Mutable matter: Using sensory methods in public engagement with nanotechnology

Leonardo

Volumn 45, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 132-139

  Last, Angela ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857720997     PISSN: 0024094X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/LEON_a_00279     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Karin Gavelin, Richard Wilson with Robert Doubleday, Democratic technologies? The final report of the Nanotechnology Engagement Group (NEG) (London, Involve, 2007) p. 10.
2. Matthew Kearnes, Phil Macnaghten, James Wilsdon, Governing at the Nanoscale: People, policies and emerging nanotechnologies (London, Demos, 2006) p. 15.
3. Matthew Kearnes, Brian Wynne, "On Nanotechnology and Ambivalence: The Politics of Enthusiasm," Nano Ethics 1, No. 2, pp. 131-142 (2007).
4. The NEG report lists three government-funded and seven non-government-funded projects.
5. Gavelin et al, Democratic technologies? The final report of the Nanotechnology Engagement Group (NEG) (London, Involve, 2007), p. 7.
6. Ulrich Beck, Risk Society (London, Sage, 1992) pp. 21, 72.
7. Seve Hinchliffe, "Indeterminacy in-decisions: science, policy and politics in the BSE (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy) crisis," Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 26, No. 2, 182-204 (2001).
8. The project is shaped by theorizations of matter (by Karen Barad, Barbara Adam and Chris Groves) as well as theorizations of play and sensation as a source of invention (by Michel Serres and Mikhail Bakhtin).
9. For a summary of Mutation and Animal Lab, other experimental "mobile sites of debate," see http://mutablematter.wordpress.com/2007/10/15/so-whyam-i-doing-this-project/.
10. Victoria Vesna and James Gimzewski, NANO http://nano.arts.ucla.edu/ (2003).
11. Christa Sommerer and Laurent Mignonneau, Nanoscape http://www.interface.ufg.ac.at/christa-laurent/WORKS/FRAMES/TOPFRAMES/NanoScapeTop.html (2002).
12. The NEG report stated that even now the outcomes of official projects "do not come in a form that can be slotted easily into existing policy processes."
13. See Gavelin et al. Democratic technologies? The final report of the Nanotechnology Engagement Group (NEG) (London, Involve, 2007) p. 45.
14. Tony Bennett, "The Exhibitionary Complex," New Formations, No. 4 (Spring), 73-102 (1988) p. 76.
15. Jack Stilgoe, Nanodialogues: Experiments in public engagement with science (London, Demos, 2007) p. 62.
16. Kearnes et al. Governing at the Nanoscale: People, policies and emerging nanotechnologies (London, Demos, 2006) p. 57.
17. Kearnes et al, Governing at the Nanoscale: People, policies and emerging nanotechnologies (London, Demos, 2006) p. 25.
18. Kearnes et al, Democratic technologies? The final report of the Nanotechnology Engagement Group (NEG) (London, Involve, 2007), p. 64.
19. Jack Stilgoe, "The Nanodialogues: Four experiments in public engagement," All Talk? Nanotechnologies and Public Engagement, London, Institute of Physics (26 June 2007).
20. The Open University is a U.K.-governmentsponsored distance-learning university. More than two-thirds of undergraduates are mature students with full-time employment.
21. Paul Thomas, "Midas: A nanotechnological exploration of touch," Leonardo 42, No. 3, 186-192 (2009).
22. The Institute for Applied Physics/Vienna University of Technology STM Gallery www.iap.tuwien.ac.at/www/surface/STM_Gallery/index
23. Participant, Leeds Workshop 2.
24. Participant, Leeds Workshop 1.
25. Richard Jones, Soft machines: Nanotechnology and Life (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004).
26. Jones, Soft machines: Nanotechnology and Life (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004) p. 55.
27. Participant, Leeds Workshop 1.
28. Jones, Soft machines: Nanotechnology and Life (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004), p. 86.
29. Participant, London.
30. Participant, Leeds 2.
31. Participant, Leeds 1.
32. http://mutablematter.wordpress.com.
33. James Wilsdon, Rebecca Willis, See-through Science-Why public engagement needs to move upstream (London, Demos, 2004) p. 32.
34. Kearnes et al. Governing at the Nanoscale: People, policies and emerging nanotechnologies (London, Demos, 2006) p. 28.
35. Kearnes et al. Governing at the Nanoscale: People, policies and emerging nanotechnologies (London, Demos, 2006) p. 15.
36. Jones, http://mutablematter.wordpress.com. p. 60.
37. Jones, http://mutablematter.wordpress.com. p. 57.
38. IBM Scanning Tunneling Microscopy: http://www.almaden.ibm.com/vis/stm/stm.html.