Not again! Public perception, regulation, and nanotechnology

Regulation and Governance

Volumn 3, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 165-185

  Sylvester, Douglas J ^a   Abbott, Kenneth W ^a   Marchant, Gary E ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cognitive psychology; Nanotechnology; Public opinion; Responsive regulation; Risk regulation

Indexed keywords

EID: 67449135209     PISSN: 17485983     EISSN: 17485991     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-5991.2009.01049.x     Document Type: Article

References (108)

1. Abbott KW, Marchant GE, Sylvester DJ (2006) A Framework Convention for Nanotechnology? Environmental Law Reporter 36, 10931-10942.
2. Anderson B (2007) Hope for Nanotechnology: Anticipatory Knowledge and the Governance of Affect. Area 39, 156-165.
3. AzoNano (2008) Educating Public about Nanotechnology Causes People to Become Worried and Cautious. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.]Available from URL: http://www.azonano.com/News.asp?NewsID=6852.
4. Barben D, Fisher E, Selin C, Guston D (2007) Anticipatory Governance of Nanotechnology: Foresight, Engagement, And Integration. In: Hackett EJ, Amsterdamska O, Lynch M etal. (eds) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd edn, pp. 979-1000. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
5. Bass C (2008) Nanotech: The Unknown Risks. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.]Available from URL: http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id= 2029.
6. Birnbauer W (2005) Nano Could be a Huge Future Health Crisis. The Age. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.] Available from URL: http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/ nano-could-be-a-huge-future-health-crisis/2005/10/29/1130400402062.html.
7. Borras S (2006) Legitimate Governance of Risk at the EU Level? The Case of Genetically Modified Organisms. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 1, 61-75.
8. Bowman DM, Gilligan G (2006) How Will the Regulation of Nanotechnology Develop? Clues from Other Sectors. In: Hodge G, Bowman D, Ludlow K (eds) New Global Frontiers in Regulation: The Age of Nanotechnology, pp. 353-384. Elgar, Northampton, MA.
9. Bowman DM, Hodge GA (2007) Nanotechnology and Public Interest Dialogue: Some International Observations. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 27, 118-132.
10. Bowman DM, Van Calster G (2007) Reflecting on REACH: Global Implications of the European Union's Chemicals Regulation. Nanotechnology Law and Business 4, 375-384.
11. Braithwaite V, Levi M (eds) (1998) Trust & Governance. Russell Sage Foundation, New York.
12. Brechin SR (2003) Comparative Public Opinion and Knowledge on Global Climactic Change and the Kyoto Protocol: The U.S. versus the World? International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 23, 106-134.
13. Brewer TL (2005) US Public Opinion on Climate Change Issues: Implications for Consensus-Building and Policymaking. Climate Policy 4, 359-376.
14. Burri RV (2007) Deliberating Risks under Uncertainty: Experience, Trust, and Attitudes in a Swiss Nanotechnology Stakeholder Discussion Group. Nanoethics 1, 143-154.
15. Burri V, Bellucci S (2008) Public Perception of Nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 10, 387-391.
16. Cobb MD, Macoubrie J (2004) Public Perceptions about Nanotechnology: Risks, Benefits, and Trust. Journal of Nanoparticle Research: An Interdisciplinary Forum for Nanoscale Science and Technology 6, 395-405.
17. Colvin VL (2003) The Potential Environmental Impact of Engineered Nanomaterials. Nature Biotechnology 21, 1166-1170.
18. Davies JC (2007) EPA and Nanotechnology: Oversight for the 21st Century. Project on Emerging Technologies, Washington, DC.
19. Davies JC (2008) Nanotechnology Oversight: An Agenda for the New Administration. Project on Emerging Technologies, Washington, DC.
20. Dumortier H, Lacotte S, Pastorin G, Marega R, Wu W, Bonifazi D et al. (2006) Functionalized Carbon Nanotubes are Non-Cytotoxic and Preserve the Functionality of Primary Immune Cells. Nano Letters 6, 1522-1528.
21. Dupuy JP (2007) Complexity and Uncertainty: A Prudential Approach to Nanotechnology. In: Allhoff F, Lin P, Moor J, Weckert J (eds) Nanoethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Nanotechnology, pp. 119-132. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
22. Frewer LJ, Howard JC, Hedderley D, Shepherd R (1996) What Determines Trust in Information about Food Related Risks? Underlying Psychological Constructs. Risk Analysis 16, 473-486.
23. Frewer LJ, Howard C, Shepherd R (1998) The Influence of Initial Attitudes on Responses to Communication about Genetic Engineering in Food Production. Agriculture and Human Values 15, 15-30.
24. Friedman SM, Egolf BE (2005) Nanotechnology: Risks and the Media. IEEE Technology and Society 24, 5-11.
25. Gaskell G (2005) Imagining Nanotechnology: Cultural Support for Technological Innovation in Europe and the United States. Public Understanding of Science 14, 81-90.
26. Gaskell G, Ten Eyck T, Jackson J, Veltri G (2003) Public Attitudes to Nanotechnology in Europe and the United States. Nature Materials 2, 496-499.
27. Gibson J (2006) "Consumer Protection": Consumer Strategies and the European Market in Genetically Modified Foods. Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property 5, 176-191.
28. Greenberg MR (2006) Gap Analysis of Environmental Management Frameworks for Nanotechnology. In: Proceedings of the 2006 Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium, pp. 310-314. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.]Available from URL: http://www.sys.virginia.edu/sieds06/papers/ FAfternoonSession8.1.pdf.
29. Gregory R, Flynn J, Slovic P (1995) Technological Stigma. American Scientist 83, 220-223.
30. Hallman WK, Hebden WC, Aquino HL, Cuite CL, Lang JT (2003) Public Perceptions of Genetically Modified Foods: A National Study of American Knowledge and Opinion. Food Policy Institute, New Brunswick, NJ.
31. Hardin R (2002) Trust & Trustworthiness. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY.
32. International Food Information Council (2006) Food Biotechnology: A Study of US Consumer Attitudinal Trends 2006 Report. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.]Available from URL: http://www.ific.org/research/upload/ 2006%20Biotech%20Consumer%20Research%20Report.pdf.
33. International Food Information Council (2008) 2008 Food Biotechnology: A Study of US Consumer Trends. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.] Available from URL: http://www.ific.org/food/biotechnology/upload/ foodbiotechnologybackgrounder.pdf.
34. International Food Information Council (2009) 2007-2009 IFIC Foundation Media Guide on Food Safety and Nutrition: Backgrounder, Food Biotechnology. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.]Available from URL: http://www.ific.org/food/biotechnology/upload/ foodbiotechnologybackgrounder.pdf.
35. Kahan D, Braman D (2006) Cultural Cognition and Public Policy. Yale Law and Policy Review 24, 147-170.
36. Kahan D, Slovic P, Braman D, Gastil J, Cohen GL (2007) Affect, Values, and Nanotechnology Risk Perceptions: An Experimental Investigation. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.]Available from URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/ sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=968652.
37. Kahan DM, Braman D, Slovic P, Gastil J, Cohen GL (2008a) The Future of Nanotechnology Risk Perceptions: An Experimental Investigation of Two Hypotheses. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.]Available from URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1089230.
38. Kahan D, Slovic P, Braman D, Gastil J, Cohen G, Kysar D (2008b) Biased Assimilation, Polarization, and Cultural Credibility: An Experimental Study of Nanotechnology Risk Perceptions. Available from URL: http://www.nanotechproject.org/process/files/5960/brief2kahan_final.pdf.
39. Kasperson JX, Kasperson RE, Pidgeon N, Slovic P (2003) The Social Amplification of Risk: Fifteen Years of Research and Theory. In: Pidgeon N, Kasperson RE, Slovic P (eds) The Social Amplification of Risk, pp. 13-37. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
40. Kearnes MB, Grove-White R, Macnaghten PM, Wilsdon J, Wynne B (2006) From Bio to Nano: Learning Lessons from the UK Agricultural Biotechnology Controversy. Science as Culture 15, 291-307.
41. Kimbrell G, Salvi A (2008) Nano-Protecting the Public. Los Angeles Times 28 Feb. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.] Available from URL: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/ la-op-salvi-kimbrell28feb28,0,6228603.story.
42. Kuran T, Sunstein CR (1999) Availability Cascades and Risk Regulation. Stanford Law Review 51, 683-768.
43. Lang JT, Hallman WK (2005) Who Does the Public Trust? The Case of Genetically Modified Food in the United States. Risk Analysis 25, 1241-1252.
44. Levidow L (1998) Democratizing Technology - or Technologizing Democracy? Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology in Europe. Technology in Society 20, 211-226.
45. Lin A (2007) Size Matters: Regulating Nanotechnology. Harvard Environmental Law Review 31, 349-408.
46. Liu A, Sun K, Yang J, Zhao D (2008) Toxicological Effects of Multi-Wall Carbon Nanotubes in Rats. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 10, 1303-1307.
47. Lloyd's of London (2007) Nanotechnology: The Big Questions. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.] Available from URL: http://www.lloyds.com/NR/ rdonlyres/A3674547-BF46-42B2-ACF7-9DC17A574BD9/0/ Nanotechnology_the_big_questions.pdf.
48. Losey JE, Rayor LS, Carter ME (1999) Transgenic Pollen Harms Monarch Larvae. Nature 399, 214.
49. MacMillan T, Seshia S (2006) Farming and Food Research: Participation and the Public Good. In: Gunning J, Holm S (eds) Ethics, Law & Society, Vol. 1, pp. 109-116. Ashgate, Burlington, VT.
50. Macoubrie J (2005) Informed Public Perceptions of Nanotechnology and Trust in Government. Project on Emerging Technologies, Washington, DC.
51. Magrez A, Kasas S, Salicio V, Pasquier N, Seo JW, Celio M et al. (2006) Cellular Toxicity of Carbon-based Nanomaterials. Nano Letters 6, 1121-1125.
52. Mandel G (2005) Technology Wars: The Failure of Democratic Discourse. Michigan Telecommunications Law Review 11, 117-190.
53. Marchant GE, Sylvester DJ (2006) Transnational Models for Regulation of Nanotechnology. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 34, 714-725.
54. Marchant GE, Sylvester DJ, Abbott K (2008) Risk Management Principles for Nanotechnology. Nanoethics 2, 43-60.
55. Maynard A (2006) Safe Handling of Nanotechnology. Nature 444, 267-269.
56. Mazzola L (2003) Commercializing Nanotechnology. Nature Biotechnology 21, 1137-1143.
57. Medina C, Santos-Martinez MJ, Radomski A, Corrigan OI, Radomski MW (2007) Nanoparticles: Pharmacological and Toxicological Significance. British Journal of Pharmacology 150, 552-558.
58. Meili C (2006) Nano-Regulation: A Multi-Stakeholder-Dialogue Approach Towards a Sustainable Regulatory Framework for Nanotechnologies and Nanosciences. The Innovation Society Ltd., St Gallen.
59. Mellman Group, Inc. (2005) Recent Findings: Memorandum to the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.] Available from URL: http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/ wwwpewtrustsorg/Public_Opinion/Food_and_Biotechnology/2005summary.pdf.
60. Mellman Group, Inc. (2006) Recent Findings: Memorandum to the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.]Available from URL: http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/ wwwpewtrustsorg/Public_Opinion/Food_and_Biotechnology/2006summary.pdf.
61. Michelson ES (2006) Nanotechnology Policy: An Analysis of Transnational Governance Issues Facing the United States and China. Project on Emerging Technologies, Washington, DC.
62. Moore JA (2001) Frankenfood or Doubly Green Revolution: Europe vs. America on the GMO Debate. In: Teich AH, Nelson SD, McEnaney C, Lita SJ (eds) AAAS Science and Technology Yearbook 2001, pp. 173-182. American Association for the Advancement of Science, New York, NY.
63. Oberdorster E (2004) Manufactured Nanomaterials (Fullerenes, C60) Induce Oxidative Stress in the Brain of Juvenile Largemouth Bass. Environmental Health Perspectives 112, 1058-1062.
64. Oberdorster G, Stone V, Donaldson K (2007) Toxicology of Nanoparticles: A Historical Perspective. Nanotoxicology 1, 2-25.
65. Owens SR (2003) Feeding Prejudice. EMBO Reports 4, 229-232.
66. Parr D (2005) Will Nanotechnology Make the World a Better Place? Trends in Biotechnology 23, 395-398.
67. Pidgeon N, Kasperson RE, Slovic P (eds) (2003) The Social Amplification of Risk. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
68. Pidgeon N, Harthorn BH, Brant K, Rogers-Hayden T (2009) Deliberating the Risks of Nanotechnologies for Energy and Health Applications in the United States and the United Kingdom. Nature Nanotechnology 4, 95-98.
69. Poland CA, Duffin R, Kinloch I, Maynard A, Wallace WAH, Seaton A et al. (2008) Carbon Nanotubes Introduced Into the Abdominal Cavity of Mice Show Asbestos Like Pathogenicity in a Pilot Study. Nature Nanotechnology 3, 423-428.
70. Prakash CS (2001) The Genetically Modified Crop Debate in the Context of Agricultural Evolution. Plant Physiology 126, 8-15.
71. Priestly B, Harford A (2006) The Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) of Nanomaterials. In: Hodge G, Bowman D, Ludlow K (eds) New Global Frontiers in Regulation: The Age of Nanotechnology, pp. 134-148. Elgar, Northampton, MA.
72. Rachlinski J (2003) The Uncertain Psychological Case for Paternalism. Northwestern University Law Review 97, 1165-1225.
73. Raeburn P (1999/2000) Clamor over Genetically Modified Foods Come to the United States. New York University Environmental Law Journal 8, 610-613.
74. Rejeski D (2007) Nanotechnology and the Trust Gap. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.]Available from URL: http://www.nanotech-now.com/columns/?article= 109.
75. Rejeski D (2008) Written Testimony: National Nanotechnology Initiative: Charting the Course for Reauthorization. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.]Available from URL: http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files/ RejeskiWrittenTestimony.pdf.
76. Renn O, Roco MC (2006) Nanotechnology and the Need for Risk Governance. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 8, 153-191.
77. Reuters (2001) Persuading the Wary Consumers, GMOs and Mistrust. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.]Available from URL: http://www.biotech-info.net/ mistrust.html.
78. Schuler E (2004) Perception of Risks and Nanotechnology. In: Baird D, Nordmann A, Schummer J (eds) Discovering the Nanoscale, pp. 279-284. IOS Press, Amsterdam.
79. Schweitzer NJ, Sylvester DJ, Saks MJ (2007) Rule Violations and the Rule of Law: A Factorial Survey of Public Attitudes. DePaul Law Review, 56, 615-638.
80. Scott D (2003) Science and the Consequences of Mistrust: Lessons from the Recent GM Controversies. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16, 569-582.
81. Sheetz T, Vidal J, Pearson T, Lozano K (2005) Nanotechnology: Awareness and Societal Concerns. Technology in Society 27, 329-345.
82. Siegrist M, Wiek A, Hellan A, Kastenholz H (2007a) Risks and Nanotechnology: The Public is More Concerned than Experts and Industry. Nature Nanotechnology 2, 67.
83. Siegrist M, Keller C, Kastenholz H, Frey S, Wiek A (2007b) Laypeople's and Experts' Perceptions of Nanotechnology Hazards. Risk Analysis 27, 59-69.
84. Skitka LJ (2002) Do the Means Always Justify the Ends, or Do the Ends Sometimes Justify the Means? A Value Protection Model of Justice Reasoning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28, 588-597.
85. Slovic P (2000) The Perception of Risk. Earthscan, London.
86. Slovic P (2004) What's Fear Got to Do with It? It's Affect We Need to Worry About. Mississippi Law Review 69, 971-990.
87. Slovic P, Peters E, Finucane ML, MacGregor DG (2005) Affect, Risk, and Decisionmaking. Health and Psychology 24, S35-S40.
88. Smallman M (2007) Small Talk Reveals All. Nanotoday 2, 7.
89. Soper S (2007) Nanotechnology Faces Criticism, Fear. The Morning Call 5 Jun. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.]Available from URL: http://www.cns.ucsb.edu/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf= 1&id=263
90. Stanley-Horn DE, Dively GP, Hellmich RL, Mattila HR, Sears MK, Rose R et al. (2001) Assessing the Impact of Cry1Ab-Expressing Corn Pollen on Monarch Butterfly Larvae in Field Studies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 98, 11931-11936.
91. Sunstein CR (2002) Probability Neglect: Emotions, Worst Cases, and Law. Yale Law Journal 112, 61-108.
92. Sunstein CR (2003a) Beyond the Precautionary Principle. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 151, 1003-1058.
93. Sunstein CR (2003b) Hazardous Heuristics. University Chicago Law Review 70, 751-781.
94. Sunstein CR (2003c) Terrorism and Probability Neglect. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 26, 121-136.
95. Sylvester D, Lohr S (2005) Counting on Confidentiality: Legal and Statistical Approaches to Federal Privacy Law after the USA Patriot Act. Wisconsin Law Review 2005, 1036-1138.
96. TACD (TransAtlantic Consumer Dialogue) (2006) TACD Statement on WTO Decision on GM Foods. [Last accessed 25 May 2009.] Available from URL: http://tacd.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id= 49&Itemid=1.
97. Thayer AM (2006) Chance of a Lifetime. Chemical Engineering News 1, 10-18.
98. Trewavas A (2001) Urban Myths of Organic Farming. Nature 410, 409-410.
99. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1982) Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. In: Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (eds) Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, pp. 3-22. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
100. Tyler TR (2003) Procedural Justice, Legitimacy, and the Effective Rule of Law. Crime & Justice 30, 283-358.
101. Van Calster G (2008) Risk Regulation, EU Law and Emerging Technologies: Smother or Smooth? Nanoethics 2, 61-71.
102. Wexler L (2006) Limiting the Precautionary Principle: Weapons Regulation in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty. UC Davis Law Review 39, 459-527.
103. Wilsdon J, Willis R (2004) See-Through Science: Why Public Engagement Needs to Move Upstream. Demos, London.
104. Wilson RF (2006) Nanotechnology: The Challenge of Regulating Known Unknowns. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 34, 704-713.
105. Wolinsky H (2006) Nanoregulation: A Recent Scare Involving Nanotech Products Reveals That the Technology is not yet Properly Regulated. EMBO Reports 7, 858-861.
106. Wong-Ekkabut J, Baoukina S, Triampo W, Tang I-M, Tieleman DP, Monticelli L (2008) Computer Simulation Study of Fullerene Translocation Through Lipid Membranes. Nature Nanotechnology 3, 363-368.
107. Wu F, Butz WP (2004) The Future of Genetically Modified Crops: Lessons from the Green Revolution. Rand, Pittsburgh, PA.
108. Wynne B (2006) Public Engagement as a Means of Restoring Trust in Science - Hitting the Notes, but Missing the Music? Public Health Genomics 9, 211-220.