Classifying US nano-scientists: Of cautious innovators, regulators, and technology optimists

Science and Public Policy

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 30-38

  Kim, Youngjae ^a   Corley, Elizabeth A ^a   Scheufele, Dietram A ^b  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

Nanotechnology regulation; Risk perceptions; Scientist attitudes; Survey data collection

Indexed keywords

INNOVATION; NANOTECHNOLOGY; REGULATORY FRAMEWORK; RISK PERCEPTION; TECHNOLOGY POLICY;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 84871395227     PISSN: 03023427     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/030234212X13113405157822     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. AAPOR. (2008) Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. Lenexa, KS: American Association for Public Opinion Research.
2. Balbus, J. M., Florini, K., Denison, R. A. and Walsh, S. A. (2006) 'Getting it right the first time - Developing nanotechnology while protecting workers, public health, and the environment'. In: Mehlman, M. A., Soffritti, M., Landrigan, P., Bingham, E. and Belpoggi, F. (eds) Living in a Chemical World: Framing the Future in Light of the Past, pp. 331-4. Wiley-Blackwell.
3. Bowman, D. and Hodge, G. (2007) 'A small matter of regulation: an international review of nanotechnology regulation', Columbia Science and Technology Law Review, 8: 1-32.
4. Cook, G., Pieri, E. and Robbins, P. T. (2004) '"The scientists think and the public feels": Expert perceptions of the discourse of GM food', Discourse & Society, 15: 433-49.
5. Corley, E. A., Scheufele, D. A. and Hu, Q. (2009) 'Of risks and regulations: How leading U.S. nano-scientists form policy stances about nanotechnology', Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 11: 1573-85.
6. Davies, J. C. (2006) Managing the Effects of Nanotechnology Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
7. Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D. and Christian, L. M. (2008) Internet mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method. Wiley: Hoboken.
8. DiLoreto, J. (2010) 'We should have seen it coming: States regulating nanotechnology', accessed 15 June 2011.
9. Hester, T. (2006) 'RCRA Regulation of wastes from the production, use, and disposal of nanomaterials'. Chicago, IL: American Bar Association, Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources.
10. Ho, S., Scheufele, D. A. and Corley, E. A. (2010) 'Value predispositions, communication, and attitudes toward nanotechnology: The interplay of public and experts', Science Communication, doi: 10.1177/1075547010380386.
11. Keiner, S. (2008) 'Room at the bottom? Potential state and local strategies for managing the risks and benefits of nanotechnology'. Washington DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
12. Levinson, A. and Taylor, M. (2008) 'Unmasking the pollution haven effect', International Economic Review, 49: 223-54.
13. Marchant, G. E. and Abbott, K. W. (2009) 'A new soft law approach to nanotechnology oversight: A voluntary product certification scheme', UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy, 28: 123-52.
14. Marchant, G. E. and Sylvester, D. J. (2006) 'Transnational models for regulation of nanotechnology', Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics, 34: 714-25.
15. Marchant, G. E., Sylvester, D. J. and Abbott, K. W. (2007) 'Nanotechnology regulation: the United States approach'. In: Hodge, G., Bowman, D. and Ludlow, K. (eds) New Global Frontiers in Regulation: The Age of Nanotechnology, pp. 189-211. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
16. Meili, C. (2006) 'Nano-regulation: A multi-stakeholderdialogue-approach towards a sustainable regulatory framework for nanotechnologies and nanosciences', a report. St Gallen: Innovation Society.
17. Morris, J., Willis, J., De Martinis, D., Hansen, B., Laursen, H. and Sintes, J. R. (2011) 'Science policy considerations for responsible nanotechnology decisions', Nature Nanotechnology, 6: 73-7.
18. Pitkethly, M. J. (2004) 'Nanomaterials - the driving force', Materials Today, 7: 20-9.
19. Porter, A. L., Youtie, J., Shapira, P. and Schoeneck, D. J. (2008) 'Refining search terms for nanotechnology', Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 10: 715-28.
20. Powell, M. C. (2010) Letter to the Wisconsin Legislature's Special Committee on Nanotechnology, accessed 17 June 2011.
21. Powell, M. C., Griffin, M. P. A. and Tai, S. (2008) 'Bottom-up risk regulation? How nanotechnology risk knowledge gaps challenge federal and state environmental agencies', Environmental Management, 42: 426-43, doi: 10.1007/ s00267-008-9129-z.
22. Retel, V. P., Hummel, M. J. M. and Van Harten, W. H. (2009) 'Review on early technology assessments of nanotechnologies in oncology', Molecular Oncology, 3: 394-401.
23. Roco, M. C. (2004) 'Nanoscale science and engineering: unifying and transforming tools', AIChE Journal, 50: 890-7.
24. Roco, M. C., Mirkin, C. A. and Hersam, M. C. (2011) Nanotechnology Research Directions for Societal Needs in 2020. Springer.
25. Rosenbaum, W. A. (2005) Environmental Policy and Politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
26. Scheufele, D. A. (2010) Letter to Sen. Mark Miller and Rep. Chuck Benedict, , accessed 17 June 2011.
27. Scheufele, D. A., Brossard, D., Dunwoody, S., Corley, E. A., Guston, D. and Peters, H. P. (2009) 'Are scientists really out of touch?', The Scientist, , accessed 7 June 2011.
28. Siegrist, M., Keller, C., Kastenholz, H., Frey, S. and Wiek, A. (2007) 'Laypeople's and experts' perception of nanotechnology hazards', Risk Analysis, 27: 59-69.
29. Strohm, L. A. (2002) 'Pollution havens and the transfer of environmental risk', Global Environmental Politics, 2: 29-36.
30. Temurshoev, U. (2005) 'Pollution haven hypothesis or factor endowment hypothesis: theory and empirical examination for the US and China', Working Paper No. 292, Charles University, Prague, , accessed 5 May 2011.
31. Wisconsin Legislature's Special Committee on Nanotechnology. (2011), accessed 15 June 2011.