The morality of attitudes toward nanotechnology: about God,techno-scientific progress,and interfering with nature

Using survey data, we examine public attitudes toward and awareness of nanotechnology in Germany (N = 750). First, it is shown that a majority of the people are still not familiar with nanotechnology. In addition, diffusion of information about nanotechnology thus far mostly seems to reach men and people with a relative higher educational background. Also, pro-science and technology views are positively related with nanotech familiarity. Results further show that a majority of the people have an indifferent, ambiguous, or non-attitude toward nanotechnology. Multinomial logit analyses further reveal that nanotech familiarity is positively related with people’s attitudes. In addition, it is shown that traditional religiosity is unrelated to attitudes and that individual religiosity is weakly related to nanotechnology attitudes. However, moral covariates other than religiosity seem of major importance. In particular, our results show that more negative views on technological and scientific progress as well as more holistic views about the relation between people and the environment increase the likelihood of having a negative attitude toward nanotechnology.     

The Public and Nanotechnology: How Citizens Make Sense of Emerging Technologies

We report findings from a national telephone survey on levels of knowledge about and attitudes toward nanotechnology that demonstrate how people make decisions about emerging technologies. Our findings confirm previous research that suggests that people form opinions and attitudes even in the absence of relevant scientific or policy-related information. In fact, our data show that cognitive shortcuts or heuristics – often provided by mass media – are currently a key factor in influencing how the public thinks about nanotechnology and about its risks and benefits, and in determining the level of support among the public for further funding for research in this area.     

The slings and arrows of communication on nanotechnology

According to numerous surveys the perceived risk of nanotechnology is low and most people feel that the benefits outweigh the risks. This article provides greater insight into risk perception and concludes that the positive attitude to nanotechnology is based not on knowledge but on hope and fascination. The perceived risk is low because of a lack of vivid and frightening images of possible hazards. If news flashes were to link nanotechnology to concrete hazards or actual harm to people, attitudes might suddenly change. Risk communication faces the problem of dealing with a public at large that has little or no knowledge about the technology. As it takes time and extensive additional research to develop appropriate communication strategies and disseminate them to the relevant institutions, this exercise should be started immediately.     

Broader Societal Issues of Nanotechnology

Nanoscale science and engineering are providing unprecedented understanding and control over the basic building blocks of matter, leading to increased coherence in knowledge, technology, and education. The main reason for developing nanotechnology is to advance broad societal goals such as improved comprehension of nature, increased productivity, better healthcare, and extending the limits of sustainable development and of human potential. This paper outlines societal implication activities in nanotechnology R&D programs. The US National Nanotechnology Initiative annual investment in research with educational and societal implications is estimated at about $30 million (of which National Science Foundation (NSF) awards about $23 million including contributions to student fellowships), and in nanoscale research with relevance to environment at about $50 million (of which NSF awards about $30 million and EPA about $6 million). An appeal is made to researchers and funding organizations worldwide to take timely and responsible advantage of the new technology for economic and sustainable development, to initiate societal implications studies from the beginning of the nanotechnology programs, and to communicate effectively the goals and potential risks with research users and the public.     

Comparing nanoparticle risk perceptions to other known EHS risks

Over the last decade social scientific researchers have examined how the public perceives risks associated with nanotechnology. The body of literature that has emerged has been methodologically diverse. The findings have confirmed that some publics perceive nanotechnology as riskier than others, experts feel nanotechnology is less risky than the public does, and despite risks the public is optimistic about nanotechnology development. However, the extant literature on nanotechnology and risk suffers from sometimes widely divergent findings and has failed to provide a detailed picture of how the public actually feels about nanotechnology risks when compared to other risks. This study addresses the deficiencies in the literature by providing a comparative approach to gauging nanotechnology risks. The findings show that the public does not fear nanotechnology compared to other risks. Out of 24 risks presented to the participants, nanotechnology ranked 19th in terms of overall risk and 20th in terms of “high risk.”     

Nanotechnology as an experiment in democracy: how do citizens form opinions about technology and policy?

This article analyzes nanotechnology as an experiment in democratic deliberation, one that seems motivated both by a desire to improve deliberative democracy and to protect the technology from undue public interference. However, rather than involving amplified (overstated) risks, nanotechnology appears to involve attenuated (understated) risks. Results from a 3-year panel study are presented to illustrate the ways in which citizens form opinions about nanotechnology, supporting the assertion that public opinion about complex technology can be both reasonable and stable. Nevertheless, the authors also voice concern that, in the absence of public pressure, risk regulation may not evolve as swiftly as it should to protect both society and industry.     

Expert opinion on nanotechnology: risks,benefits, and regulation

A survey of American (US) nanotechnology researchers (N = 177) suggests a diversity of views about what areas are most important to the burgeoning field, as well as perceptions about the overall benefits and risks of such research. On average, respondents saw a range of technologies as key and viewed public health and environmental issues as areas where both risks and the need for regulation are greatest. These areas were also where respondents said current regulations were least adequate. Factor analyses of the survey questions suggest that, when considering both risks and regulations, respondents make a distinction between health and environmental risks, and what might be termed “social risks” (e.g., invasion of privacy, use of nanotechnology in weapons, and economic impacts).

Making sense of policy choices: understanding the roles of value predispositions, mass media, and cognitive processing in public attitudes toward nanotechnology

Using a nationally representative telephone survey of 1,015 adults in the United States, this study examines how value predispositions, communication variables, and perceptions of risks and benefits are associated with public support for federal funding of nanotechnology. Our findings show that highly religious individuals were less supportive of funding of nanotech than less religious individuals, whereas individuals who held a high deference for scientific authority were more supportive of funding of the emerging technology than those low in deference. Mass media use and elaborative processing of scientific news were positively associated with public support for funding, whereas factual scientific knowledge had no significant association with policy choices. The findings suggest that thinking about and reflecting upon scientific news promote better understanding of the scientific world and may provide a more sophisticated cognitive structure for the public to form opinions about nanotech than factual scientific knowledge. Finally, heuristic cues including trust in scientists and perceived risks and benefits of nanotech were found to be associated with public support for nanotech funding. We conclude with policy implications that will be useful for policymakers and science communication practitioners.     

The changing information environment for nanotechnology: online audiences and content

The shift toward online communication in all realms, from print newspapers to broadcast television, has implications for how the general public consumes information about nanotechnology. The goal of this study is threefold: to investigate who is using online sources for information and news about science and nanotechnology, to examine what the general public is searching for online with regards to nanotechnology, and to analyze what they find in online content of nanotechnology. Using survey data, we find those who report the Internet as their primary source of science and technology news are diverse in age, more knowledgeable about science and nanotechnology, highly educated, male, and more diverse racially than users of other media. In a comparison of demographic data on actual visits by online users to general news and science Web sites, science sites attracted more male, non-white users from the Western region of the United States than news sites did. News sites, on the other hand, attracted those with a slightly higher level of education. Our analysis of published estimates of keyword searches on nanotechnology reveals people are turning to the Internet to search for keyword searches related to the future, health, and applications of nanotechnology. A content analysis of online content reveals health content dominates overall. Comparisons of content in different types of sites—blogs, government, and general sites—are conducted.     

Numbers,scale and symbols: the public understanding of nanotechnology

Nanotechnology will be an increasing part of the everyday lives of most people in the world. There is a general recognition that few people understand the implications of the technology, the technology itself or even the definition of the word. This lack of understanding stems from a lack of knowledge about science in general but more specifically difficulty in grasping the size scale and symbolism of nanotechnology. A potential key to informing the general public is establishing the ability to comprehend the scale of nanotechnology. Transitioning from the macro to the nanoscale seems to require an ability to comprehend scales of one-billion. Scaling is a skill not common in most individuals and tests of their ability to extrapolate size based upon scaling a common object demonstrates that most individuals cannot scale to the extent needed to make the transition to nanoscale. Symbolism is another important vehicle to providing the general public with a basis to understand the concepts of nanotechnology. With increasing age, individuals are able to draw representations of atomic scale objects, but these tend to be iconic and the different representations not easily translated. Ball and stick models are most recognized by the public, which provides an opportunity to present not only useful symbolism but also a reference point for the atomic scale.     

Continuous 3-day exposure assessment of workplace manufacturing silver nanoparticles

In this study we present an overview of the research activities in nanotechnology for the period 2001?C2011 for six selected countries belonging to the Organization of Islamic cooperation (OIC). The selection has been made based on the research output of these countries. The countries are Iran, Turkey, Egypt, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. The factors considered are the number of publications, citations per paper, p-index, and collaborative research output. Iran with 7,795 publications and an annual growth rate of 41?% leads the group, followed by Turkey with 3,169 publications and an annual growth rate of 29?%. Turkey however, has a much better citation per paper (8.96), and p-index (63.34) as compared to Iran (4.59 and 54.36, respectively). We can classify the six countries into two categories. Those, that have a well coordinated national program in nanotechnology, namely, Iran, Malaysia, and Saudi Arabia and those that do not have any national program but are still showing a reasonable good activity in nanotechnology namely Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan. A brief account of the initiatives taken by the six selected countries of OIC in the field of nanotechnology is also presented.     

Public perception of nanotechnology

While several studies on the public opinion of nanotechnology have pointed to a rather enthusiastic U.S. public, the public uptake of nanotechnology in Europe is more contained. The results of the Swiss publifocus on nanotechnology reveal a pragmatic attitude of citizens toward the emerging technologies, thus confirming what has been identified as a “balanced approach” in the NanoJury UK.

Public perceptions about nanotechnology: Risks,benefits and trust

We report data from the first representative national phone survey of Americans' perceptions about nanotechnology (N =1536). Public opinion about nanotechnology is in its infancy, and knowledge about it is quite limited. Yet, Americans' initial reaction to nanotechnology is thus far generally positive, probably rooted in a generally positive view of science overall. Survey respondents expected benefits of nanotechnology to be more prevalent than risks, and they reported feeling hopeful about nanotechnology rather than worried. Their most preferred potential benefit of nanotechnology is new and better ways to detect and treat human diseases, and they identified losing personal privacy to tiny new surveillance devices as the most important potential risk to avoid. The most discouraging aspect to the data is respondents' lack of trust in business leaders to minimize nanotechnology risks to human health. Overall, these data indicate that while Americans do not necessarily presume benefits and the absence of risks, their outlook is much more positive than not.     

Nanotechnology and the public: Effectively communicating nanoscale science and engineering concepts

Researchers are faced with challenges when addressing the public on concepts and applications associated with nanotechnology. The goal of our work was to understand the public’s knowledge of nanotechnology in order to identify appropriate starting points for dialog. Survey results showed that people lack true understanding of concepts associated with atoms and the size of the nanoscale regime. Such gaps in understanding lead to a disappointing lack of communication between researchers and the public concerning fundamental concepts in nanoscale science and engineering. Strategies are offered on how scientists should present their research when engaging the public on nanotechnology topics. Since the time of writing, O.M. Castellini has relocated to the Department of Science and Technology, Museum of Science and Industry, 57th Street and Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.     

Leading US nano-scientists’ perceptions about media coverage and the public communication of scientific research findings

Despite the significant increase in the use of nanotechnology in academic research and commercial products over the past decade, there have been few studies that have explored scientists’ perceptions and attitudes about the technology. In this article, we use survey data from the leading U.S. nano-scientists to explore their perceptions about two issues: the public communication of research findings and media coverage of nanotechnology, which serves as one relatively rapid outlet for public communication. We find that leading U.S. nano-scientists do see an important connection between the public communication of research findings and public attitudes about science. Also, there is a connection between the scientists’ perceptions about media coverage and their views on the timing of public communication; scientists with positive attitudes about the media are more likely to support immediate public communication of research findings, while others believe that communication should take place only after research findings have been published through a peer-review process. We also demonstrate that journalists might have a more challenging time getting scientists to talk with them about nanotechnology news stories because nano-scientists tend to view media coverage of nanotechnology as less credible and less accurate than general science media coverage. We conclude that leading U.S. nano-scientists do feel a sense of responsibility for communicating their research findings to the public, but attitudes about the timing and the pathway of that communication vary across the group.     

The long view of nanotechnology development: the National Nanotechnology Initiative at 10 years

A global scientific and societal endeavor was set in motion by the nanotechnology vision formulated in 1999 that inspired the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) and other national and international R&D programs. Establishing foundational knowledge at the nanoscale has been the main focus of the nanotechnology research community in the first decade. As of 2009, this new knowledge underpinned about a quarter of a trillion dollars worldwide market, of which about $91 billion was in US products that incorporate nanoscale components. Nanotechnology is already evolving toward becoming a general-purpose technology by 2020, encompassing four generations of products with increasing structural and dynamic complexity: (1) passive nanostructures, (2) active nanostructures, (3) nanosystems, and (4) molecular nanosystems. By 2020, the increasing integration of nanoscale science and engineering knowledge and of nanosystems promises mass applications of nanotechnology in industry, medicine, and computing, and in better comprehension and conservation of nature. Nanotechnology’s rapid development worldwide is a testimony to the transformative power of identifying a concept or trend and laying out a vision at the synergistic confluence of diverse scientific research areas. This chapter provides a brief perspective on the development of the NNI since 2000 in the international context, the main outcomes of the R&D programs after 10 years, the governance aspects specific to this emerging field, lessons learned, and most importantly, how the nanotechnology community should prepare for the future.     

Shape-influenced magnetic properties of CoO nanoparticles

Despite uncertainty about the potential human health and environmental risks of nanotechnology, major stakeholders such as regulatory agencies and the nanotechnology industry are already negotiating the emerging regulatory framework for nanotechnology. Because of a relative lack of nano-specific regulations, the future of nanotechnology development will depend greatly on the views held by the nanotechnology industry. This study fills the research gap in understanding how the nanotechnology industry perceives the risks of nanotechnology. This is the first interview-based study of the nanotechnology industry in the United States. Semi-structured, open-ended phone interviews were conducted with 17 individuals involved in the commercialization of nanotechnology in the United States. Results indicate that while the industry acknowledges uncertainty about the potential risks of nanotechnology and takes significant precaution in ensuring the safety of their products, they do not see nanotechnology as novel or risky. They do not believe that uncertainty over risk ought to delay the further development of nanotechnology. The industry sees itself as the primary agent in ensuring consumer safety and believes that consumers are adequately protected. They are also largely benefit-centric and view product labeling as inefficacious.     

Awareness on adverse effects of nanotechnology increases negative perception among public: survey study from Singapore

As has been demonstrated by recent societal controversies associated with the introduction of novel technologies, societal acceptance of a technology and its applications is shaped by consumers’ perceived risks and benefits. The research reported here investigates public perceptions of nanotechnology in Singapore, where technological innovation is an established part of the economy, and it might be expected that consumer perceptions of risk are low, and those of benefit are high. The contribution of socio-demographic variables, knowledge level and exposure to risk information in shaping risk perception about nanotechnology applications within different application sectors were analysed. About ~80 % of respondents have some understanding of nanotechnology, 60 % report having heard some negative information, and 39 % perceive nanotechnology as beneficial, while 27.5 % perceive it as risky. Nanotechnology application in food was reported to cause the most concern in the consumers included in the sample. Two-step cluster analysis of the data enabled grouping of respondents into those who expressed ‘less concern’ or ‘more concern’ based on their average scores for concern levels expressed with applications of nanotechnology in different sectors. Profiling of these clusters revealed that, apart from various socio-demographic factors, exposure to risk-related information, rather than awareness in nanotechnology itself, resulted in respondents expressing greater concern about nanotechnology applications. The results provide evidence upon which regulatory agencies and industries can base policies regarding informed risk–benefit communication and management associated with the introduction of commercial applications of nanotechnology.     

The current state of public understanding of nanotechnology

The growing importance of nanotechnology in industry and society has not been accompanied by a widespread understanding of the subject among the general public. Simple questions to initially probe the smallest thing that people can see and can think of reveals a divide in the understanding of the general public. A survey of 1500 individuals ranging in age from 6 to 74 has revealed a lack of knowledge of nanotechnology and especially a lack of understanding of the context of nanotechnology in the world that is too small to see. Survey findings are corroborated by in-depth interviews with 400 adults in studies of nanoscience literacy commisioned by University of California, Berkeley and Cornell in 2002 and 2004, respectively. In general, with the exception of 14–28 year olds, over 60% of respondents say they have never heard of nano or nanotechnology. The results suggest that the general public, especially middle-school children, has no firm foundation to understand nanotechnology and likely will continue to be equally impressed by credible scientific information as well as pure fictional accounts of nanotechnology.     

Altruism and skepticism in public attitudes toward food nanotechnologies

To better explore and understand the public's perceptions of and attitudes toward emerging technologies and food products, we conducted a US-based focus group study centered on nanotechnology, nano-food, and nano-food labeling. Seven focus groups were conducted in seven locations in two different US metropolitan areas from September 2010 to January 2011. In addition to revealing context-specific data on already established risk and public perception factors, our goal was to inductively identify other nano-food perception factors of significance for consideration when analyzing why and how perceptions and attitudes are formed to nanotechnology in food. Two such factors that emerged—altruism and skepticism—are particularly interesting in that they may be situated between different theoretical frameworks that have been used for explaining perception and attitude. We argue that they may represent a convergence point among theories that each help explain different aspects of both how food nanotechnologies are perceived and why those perceptions are formed. In this paper, we first review theoretical frameworks for evaluating risk perception and attitudes toward emerging technologies, then review previous work on public perception of nanotechnology and nano-food, describe our qualitative content analysis results for public perception toward nano-food—focusing especially on altruism and skepticism, and discuss implications of these findings in terms of how public attitudes toward nano-food could be formed and understood. Finally, we propose that paying attention to these two factors may guide more responsible development of nano-food in the future.