origin stories, seemingly limitless claims about its potential to transform everything from sunscreen to space travel, the nascent ingredients for a public risk controversy and state-level coordination of research funding and support measures. If ever anyone was in any doubt, What is Nanotechnology and Why Does It Matter? (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Matthew Kearnes & Matthias Wienroth (2011). Tools of the Trade: UK Research Intermediaries and the Politics of Impacts. [REVIEW] Minerva 49 (2):153-174.
    In recent years questions concerning the impact of public research funding have become the preeminent site at which struggles over the meanings and value of science are played out. In this paper we explore the ‘politics of impact’ in contemporary UK science and research policy and, in particular, detail the ways in which UK research councils have responded to and reframed recent calls for the quantitative measurement of research impacts. Operating as ‘boundary organisations’ research councils are embroiled in what might (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Matthew Kearnes (2008). Informationalising Matter: Systems Understandings of the Nanoscale. Spontaneous Generations: A Journal for the History and Philosophy of Science 2 (1):99.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Matthew Kearnes & Brian Wynne (2007). On Nanotechnology and Ambivalence: The Politics of Enthusiasm. [REVIEW] NanoEthics 1 (2):131-142.
    The promise of scientific and technological innovation – particularly in fields such as nanotechnology – is increasingly set against what has been articulated as a deficit in public trust in both the new technologies and regulatory mechanisms. Whilst the development of new technology is cast as providing contributions to both quality of life and national competitiveness, what has been termed a ‘legitimacy crisis’ is seen as threatening the vitality of this process. However in contrast to the risk debates that dominated (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation