The public understanding of nanotechnology in the food domain: The hidden role of views on science, technology, and nature

Public Understanding of Science

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 195-206

  Vandermoere, Frederic ^a   Blanchemanche, Sandrine ^b   Bieberstein, Andrea ^c   Marette, Stephan ^d   Roosen, Jutta ^c  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b Metarisk unit at INRA   (France)

^c TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^d INRA ALISS   (France)

Author keywords

food science; nanotechnology; risk attitudes

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; FOOD HANDLING; FOOD PACKAGING; FRANCE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NANOTECHNOLOGY; PUBLIC OPINION; QUESTIONNAIRE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; FOOD PACKAGING; FOOD TECHNOLOGY; FRANCE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NANOTECHNOLOGY; PUBLIC OPINION; QUESTIONNAIRES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79954527103     PISSN: 09636625     EISSN: 13616609     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963662509350139     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Alhakami, A.S. and Slovic, P. (1994) "A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit,"Risk Analysis 14(6): 1085-96.
2. Allum, N., Sturgis, P., Tabourazi, D. and Brunton-Smith, I. (2008) "Science Knowledge and Attitudes across Cultures: A Meta-analysis, "Public Understanding of Science 17(1): 35-54.
3. Ameisen, J.et al.(2007) "Ethical Issues Raised by Nanosciences, Nanotechnologies and Health,"National Consultative Ethics Committee for Health and Life Sciences, Opinion paper No. 96.
4. Bauer, M. (2005) "Distinguishing Red and Green Biotechnology: Cultivation Effects of the Elite Press,"International Journal of Public Opinion Research 17(1): 63-89.
5. Cobb, M. and Macoubrie, J. (2004) "Public Perceptions about Nanotechnology: Risk, Benefits and Trust,"Journal of Nanoparticle Research 6: 395-405.
6. Commission of the European Communities (2008) Regulatory Aspects of Nanomaterials: Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee. Brussels: European Commission.
7. Cooper, H. (1981) "Ubiquitous Halo,"Psychological Bulletin 90(2): 218-44.
8. Corral-Verdugo, V., Carrus, G., Bonnes, M., Moser, G. and Sinha, J. (2008) "Environmental Beliefs and Endorsement of Sustainable Development Principles in Water Conservation: Toward a New Human Interdependence Paradigm Scale,"Environment and Behavior 40: 703-25.
9. Frewer, L., Lassen, J., Kettlitz, J., Scholderer, J., Beekman, V. and Berdal, K. (2004) "Societal Aspects of Genetically Modified Foods,"Food and Chemical Toxicology 42(7): 1181-93.
10. Gaskell, G., Bauer, M., Durant, J. and Allum, N. (1999) "Worlds Apart? The Reception of Genetically Modified Foods in Europe and the U.S.,"Science 285(5426): 384-7.
11. Gaskell, G., Ten Eyck, T., Jackson, J. and Veltri, G. (2004) "Public Attitudes to Nanotechnology in Europe and the United States,"Nature Materials 3: 496.
12. Grimes, W. (1998) "Talk About a Fork in the Road,"New York Times 9 May. URL (consulted 20 June 2009): http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/09.
13. Kahan, D., Braman, D., Slovic, P., Gastil, J. and Cohen, G. (2008) "Cultural Cognition of the Risks and Benefits of Nanotechnology, "Nature Nanotechnology 4: 87-90.
14. Keene, K. and Sackett, V. (1981) "An Editors' Report on the Yankelovich, Skelly and White Mushiness Index,"Public Opinion 4(2): 50-1.
15. Kolodinsky, J., Labrecque, J., Doyon, M., Reynolds, T., Oble, F., Bellavance, F. and Marquis, M. (2008) "Sex and Cultural Differences in the Acceptance of Functional Foods: A Comparison of American, Canadian, and French College Students,"Journal of American College Health 57(2): 143-9.
16. Lee, C., Scheufele, D. and Lewenstein, B. (2005) "Public Attitudes toward Emerging Technologies,"Science Communication 27: 240-67.
17. Macoubrie, J. (2006) "Nanotechnology: Public Concerns, Reasoning and Trust in Government,"Public Understanding of Science 15: 221-41.
18. Mennel, S. (1996) All Manners of Food: Eating and Taste in England and France from the Middle Ages to the Present. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
19. Miller, G. (2008) "Nanotechnology and the Public Interest: Repeating the Mistakes of GM Foods?,"International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation 7(2/3): 274-80.
20. National Nanotechnology Initiative (2009) "What is Nanotechnology?,"URL (consulted 13 April 2009): http://www.nano.gov/html/facts/whatIsNano.html.
21. Pidgeon, N. and Rogers-Hayden, T. (2007) "Opening up Nanotechnology Dialogue with the Publics: Risk Communication or 'Upstream Engagement'?,"Health, Risk & Society 9(2): 191-210.
22. Ravetz, J. (2002) "Food Safety, Quality, and Ethics: A Post-Normal Perspective,"Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15: 255-65.
23. Scheufele, D. and Lewenstein, B. (2005) "The Public and Nanotechnology: How Citizens Make Sense of Emerging Technologies,"Journal of Nanoparticle Research 7: 659-67.
24. Scheufele, D., Corley, E., Shih, T., Dalrymple, K. and Ho, S. (2008) "Religious Beliefs and Public Attitudes toward Nanotechnology in Europe and the United States,"Nature Nanotechnology 4: 91-4.
25. Selin, C. (2007) "Expectations and the Emergence of Nanotechnology,"Science, Technology & Human Values 32(2): 196-220.
26. Siegrist, M., Cousin, M., Kastenholz, H. and Wiek, A. (2007a) "Public Acceptance of Nanotechnology Foods and Food Packaging: The Influence of Affect and Trust,"Appetite 49: 459-66.
27. Siegrist, M., Keller, C., Kastenholz, H., Frey, S. and Wiek, A. (2007b) "Laypeople's and Experts' Perception of Nanotechnology Hazards,"Risk Analysis 27(1): 59-69.
28. Siegrist, M., Stampfli, N., Kastenholz, H. and Keller, C. (2008) "Perceived Risks and Benefits of Different Nanotechnology Foods and Nanotechnology Food Packaging,"Appetite 51: 283-90.
29. Sjöberg, L. (2000a) "Perceived Risk and Tampering with Nature,"Journal of Risk Research 3: 353-67.
30. Sjöberg, L. (2000b) "Factors in Risk Perception,"Risk Analysis 20: 1-11.
31. Slovic, P. (1987) "Perception of Risk,"Science 236: 280-5.
32. Starr, C. (1969) "Social Benefit versus Technological Risk,"Science 165(3899): 1232-8.
33. Sturgis, P. and Allum, N. (2004) "Science in Society: Re-evaluating the Deficit Model of Public Attitudes,"Public Understanding of Science 13(1): 55-74.
34. Trumbull, G. (2006) Consumer Capitalism: Politics, Product Markets and Firm Strategy in France and Germany. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
35. Verbeke, W., Frewer, L., Scholderer, J. and De Brabander, H. (2007) "Why Consumers Behave as they do with Respect to Food Safety and Risk Information,"Analytica Chimica Acta 586: 2-7.
36. Waldron, A., Spencer, D. and Batt, C. (2006) "The Current State of Public Understanding of Nanotechnology, "Journal of Nanoparticle Research 8: 569-75.
37. Waterton, C. and Wynne, B. (2004) "Knowledge and Political Order in the European Environment Agency,"in S. Jasanoff (ed.) States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order, pp. 87-108. London and New York: Routledge.
38. Weiss, J., Takhistov, P. and McClements, J. (2006) "Functional Materials in Food Nanotechnology,"Journal of Food Science 71: 107-16.