Avoiding the trust deficit: Public engagement, values, the precautionary principle and the future of nanotechnology [Book Review]
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 6 (1):37-48 (2009)
Debates about the regulatory requirements surrounding the introduction of nanotechnology products have, at least in Australia, remained largely within disciplinary boundaries and industry and academic circles. This paper argues for a more interdisciplinary and inclusive upstream debate about the introduction of ethical, regulatory and legal frameworks that may avoid the loss of public trust that has characterised the introduction of many new technologies in the past. Insights from risk-perception theory and research are used to introduce the notion of risk as narrative as a framework for action. This paper suggests three main strategies for moving forward; drawing insights from the “trust gap” experiences of other new technologies; the application of the active form of the precautionary principle; and, the creation of nano-futures that meet both community and industry values through effective public engagement.
|Keywords||Risk perception Risk communication Trust Values Precautionary principle Sustainability Nanotechnology|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
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.
Nano-Ethics as NEST-Ethics: Patterns of Moral Argumentation About New and Emerging Science and Technology. [REVIEW]Tsjalling Swierstra & Arie Rip - 2007 - NanoEthics 1 (1):3-20.
The Theory of Reflexive Modernization.Ulrich Beck, Wolfgang Bonss & Christoph Lau - 2003 - Theory, Culture and Society 20 (2):1-33.
Sunscreen Safety: The Precautionary Principle, the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration and Nanoparticles in Sunscreens. [REVIEW]Thomas Faunce, Katherine Murray, Hitoshi Nasu & Diana Bowman - 2008 - NanoEthics 2 (3):231-240.
Citations of this work BETA
An Uncertain Risk: The World Health Organization's Account of H1N1.Sudeepa Abeysinghe - 2014 - Science in Context 27 (3):511-529.
Similar books and articles
Trust in Nanotechnology? On Trust as Analytical Tool in Social Research on Emerging Technologies.Trond Grønli Åm - 2011 - NanoEthics 5 (1):15-28.
The Precautionary Principle in Nanotechnology.James Moor - 2006 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 20 (2):191-204.
Toward Understanding Aspects of the Precautionary Principle.Carl F. Cranor - 2004 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 29 (3):259 – 279.
Why Do We Need to Know What the Public Thinks About Nanotechnology?Craig Cormick - 2009 - NanoEthics 3 (2):167-173.
Future Technologies, Dystopic Futures and the Precautionary Principle.Steve Clarke - 2005 - Ethics and Information Technology 7 (3):121-126.
Avoiding Empty Rhetoric: Engaging Publics in Debates About Nanotechnologies.Renee Kyle & Susan Dodds - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):81-96.
Risk Management Principles for Nanotechnology.E. Marchant Gary, J. Sylvester Douglas & W. Abbott Kenneth - 2008 - NanoEthics 2 (1):43-60.
On Nanotechnology and Ambivalence: The Politics of Enthusiasm. [REVIEW]Matthew Kearnes & Brian Wynne - 2007 - NanoEthics 1 (2):131-142.
Added to index2009-02-16
Total downloads31 ( #167,434 of 2,177,961 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #317,206 of 2,177,961 )
How can I increase my downloads?