NanoEthics 11 (3):229-242 (2017)

There is a growing literature on how scientific experts understand risk of technology related to their disciplinary field. Previous research shows that experts have different understandings and perspectives depending on disciplinary culture, organizational affiliation, and how they more broadly look upon their role in society. From a practice-based perspective on risk management as a bottom-up activity embedded in work place routines and everyday interactions, we look, through an ethnographic lens, at the laboratory life of nanoscientists. In the USA and Sweden, two categories of nanoscientists have been studied: upstream scientists who are mainly electrical and physical engineers and downstream scientists who are toxicologists, often with a more multidisciplinary background, including physics, chemistry, biology, and engineering. The results show that although the two groups of scientists share the same norms of appropriate laboratory conduct to promote safety and good science practice, they have very different perspectives on risk with nanomaterials. Upstream scientists downplay risk; they emphasize the innovative potential of the new materials to which they express an affectionate and personalized stance. The downstream scientists, instead, focus on the uncertainties and unpredictability of nanomaterials and they see some materials as potentially highly dangerous. The results highlight the ambiguous and complex role of scientific experts in policy processes about the risk and regulation of nanotechnology.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11569-017-0297-2
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 59,916
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity.Ulrich Beck, Mark Ritter & Jennifer Brown - 1993 - Environmental Values 2 (4):367-368.
Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy.Arjun Appadurai - 1990 - Theory, Culture and Society 7 (2-3):295-310.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Issues of Academic Disciplines in Agricultural Research.H. O. Kunkel - 1988 - Agriculture and Human Values 5 (4):16-25.


Added to PP index

Total views
8 ( #960,024 of 2,433,208 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #463,180 of 2,433,208 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes