Nanotechnology - Nanotech Regulatory Document Archive - Arizona ...

Market expectations & unfolding
Nano to follow bio, with new markets and start-ups? Or
more ‘nano-enabled’ products & markets?
For Abernathy (1985) ‘revolutionary innovations’, i.e.
radically new ways of designing and producing existing
products
Stakes = potential hidden risks for health & the
environment
Past cases and the mix of scientific controversies,
economic & political interests & public (dis)trust
--> need to follow consumer practices
-->do we have more to learn from past cases (e.g. GMO
or Asbestos, but also Shell Oil Rig…)
Social Impact (2)
Difficulties with technological anticipations.
See on-going controversy on scenarios on molecular
nanotechnology --> need for more research on
foresight processes
Difficulties related to societal dimensions
see Callon & Rip hybrid fora (15 years ago) and work
on mediations & concerned groups as support for a
rich civil society nurturing ‘technical democracy’
184
Social Impact (1)
Only nano-enabled? No, also ‘architectural innovations’
(i.e. breaking from previous technologies & markets)
Meaning simultaneous transformations of ‘industry’
knowledge base, qualities (embedded in standards &
norms), and societal values
Key driver for ‘socio-technical shaping’ = controversies
(major lesson from sciences studies, Latour). Closure
drives to robust compromises (Rip) enabling investment.
Hype = marker of limited closure, with 2 main forms of
difficulties
Social impact (3)
What about Social Sciences?
An unexpected focus on ‘direct’ democracy and the
self-engineering of new mediations (role of funding
agencies?): not very productive (see Stilgoe 2007)
How to reflect on this? Blair’s position? or a wrong
assessment of the role of social scientists?
Role: study emergence and deployment of new
collectives & mediations,
Expectations from society: enhance abilities to
analyse situations and problem-solving capabilities