Nanotechnologies for Tomorrow's Society1 A case study from the heart of Europe (original) (raw)
Related papers
Nanotechnologies for Tomorrow’s Society: A Case for Reflective Action Research in Flanders, Belgium
Policy makers involved in innovation policy and scientists working on newly emerging technologies such as nanotechnologies, are confronted with three considerable challenges: a lack of distinct indicating directions of possible applications (strategic uncertainty), a lack of scientific knowledge (complexity) and the ambiguous reception of new developments in society. In this climate of uncertainty and ambiguity it is by no means clear for the actors involved how to innovate purposefully and constructively. In response to such problems and difficulties, the Flemish interdisciplinary research project 'Nanotechnologies for Tomorrow's Society' (NanoSoc) engages innovation networks where each actor contributes his (incomplete) views and perspectives and confronts them with those of others. The project brings together nanotechnologists, natural and social scientists, stakeholders, and citizens in the region of Flanders, Belgium, to discuss and steer future nanotech developments in three particular fields of nanotechnology development: smart environment, bio on chip, and new materials. This article first discusses the main challenges in innovating successfully with nanotechnologies, to then elaborate on how NanoSoc seeks to effectively address these issues through interdisciplinary reflective action research.
A social shaping perspective on nanotechnologies
2005
The social shaping of technology approach (SST) has developed as a response to narrow ideas of techno-economically rationality and linear conceptions of technology development and its consequences. The SST approach seems especially promising in areas where visions are manifold and applications and markets are non-existing or unclear. The emerging idea of 'nanotechnologies' is an example of this kind, where techno-economic networks are unstable or under construction and consequences are difficult, if not impossible to evaluate. The paper explores the potential of a social shaping of technology approach in the area of emerging nano-technologies and debate the methodological aspects based on an ongoing Danish foresight project concerned with environmental risks and opportunities in nanotechnologies. The focus is on the identification of strategic considerations and choices related to early stages of socio-technical or socioeconomic network building processes cutting across diverse worlds of science, manufacturing, product design and use.
Science, Technology and Innovation Studies, 2008
The aim of this article is twofold: First, I would like to theoretically contribute to Science and Technology Studies, and to Science, Technology and Innovation Studies , respectively, by introducing a hegemony-and discourse-theoretical inspired political economy as an interdisciplinary approach. And second, I shall present some tentative empirical analyses of the policy field of nanotechnology. Nanotechnology is widely perceived as the key technology of the 21st century. As a result, it is becoming increasingly important in many government policies devoted to technology. Nanotechnology is supposedly appealing for many actors, since it is expected to both produce entirely new materials and revolutionize production processes in virtually all industrial branches. Approaching the 'nano-hype' from a discourse-theoretical perspective, I shall show that nanotechnology is not a definite technology, but an empty signifier. This empty signifier provides the basis for an encompassing socioeconomic project that is kept together only by the signifier itself. This " innovation project " creates a link between nanotechnology and the future of the industrialised states. It aims, above others, at their reconstruction along competitive criteria as 'competition states'. Hence, I shall locate nanotechnology policies within a discursive field of political and economic interests and strategies. My theoretical approach highlights the importance of hegemonic struggles for the construction of (political) reality. Hegemonic practices shape the discursive structure , which, in turn provides the strategic-selective conditions for articulation. Accordingly , policymaking can be described as a rather performative process, which uses complex systems of representation to establish a situation of stability and predictability. Hence, the governance of nanotechnology has to be understood as a contradictory battleground, where certain actors try to enforce their interests.
Widening the Circle of Nano Research: A Case for Reflective Action Research in Flemish Society
Drawing on the hard lessons learned from the public controversy over genetically modified crops, policy makers as well as scientists and technologists have begun to recognize the need to engage wider audiences in technology innovation. While this upstreaming of public involvement is by no means a new idea, it is increasingly being called for in social democracies seeking to address the societal implications of nanotechnologies. One case in point is the highly industrialized region of Flanders, Belgium. Its government is funding a research project entitled "Nanotechnologies For Tomorrow's Society", which the authors coordinate. The endeavor brings together scientists, stakeholders, and interested citizens in an effort to collectively construct sustainable nanotechnology trajectories. As this entails more than merely assessing possible technology impacts, an open, experimental model of social science research with respect for the undetermined nature of nanotechnology, is set forth. Its key aim is to discover and reflect on the motivations and considerations of nano-researchers, as well as to openly debate the economic and social driving forces that shape the technology in the Flemish region. Identifying and systematically calling into question these underlying incentives with all participants, is the central feature of the research method. It is, we argue, crucial to move the debate upstream, as not only does it reveal which nanotechnology trajectories are in the making, but also suggests how they could effectively be adjusted or altered to better fit society's needs. In this article we outline the Technology Assessment framework that underlies our reflective action research approach and motivate its application in co-shaping nanotechnology developments in Flanders.
Nanoethics, 2008
The main objective of the Flemish research project ‘Nanotechnologies for tomorrow’s society’ (NanoSoc) is to develop and try out an interactive process as a suitable methodology for rendering nanoresearchers aware of underlying assumptions that guide nanotech research and integrating social considerations into the research choices they face. In particular, the NanoSoc process should sustain scientists’ capacities to address growing uncertainties on the strategic, scientific and public acceptance level. The article elaborates on these uncertainties and involved dilemmas scientists are facing and proposes a process approach which addresses strategic uncertainty by alternating between ‘visioning’ and ‘technology assessment’; a process design which manages complexity by promoting reflexivity among scientists by exposing them to deliberations in civil society (social experts, stakeholders, citizens) on plausible futures with nanotechnologies; and as an answer to societal ambivalence, certain process quality requirements such as an attitude of perplexity or openness towards ‘plurality’ and an attitude of ‘temporary closure’, both in support of understanding and learning from differences.
Negotiating Plausibility: Intervening in the Future of Nanotechnology
Science and Engineering Ethics, 2011
This paper investigates the challenges of negotiating plausibility in a national scenarios project-NanoFutures-focused on the social, political, economic, and ethical implications of nanotechnology initiated by the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University (CNS-ASU). The project involves novel foresight methodologies to develop plausible visions of nanotechnology enabled futures, elucidate public preferences for various alternatives, and using such preferences, help further refine future visions for research and outreach. In doing so, NanoFutures aims to address a central question: How to instigate deliberation about the social implications of a new technology whose outcomes are not known? The solutions pursued by the CNS NanoFutures project are two fold. First, NanoFutures limits the speculation of the technology to plausible visions. This ambition introduces a host of concerns about the limits of prediction, the nature of plausibility and how to establish plausibility. Second, to subject these visions to democratic assessment by a range of stakeholders, thus raising methodological issues as to who are relevant stakeholders and how to activate different communities to engage the far future. This article makes transparent the dilemmas posed by and decisions made about such methodological issues and articulates the role of plausibility in anticipatory governance.