Missing links in nanomaterials governance: Bringing industrial dynamics and downstream policies into view

Journal of Technology Transfer

Volumn 36, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 624-639

  Rafols, Ismael ^a,b   van Zwanenberg, Patrick ^a   Morgan, Molly ^a   Nightingale, Paul ^a   Smith, Adrian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX   (United Kingdom)

^b GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Enabling technology; Industrial dynamics; Innovation governance; Manufactured nanomaterials; Nanotechnology; Public engagement

Indexed keywords

EID: 80155133875     PISSN: 08929912     EISSN: 15737047     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10961-011-9208-9     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Aitken, R. J., Chaudhry, M. Q., Boxall, A. B. A., & Hull, M. (2006). Manufacture and use of nanomaterials: Current status in the UK and global trends. Occupational Medicine, 56, 300-306.
2. Anon (2008). The Responsible Nano Code. http://www. responsiblenanocode. org. Accessed 8 July 2009.
3. Arthur, W. B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99(394), 116-131.
4. BASF (2009) Code of Conduct Nanotechnology. http://www. basf. com/group/corporate/en/sustainability/dialogue/in-dialogue-with-politics/nanotechnology/code-of-conduct. Accessed 8th July 2009.
5. Bauer, C., Buchgeister, J., Hischier, R., Poganietz, W. R., Schebek, L., & Warsen, J. (2007). Towards a framework for life cycle thinking in the assessment of nanotechnology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(8-9), 910-926.
6. Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S., et al. (2008). Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis. Research Policy, 37(3), 407-429.
7. Bowmann, D. M., & Hodge, G. A. (2008). 'Governing' nanotechnology without government? Science and Public Policy, 35(7), 475-487.
8. Bruland, K., & Mowery, D. C. (2004). Innovation through time. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 349-379). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9. Collingridge, D. (1992). The management of scale: Big organizations, big decisions, big mistakes. London: Routledge.
10. David, P. A. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. The American Economic Review, 75(2), 332-337.
11. David, P. & Wright, G. (1999). General purpose technologies and surges in productivity: histotical reflections on the future of the ICT revolution. University of Oxford, Discussion Papers in Economic and Social History, 31. Available at http://www. nuffield. ox. ac. uk/economics/history/paper31/a4. pdf. Accessed 30 January 2010.
12. DEFRA (2008). The UK Voluntary Reporting Scheme for Engineered Nanoscale materials: Seventh Quarterly Report. Accessed 6 September 2008.
13. Dosi, G. (1982). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, 11(3), 147-162.
14. Doubleday, R. (2007). Risk, public engagement and reflexivity: Alternative framings of the public dimensions of nanotechnology. Health, Risk & Society, 9(2), 211-227.
15. EC. (2007). Taking European knowledge society seriously. Report of the Expert Group on Science and Governance to the Science. Brussels: Economy and Society Directorate, DG for Research, EC.
16. EC. (2008). Commission recommendation of a code of conduct for responsible nanosciences and nanotechnologies research. EC, Brussels 02/02/2008 C(2008) 424 final.
17. Fisher, E., Mahajan, R. L., & Mitcham, C. (2006). Midstream modulation of technology: Governance from within. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 26(6), 485-496.
18. Flowers, S., Mateos-Garcia, J., Sapsed, J., Nightingale, P., Grantham, A., & Voss, G. (2008). The New Inventors: How users are changing the rules of innovation. London: NESTA.
19. UK Government. (2009). UK Government response to the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) Report Novel materials in the environment: The case of nanotechnology. The Stationary Office, London. Available at http://www. official-documents. gov. uk/document/cm76/7620/7620. pdf. Accessed 11 July 2009.
20. Hansen, S. F., Maynard, A., Baun, A., & Tickner, J. A. (2008). Late lessons from early warnings for nanotechnology. Nature Nanotechnology, 3, 444-447.
21. Jacobsson, S., & Johnson, A. (2000). The diffusion of renewable energy technology: An analytical framework and key issues for research. Energy Policy, 28, 625-640.
22. Joly, P.-B., & Rip, A. (2007). A timely harvest. Nature, 450, 74.
23. Jones, R. (2007). Can nanotechnology ever prove that it is green? Nature Nanotechnology, 2, 71-72.
24. Kahan, D. M., Braman, D., Slovic, P., Gastil, J., & Cohen, G. (2009). Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Nature Nanotechnology, 4, 87-90.
25. Lee, R., & Jose, P. D. (2008). Self-interest, self-restraint and corporate responsibility for nanotechnologies: Emerging dilemmas for modern managers. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 20(1), 113-125.
26. Macnaghten, P., Kearnes, M. B., & Wynne, B. (2005). Nanotechnology, governance, and public deliberation: What role for the social sciences? Science Communication, 27(2), 268-291.
27. Maynard, A., & Rejeski, D. (2009). Too small to overlook. Nature, 460, 174.
28. Meyer, D. E., Curran, M. A., & Gonzalez, M. A. (2009). An examination of existing data dor the industrial manufacture and use of nanocomponents and their role in the life cycle impact of nanoproducts. Environmental Science and Technology, 43(5), 1256-1262.
29. Meyer, M., Makar, I., Rafols, I., Olsen, D., Wagner, V., Zweck, A., Porter, A. L. & Youtie, J. (2008). Euronano: Nanotechnology in Europe: assessment of the current state, opportunities, challenges and socio-economic impact, ETEPS.
30. Mowery, D. C. (2011). Nanotechnology and the US national innovation system: continuity and change. Journal of Technology Trasnfer, in press (this issue).
31. Nanocentral. (2010). Qinetiq Nanomaterials Ltd. http://www. nanocentral. eu/wp-content/uploads/qinetiqnanomaterials. pdf Accessed 29 January 2010.
32. National Research Council. (2006). A matter of size: Triennial review of the national nanotechnology initiative. Washington, D. C.: National Academies Press.
33. Nightingale, P., Morgan, M., Rafols, I. & van Zwanenberg, P. (2008). Nanomaterials Innovation Systems: Their Structure, Dynamics and Regulation. Report for the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution. Brighton, UK, SPRU. Available at: http://www. sussex. ac. uk/spru/documents/spru-rcep-nanomaterials. pdf.
34. Oakdene Hollins. (2007). Environmentally Beneficial Nanotechnologies: Barriers and Opportunities. Report for DEFRA. Available at http://www. defra. gov. uk/environment/nanotech/policy/pdf/envbeneficial-report. pdf.
35. PEN. (2009). Consumer Products. An inventory of nanotechnology-based consumer products currently on the market. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholar. Project on Emergent Technologies, Washington DC. Accessed 8 July 2009. http://www. nanotechproject. org/inventories/consumer/.
36. Pidgeon, N., Herr Harthorn, B., Bryant, K., & Rogers-Hayden, T. (2009). Deliberating the risks of nanotechnologies for energy and health applications in the United States and United Kingdom. Nature Nanotechnology, 4, 95-98.
37. Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1987). The social construction of facts and artifacts. In W. Bijker, T. Hughes, & T. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. RCEP. (2008). Novel materials in the environment: The case of nanotechnology. UK, Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution. Available at http://www. rcep. org. uk/reports/27-novel%20materials/27-novelmaterials. htm.
39. Rebuffat, F. (2008). The risk and promise of green nanotechnology. Research*eu 56, 22-24.
40. Renn, O. & Roco, M. (2006a). White Paper on Nanotechnolog y Risk Governance. International Risk Governance Council.
41. Renn, O., & Roco, M. (2006b). Nanotechnology and the need for risk governance. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 8, 153-191.
42. Rip, A. (2009). De facto governance in nanotechnologies. Preprint of the Proceedings of the Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology and Society (TILT) Conference.
43. Robinson, D. K. R. (2009). Co-evolutionary Scenarios: An application to prospecting futures of the responsible development of nanotechnology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change (forthcoming).
44. Robinson, D. K. R., & Propp, T. (2008). Multi-path mapping for alignment strategies in emerging science and technologies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75, 517-538.
45. Rosenberg, N. (1963). Technological change in the machine tool industry, 1840-1910. The Journal of Economic History, 23(4), 414-443.
46. RS/RAE. (2004). Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties, Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering. Available at http://www. nanotec. org. uk/. Accessed 11 July 2008.
47. SCENIHR (2007). Opinion on the appropriateness of the risk assessment methodolog y in accordance with the technical guidance documents for new and existing substances for assessing the risks of nanomaterials. European Commission Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR). Available at http://ec. europa. eu/health/ph_risk/committees/04_scenihr/docs/scenihr_o_010. pdf.
48. Schmid, K., & Riediker, M. (2008). Use of nanoparticles in Swiss industry: A targeted survey. Environmental Science and Technology, 42(7), 2253-2260.
49. Schmidt, K. F. (2007). Green nanotechnology, it's easier than you think. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholar. Washington, DC: Project on Emerging Technologies.
50. Shove, E. (2003). Converging conventions of comfort, cleanliness and convenience. Journal of Consumer Policy, 26, 395-418.
51. Smith, A., & Stirling, A. (2007). Moving outside or inside? Objectification and reflexivity in the governance of socio-technical systems. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 9(3-4), 351-373.
52. Smith, A., Stirling, A., & Berkhout, F. (2005). The governance of socio-technical transitions. Research Policy, 34, 1491-1500.
53. Song, J.-W., Kim, J., Yoon, Y.-H., Choi, B.-S., Kim, J.-H., & Han, C.-S. (2008). Inkjet printing of single-walled carbon nanotubes and electrical characterization of the line pattern. Nanotechnology, 19, 095702.
54. Stirling, A. (2008). Science, precaution, and the politics of technological risk. Converging implications in evolutionary and social scientific perspectives. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1125, 95-110.
55. Stokes, E. (2009). Regulating nanotechnologies: Sizing up the options. Legal Studies, 29(2), 281-304.
56. Valentin, F., & Jensen, R. L. (2003). Discontinuities and distributed innovatgion: The case of biotechnology in food processing. Industry and innovation, 10(3), 275-310.
57. von Hippel, E. (1988). The sources of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
58. von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
59. Walker, W. (2000). Entrapment in large technological systems: Institutional commitment and power relations. Research Policy, 29, 833-846.
60. Williams, R. (2006). Compressed foresight and narrative bias: Pitfalls in assessing high technology futures. Science as Culture, 15(4), 327-348.
61. Wilsdon, J., & Willis, R. (2004). See-through science: Why public engagement needs to move upstream. London: Demos.
62. Wilsdon, J., Wynne, B., & Stilgoe, J. (2005). The public value of science. Or how to ensure that science really matters. London: Demos.
63. Youtie, J., Iacopetta, M., & Graham, S. (2008). Assessing the nature of nanotechnology: Can we uncover an emerging general purpose technology? Journal of Technology Transfer, 33, 315-329.