Moving engagement “upstream”? Nanotechnologies and the Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering's inquiry
Top Cited Papers
- 1 July 2007
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Public Understanding of Science
- Vol. 16 (3) , 345-364
- https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506076141
Abstract
In response to the impetus that is gathering in the UK for upstream public engagement, we analyze the impacts of the Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering report of 2004 on Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties. The paper presents an analysis of 24 interviews with stakeholders to the nanotechnology debate. It uses these to discuss the inquiry process and the recommendations contained within the report, as well as to explore and critique the notion of “upstream.” We find broad support for the inquiry, which was positioned by many stakeholders itself as upstream, primarily because of its broad framing and wide stakeholder involvement. A number of both explicit and implicit upstream elements are also contained within its recommendations. However, the interviews also suggest that the notion of upstream engagement is a contested concept with a range of associated dilemmas and tensions. In drawing out some of the promise and perils of moving public debate upstream, the paper concludes that there is a risk of merely replacing the perceived deficit in public understanding of science with a perceived deficit in public engagement with science.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Nanotechnology: public concerns, reasoning and trust in governmentPublic Understanding of Science, 2006
- National discourses on democratizing nanotechnologyQuaderni, 2006
- Using Surveys in Public Participation Processes for Risk Decision Making: The Case of the 2003 British GM Nation? Public DebateRisk Analysis, 2005
- From Biotechnology to Nanotechnology: What Can We Learn from Earlier Technologies?Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 2004
- Dwarfing the Social? Nanotechnology Lessons from the Biotechnology FrontBulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 2004
- Social amplification of risk in participation: two case studiesPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,2003
- Nuclear stigmaPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,2003
- Democracy in the age of assessment: reflections on the roles of expertise and democracy in public-sector decision makingScience and Public Policy, 2003
- Risk assessment, risk values and the social science programme: why we do need risk perception researchReliability Engineering & System Safety, 1998
- Reckoning Schemes of Legitimation: On Commissions of Inquiry as Power/Knowledge FormsJournal of Historical Sociology, 1990