What Can Nanotechnology Learn From Biotechnology?

What Can Nanotechnology Learn From Biotechnology?

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages

  David, Kenneth ^a   Thompson, Paul B ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85013920855     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-373990-2.X0001-5     Document Type: Book

References (261)

1. Berube D.M. Nano-Hype: The Truth Behind the Nanotechnology Buzz 2006, Prometheus Books, p. 21.
2. Dunphy Guzmán K.A., Taylor M.R., Banfield J.F. Environmental risks of nanotechnology: National Nanotechnology Initiative Funding, 2000-2004. Environ Sci Technol 2006, 40:1401-1407.
3. No Small Matter II: The Case for a Global Moratorium. Size Matters! 2003, ETC Group, ETC Group, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
4. European Commission (2004). Nanotechnologies: A Preliminary Risk Analysis on the Basis of a Workshop Organized in Brussels on 1-2 March 2004 by the Health and Consumer Protection Directorate General of the European Commission.
5. Malinowski B. Argonauts of the Western Pacific 1922, Routledge.
6. Mehta M.D. From biotechnology to nanotechnology: What can we learn from earlier technologies?. Bull Sci Technol Soc 2004, 24:34-39.
7. Mohanty A.K. Syllabus Packaging 891: Multifunctional Nanomaterials: Course Description, Fall 2006 2006, Michigan State University.
8. Nordmann, A. (2005). Technology naturalized, Plenary speaker at the Society for Technology and Philosophy conference at University of Delft, 2005. http://www.spt.org.
9. Wolfe, A. K., David, K., and Sherry, J. (2006). It depends on where you sit: Anthropologists' involvement with nanotechnology in government, university, and industry settings. In: Stone, J. V. and Wolfe, A. K., eds. Nanotechnology in Society: Atlas in Wonderland? Practicing Anthropology28, 2006.
10. CASPIAN (2004). German RFID scandal: hidden devices, unkillable tags found in METRO future store. http://www.spychips.com/press-releases/german-scandal.html.
11. MeatNews (2007). China develops traceability system on beef. http://www.meatnews.com/index.cfm?fuseaction5articleamp;artNum514224.
12. Swiss Re (2004). Nanotechnology: Small matter, many unknowns. http://www.swissre.com/INTERNET/pwsfilpr.nsf/vwFilebyIDKEYLu/ULUR-5YNGET/dollar;FILE/Publ04_Nanotech_en.pdf.
13. von Bubnoff, Andreas (2006). EHS efforts caught in the crosstalk. Small Times November. http://www.smalltimes.com/news/display_news_story.cfm?Section5WireNewsamp;Category5Homeamp;NewsID5140334.
14. Ames B.N., Profet M., Gold L.S. Dietary pesticides (99.99% all natural). Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990, 87:7777-7781.
15. Ames B.N., Gold L.S. Pollution, pesticides and cancer misconceptions. Fearing Food 1999, 18-39. Butterworth Heinemann. J. Morris, R. Bate (Eds.).
16. Hallman W.K., Hebden W.C., Cuite C.L., Aquino H.L., Lang J.T. Americans and GM Food: Knowledge, Opinion and Interest in 2004 2004, Publication number RR-1104-007, Food Policy Institute, Cook College, Rutgers-The State University of New Jersey.
17. Johnson, C. Y. (2005). One million nanotubes could fit into this period. Boston Globe, March 13. Cited at. http://www.masstech.org/mni/globe_2_15_05.htm.
18. McGee H. On Food and Cooking: The Science and Lore of the Kitchen 1984, Scribner.
19. McHughen A. Pandora's Picnic Basket 2000, Oxford University Press.
20. McHughen A. Scientists from Mars, consumers from Venus. Nat Biotechnol 2002, 20:549.
21. McHughen, A. (2006). Plant Genetic Engineering and Regulation in the United States. Publication 8179. University of California. Available online at. http://www.anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu/pdf/8179.pdf.
22. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process 1983, NAS, National Academy of Sciences, National Academies Press.
23. NAS (1987). Introduction of Recombinant DNA-engineered Organisms into the Environment, Key Issues. White paper. National Academies Press, 24pp.
24. Safety of Genetically Engineered Foods 2004, NAS, National Academies Press.
25. OECD, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1986). Recombinant DNA Safety Considerations: Safety Considerations for Industrial, Agricultural and Environmental Applications of Organisms Derived by Recombinant DNA Techniques (aka "Blue Book"). OECD.
26. Coordinated framework for regulation of biotechnology. US Federal Register 1986, 51:23302-23393. OSTP, Office of Science and Technology Policy.
27. Beachy, R. (2000). An overview of GMOs. Paper presented at the Conservation Technology Information Center Forum, The Future of GMOs: Driven by Perception or Reality, Colorado Springs, CO, March 2, 2000.
28. Berry W. The Unsettling of America 1977, Sierra Club Books.
29. Biotechnology Knowledge Center (1999). "Agri-food Community Open Letter to President Clinton on Science-based Labeling of Foods," GENET news , November 19, 1999.
30. Burkhardt J. Biotechnology, ethics, and the structure of agriculture. Agric Human Values 1988, 5:53-60.
31. Busch L., Lacy W., Burkhardt J., Lacy L. Plants, Power, and Profit 1991, Blackwell.
32. Cole, P. (1998). The Free, the Unfree and the Excluded: A Treatise on the Conditions of Liberty. Aldershot.
33. Comstock G. Is There a Moral Obligation to Save the Family Farm? 1987, Iowa State University Press.
34. Dworkin R. Taking Rights Seriously 1978, Duckworth.
35. Fischoff B. Acceptable Risk 1981, Cambridge University Press.
36. Graff G., Cullen S., Bradford K., Zilberman D., Bennett A. The public private structure of intellectual property ownership in agricultural biotechnology. Nat Biotechnol 2003, 21:989-995.
37. Halweil, B. (2000). Portrait of an industry in trouble. Worldwatch News Brief February 17. Worldwatch Institute. http://www.worldwatch.org.
38. Hansen M. Genetic engineering is not an extension of conventional plant breeding 2000, Consumers Union Staff Paper, www.consumersunion.org/food/widecpi200.htm.
39. Hoban T.J., Kendall P. Public perceptions of benefits and risks of biotechnology. Agricultural Biotechnology: A Public Conversation about Risk (NABC Report 5) 1993, National Agricultural Biotechnology Council, Cornell University.
40. King J.L. Concentration and monopoly in agricultural inputs industries. United States Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Information Bulletin 2001, 763. USDA.
41. Lappé M., Bailey B. Against the Grain: Biotechnology and the Corporate Takeover of your Food 1998, Common Courage Press.
42. Agricultural Biotechnology and the Public Good (NABC Report 6) 1994, NABC, National Agricultural Biotechnology Council, Cornell University.
43. Nordlee J.A., Taylor S.L., Townsend J.A. Identification of a Brazil-nut allergen in transgenic soybeans. N Engl J Med 1996, 334:688-692.
44. Substantial equivalence versus scientific food safety assessment 2000, PSRAST, Physicians and Scientists for Responsible Science and Technology, Physicians and Scientists for the Responsible Application of Science and Technology Staff Paper, www.psrast.org/subeqow.htm.
45. Raffensburger C., Tickner J. Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle 1999, Island Press.
46. Genetic seed sterilization is the "Holy Grail" for ag. biotechnology firms 1999, RAFI, Rural Advancement Foundation International, Rural Advancement Foundation International News Release, January 27, 1999. www.rafi.org/pr/release26.
47. Rice, M. (1999). Monarchs and Bt corn: questions and answers. Integrated Crop Management IC482-24. Iowa State University Cooperative Extension Bulletin, June 14.
48. Rollin B.E. The Frankenstein Syndrome: Ethical and Social Issues in the Genetic Engineering of Animals 1995, Cambridge University Press.
49. Sears M.K., Hellmich R.L., Stanley-Horn D.E., et al. Impact of Bt corn pollen on monarch butterfly populations: A risk assessment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001, 98:11937-11942.
50. Thompson P.B. Food Biotechnology in Ethical Perspective 1997, Blackie Academic & Professional.
51. Thompson P.B. Food Biotechnology's Challenge to Cultural Integrity and Individual Consent. Hastings Center Report 1997, 27.
52. Vanacht, M. (2000). Midwest growers survey regarding GMOs. Paper presented at the Conservation Technology Information Center Forum: The Future of GMOs Driven by Perception or Reality, Colorado Springs, CO, March 2, 2000.
53. Wotecki, C. (1998). Nutrition, food safety and risk assessment-a policy-maker's viewpoint. Paper presented at Purdue University, June 18, 1998. http://www.fsis.usda.gov/speeches/1998.
54. ETC Group (2005). Terminator seed battle begins: farmers face billions of dollars in potential costs. http://www.etcgroup.org/article.asp?newsid5548.
55. ETC Group (2007). World's Top 10 Seed Companies-2006. http://www.etcgroup.org/en/materials/publications.html?
56. NLP, Natural Law Party (2006). Platform on Agriculture. Available from. http://www.natural-law.org/platform/agriculture.html.
57. Saad, L. (1999). What biotech food issue? Americans not alarmed by application of biotechnology in food production. The Gallup Poll. Available from. http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=3556.
58. Bainbridge W.S. Public Attitudes towards Biotechnology. J Nanoparticle Res 2002, 4:561-570.
59. Berube D.M. Nano-Hype: The Truth Behind the Nanotechnology Buzz 2005, Prometheus Books.
60. Cobb M.D., Macoubrie J. Public perceptions about nanotechnology. J Nanoparticle Res 2004, 6:395-405.
61. Cooper D.E. Intervention, humility and animal integrity. Animal Biotechnology and Ethics 1998, 145-155. Chapman & Hall. A. Holland, A. Johnson (Eds.).
62. Public Views on Nanotechnology 2004, Danish Board on Technology, Copenhagen.
63. Dawkins R. Unweaving the Rainbow 1998, Penguin Press.
64. Grinbaum A., Dupuy J.P. Living with uncertainty. Techné: Res Philos Technol 2004, 8:4-25.
65. Jensen O. At hente rummet ind igen. Teologiske betragtninger over vort naturforhold. Naturens sande betydhning-om natursyn, etik og teologi 2001, 78-105. Multivers. L.D. Madsen, M. Gjerris (Eds.).
66. Kunic J.C. The Naked Clone: How Cloning Bans Threaten Our Personal Rights 2003, Praeger Publishers.
67. Lassen J., Gjerris M., Sandøe P. After Dolly-ethical limits to the use of biotechnology on farm animals. Theriogenology 2005, 65:992-1004.
68. Løgstrup K.E. Metaphysics 1995, Vols. I-II. Marquette University.
69. Løgstrup K.E. The Ethical Demand 1997, University of Notre Dame Press.
70. Nanotechnology: Shaping the World Atom by Atom 1999, National Science and Technology Council, National Science and Technology Council.
71. Nielsen A.P., Lassen J., Sandøe P. Involving the public: participatory methods and democratic ideals. Global Bioethics 2004, 17:191-201.
72. Patterson G. The End of Theology: And the Task of Thinking about God 1998, SCM Press Ltd.
73. Peters T. Playing God: Genetic Determinism and Human Freedom 1996, Routledge.
74. Reiss M.J., Straughan R. Improving Nature? The Science and Ethics of Genetic Engineering 2000, Cambridge University Press.
75. Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology 2001, Kluwer Academic. M.C. Roco, W.S. Bainbridge (Eds.).
76. Nanotechnology: Views of the Public. Quantitative and Qualitative Research Carried out as Part of the Nanotechnology Study 2004, Royal Society, The Royal Society.
77. Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies. Opportunities and Uncertainties 2004, Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering, The Royal Society.
78. Sandler R., Kay W.D. The GMO-nanotech (dis)analogy?. Bull Sci Technol Soc 2006, 26:57-62.
79. Buerger, M. E. (2006). From the Enlightenment to N-lightenment. http://www.wise-nano.org/w/Buerger_CTF_Essay.
80. European Commission (2005). Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies: An Action Plan for Europe 2005-2009. Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee. European Commission. http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/research/industrial_technologies/pdf/nano_action_plan_en.pdf.
81. Gjerris, M. (2006). Ethics and farm animal cloning: risk, values and conflicts. The Danish Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment. http://www.sl.kvl.dk/cloninginpublic.
82. Lassen, J. (2005). Public perceptions of farm animal cloning in Europe. The Danish Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment. http://www.sl.kvl.dk/cloninginpublic.
83. Meyer, G. (2005). Why clone farm animals? Goals, motives, assumptions, values and concerns among European scientists working with cloning of farm animals. Project report 8, Danish Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment. http://www.sl.kvl.dk/cloninginpublic.
84. Nordmann, A. (2004). Converging technologies: shaping the future of European societies. European Communities. http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/research/conferences/2004/ntw/pdf/final_report_en.pdf.
85. Roco, M. C. and Bainbridge, W. S. (eds) (2002). Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance. Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science. Report sponsored by the National Science Foundation, USA. http://www.wtec.org/ConvergingTechnologies/Report/NBIC_report.pdf.
86. Doubleday, R. (2004). Political innovation: corporate engagements in controversy over genetically modified foods. Unpublished PhD thesis, University College London.
87. Durant J., Bauer M., Gaskell G. Biotechnology in the Public Sphere: A European Source Book 1998, Science Museum.
88. Einsiedel E.F., Goldenberg L. Dwarfing the social? nanotechnology lessons from the biotechnology front. Bull Sci Technol Soc 2004, 24:28-33.
89. Gaskell G. GM foods and the misperception of risk perception. Risk Anal 2004, 24:185-194.
90. Grove-White R., Macnaghten P., Mayer S., Wynne B. Uncertain World: Genetically Modified Organisms, Food and Public Attitudes in Britain 1997, IEPPP, Lancaster University.
91. Grove-White R., Macnaghten P., Wynne B. Wising Up: The Public and New Technologies 2000, IEPPP, Lancaster University.
92. Biotechnology and genetic engineering: What Europeans think about it in 1993. Eurobarometer 1993, 39. INRA, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique.
93. The Europeans and biotechnology. Eurobarometer 2000, 52. INRA, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique.
94. Jasanoff S. Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States 2005, Princeton University Press.
95. Joss S., Durant J. Public Participation in Science: The Role of Consensus Conferences in Europe 1995, Science Museum.
96. Macnaghten P., Kearnes M., Wynne B. Nanotechnology, governance and public deliberation: What role for the social sciences?. Science Communication 2005, 27:268-287.
97. Macrory, R. (1997). National Biotechnology Conference: Report of the Rapporteur. DETR.
98. Mayer S. From genetic modification to nanotechnology: the dangers of "sound science.". Science: Can We Trust the Experts? 2002, 1-15. Hodder and Stoughton. T. Gilland (Ed.).
99. Mayer S., Stirling A. Finding a precautionary approach to technological developments-lessons for the evaluation of GM crops. J Agric Environ Ethics 2002, 15:57-71.
100. Mehta M.D. From biotechnology to nanotechnology: what can we learn from earlier technologies?. Bull Sci Technol Soc 2004, 24:34-39.
101. The Public Consultation on Developments in the Biosciences 1999, MORI, Department of Trade and Industry.
102. Nordmann A. Molecular disjunctions: staking claims at the nanoscale. Discovering the Nanoscale 2004, IOS Press. D. Baird, A. Nordmann, J. Schummer (Eds.).
103. Ravetz J. The post-normal science of safety. Science and Citizens: Globalization and the Challenge of Engagement 2005, 43-53. Zed Books. M. Leach, I. Scoones, B. Wynne (Eds.).
104. Sandler R., Kay W.D. The GMO-nanotech (dis)analogy?. Bull Sci Technol Soc 2006, 26:57-62.
105. Tait J., Levidow L. Proactive and reactive approaches to regulation: the case of biotechnology. Futures 1992, 24:219-231.
106. Waddington C.H. The Man-Made Future 1978, Croom Helm.
107. Wilsdon J., Willis R. See-through Science: Why Public Engagement Needs to Move Upstream 2004, Demos.
108. Wolfson J.R. Social and ethical issues in nanotechnology: lessons from biotechnology and other high technologies. Biotechnol Law Rep 2003, 22:376-396.
109. Wynne B. Rationality and Ritual: the Windscale Inquiry and Nuclear Decisions in Britain 1992, British Society for the History of Science.
110. Wynne B. Public understanding of science. Handbook of Science and Technology Studies 1995, 361-388. Sage. S. Jasanoff (Ed.).
111. Wynne B. Creating public alienation: expert cultures of risk and ethics on GMOs. Science as Culture 2001, 10:445-481.
112. Ahson K. What is actually happening in agro-food biotechnology?. Br Food J 1997, 99:263-267.
113. Berube D.M. Nano-Hype: The Truth Behind the Nanotechnology Buzz 2006, Prometheus Books.
114. Brunk, C. and Coward, H., eds (2008). Acceptable Genes. Suny Press.
115. Buchmann M. The impact of resistance to biotechnology in switzerland: a sociological view of the recent referendum. Resistance to New Technology: Nuclear Power, Information Technology and Biotechnology 1995, 207-224. Cambridge University Press. M. Bauer (Ed.).
116. Busch L., Lacy W., Burkhardt J., Lacy L. Plants, power and Profits: Social, Economic and Ethical Consequences of the New Biotechnologies 1991, Basil Blackwell.
117. Charles D. Lords of the Harvest: Biotech, Big Money, and the Future of Food 2001, Perseus Press.
118. Colvin V.L. The potential environmental impact of engineered nanoparticles. Nat Biotechnol 2003, 21:1166-1170.
119. Down on the Farm: The Impact of Nano-scale Technologies on Food and Agriculture 2004, ETC Group, ETC Group.
120. Evans G., Durant J. The relationship between knowledge and attitudes in the public understanding of science in Britain. Public Understanding Sci 1995, 4:57-74.
121. Gaskell G. Europe ambivalent on biotechnology. Nature 1997, 387:845-847. the European Biotechnology and the Public Concerted Action Group.
122. Gaskell G., Bauer M., Durant J. Public perceptions of biotechnology in 1996: Eurobarometer 46.1. Biotechnology in the Public Sphere: a European Sourcebook 1998, 189-214. Science Museum, London. J. Durant, M. Bauer, G. Gaskell (Eds.).
123. Gaskell G., Bauer M.W., Durant J., Allum N.C. Worlds apart? The reception of genetically modified foods in Europe and the U.S. Science 1999, 285:384-387.
124. Gaskell G., Allum N., Bauer M., et al. Biotechnology and the European Public. Nat Biotechnol 2000, 18:935-938.
125. Gaskell G., Thompson P.B., Allum N. Worlds apart? Public opinion in Europe and the USA. Biotechnology: The Making of a Global Controversy 2002, 351-375. Cambridge University Press. M.W. Bauer, G. Gaskell (Eds.).
126. Jasanoff S. Civilization and madness: The great BSE scare of 1996. Public Understanding Sci 1997, 6:221-232.
127. Kalaitzandonakes N. Biotechnology and the restructuring of the agricultural supply chain. AgBioForum 1998, 1:40-42.
128. Kass L. The wisdom of repugnance. The New Republic 1997, June 2:17-26.
129. Keystone Center (1988a). Issues raised by biotechnology: A Keystone Biotechnology Discussion Paper. July 1988, Report 34. Keystone Center.
130. Keystone Center (1988b). Workshop Summary: First Regional Workshop on Biotechnology for Public Interest Leaders. Austin, Texas; Keystone Environmental, Citizen, State and Local Leadership Initiative. July 1988, Report 35, Keystone Center.
131. Keystone Center (1988c). Workshop Summary: First Regional Workshop on Biotechnology, Madison, Wisconsin; Keystone Environmental, Citizen, State and Local Leadership Initiative. March 1988, Report 36, Keystone Center.
132. Keystone Center (1989a). Keystone National Biotechnology Forum, Interim Summary Report, Public Participation and Education in Biotechnology: Summary Report and Recommendations. February 1989, Report 31, Keystone Center.
133. Keystone Center (1989b). Biotechnology Decisionmaking: Perspectives on the Objectives of Public Participation. September 1989, Report 28, Keystone Center.
134. Keystone Center (1990). Workshop Summary: Southeast Regional Workshop on Biotechnology, Atlanta, Georgia; Keystone Environmental, Citizen, State and Local Leadership Initiative. June 1990, Report 26, Keystone Center.
135. Keystone Center (1992). The Keystone Environmental, Citizen, State and Local Leadership Initiative for Biotechnology, Issue Report Series, Biotechnology Decisionmaking: Perspectives on Commercialization. July 1992, Report 24, Keystone Center.
136. Biotechnology and Sustainability: Policy Issues 1989, National Agricultural Biotechnology Council (NABC). J.F. McDonald (Ed.).
137. Who Owns Life? 2002, Prometheus Books. D. Magnus, A. Caplan, G. McGee (Eds.).
138. Maltsberger R., Kalaitzandonakes N. Direct and hidden costs in identity preserved supply chains. AgBioForum 2000, 3:236-242.
139. Mehta M.D., Gair J.J. Social, political, legal and ethical areas of inquiry in biotechnology and genetic engineering. Technol Society 2001, 23:241-264.
140. Midden C., Boy D., Einseidel E., et al. The structure of public perceptions. Biotechnology: The Making of a Global Controversy 2002, 203-223. Cambridge University Press. M.W. Bauer, G. Gaskell (Eds.).
141. Midgley M. Biotechnology and Monstrosity. Hastings Center Report 2000, 30(5):7-15.
142. Muth M.K., Mancini D., Viator C. US food manufacturer assessment of and responses to bioengineered foods. AgBioForum 2002, 5:90-100.
143. Small Wonders, Endless Frontiers: A Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative 2002, NRC, National Research Council, National Academies Press.
144. Parr D. Foreword. Future Technologies, Today's Choices 2003, Greenpeace Environmental Trust.
145. Press E., Washburn J. The kept university. Atlantic Monthly 2000, 285(3):39-42. 44-52, 54.
146. Priest S. A Grain of Truth: The Media, the Public and Biotechnology 2001, Rowman and Littlefield.
147. Rissler J., Mellon M. The Ecological Risks of Engineered Crops 1996, MIT Press.
148. Sagoff M. Genetic engineering and the concept of the natural. Philosophy & Public Policy Quarterly 2001, 21:2-10.
149. Sandler R., Kay W.D. The GMO-nanotech (dis)analogy?. Bull Sci Technol Soc 2006, 26:57-62.
150. Thompson P.B. Unnatural farming and the debate over genetic manipulation. Genetic Prospects: Essays on Biotechnology, Ethics and Public Policy 2003, 27-40. Rowman and Littlefield. V.V. Gehring (Ed.).
151. Toumey C. Narratives for nanotechnology: Aniticipating public reaction to nanotechnology. Techné 2004, 8:88-116.
152. Toumey C. National discourses on democratizing nanotechnology. Quaderini 2006, 61:81-101.
153. Verhey A. quot;Playing God" and invoking a perspective. J Med Philos 1995, 20:347-364.
154. Wagner W., Kronberger N., Allum N., de Cheveigné S., Diego C., Gaskell G., Heinßen M., Midden C., Oslash;degaard M., Öhman S., Rizzo B., Rusanen T., Stathopoulou A. Pandora's genes: Images of genes and nature. Biotechnology: The Making of a Global Controversy 2002, 244-276. Cambridge University Press. M.W. Bauer, G. Gaskel (Eds.).
155. Ziff B. Travels with my plant: Monsanto vs. Schmeiser revisited. University of Ottawa Law Technol J 2005, 2:493-509.
156. Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineers (2004). Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties. The Royal Society. Accessed June 22, 2006. http://www.nanotec.org.uk/finalReport.htm.
157. Keller K.H. Nanotechnology and society. J Nanoparticle Res 2006, 9:5-10.
158. Roco M.C. The emergence and policy implications converging new technologies integrated from the nanoscale. J Nanoparticle Res 2005, 7:129-143.
159. Shatkin J.A., Berry B.E. Approaching risk assessment of nanoscale materials. NSTI-Nanotech 2006, 1:253-256.
160. US Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Nanotechnology White Paper. EPA 100/B-07/001.
161. Wolfe A.K., Bjornstad D.J. Why would anyone object? An exploration of social aspects of phytoremediation acceptability. Crit Rev Plant Sci 2002, 21:429-438.
162. Wolfe A.K., Bjornstad D.J. Making imperfect decisions: Results from public workshops on bioremediation. Applied Anthropol 2006, 26:54-64.
163. Wolfe A.K., Bjornstad D.J., Russell M., Kerchner N.D. A framework for analyzing dialogues over the acceptability of controversial technologies. Sci Technol Hum Values 2002, 27:134-159.
164. Wolfe A.K., Bjornstad D.J., Kerchner N.D. Making decisions about hazardous waste remediation when even consideringa remediation technology is controversial. Environ Sci Technol 2003, 37:1485-1492.
165. Hart Research Associates, Inc. (2006). Report Findings. Based on a national Survey of Adults. September 19, 2006. Accessed April 5, 2007. http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=topics.homeamp;topic_id=166192.
166. Renn, O. and Roco, M. C. (2006). Nanotechnology: Risk Governance. International Risk Governance Council. Accessed April 5, 2007. http://www.irgc.org/irgc/projects/nanotechnology/_b/contentFiles/IRGC_white_paper_2_PDF_final_version.pdf.
167. Savage, N. (2006). EPA: Nanomaterial risk evaluation extramural research activities. Accessed April 5, 2007. http://www.hesiglobal.org/Committees/ProjectCommittees/Nanomaterials/Nanomaterial+Presentations+091506.htm.
168. Boer H., During W. Innovation, what innovation? A comparison between product, process and organizational innovation. Int J Technol Manage 2001, 22:83-107.
169. Charles D. Lords of the Harvest 2001, Perseus Publishing.
170. Evenson R.E. Agricultural biotechnology. Technological Innovation and Organizational Performance 2002, 267-284. Princeton University Press. B. Steil, D. Victor, R. Nelson (Eds.).
171. Gopalakrishnan R., Bierly P. Analyzing innovation adoption using a knowledge-based approach. J Eng Technol Manage 2001, 18:107-130.
172. Hayenga M.L. Structural change in the biotech seed and chemical industrial complex. AgBioForum 1998, 1:43-55.
173. Tidd J., Bessant J., Pavitt K. Managing Innovation 2001, Wiley. 2nd edn.
174. Berne R.W. Nanotalk: Conversations with Scientists and Engineers about Ethics, Meanings, and Belief in the Development of Nanotechnology 2005, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
175. Berube D.M. Nano-Hype: The Truth Behind the Nanotechnology Buzz 2006, Prometheus Books.
176. Bohannon L. Shakespeare in the bush. Conformity and Conflict: Readings in Cultural Anthropology 1971, Little Brown and Company. J.P. Spradley, D.W. McCurdy (Eds.).
177. Bruner J. Narrative and paradigmatic modes of thought. Learning and Teaching the Ways of Knowing 1985, University of Chicago Press. E. Eisner (Ed.).
178. David K., Lloyd J.R. Tools for organizational learning and organizational teaching: Learning and communicating about collaboration in dispersed engineering design projects. The Collaborative Work Systems Fieldbook: Strategies, Tools, and Techniques 2003, Center for the Study of Work Teams, University of North Texas, Jossey-Bass. G. Klein, J. Nemiro (Eds.).
179. Elkington J. Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business 1998, New Society.
180. Feynman R.P., Leighton R., Hutchings E., Hibbs A.R. Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman! (Adventures of a Curious Character) 1997, W. W. Norton.
181. Kearnes M., Grove-White R., Macnaghten P., Wilsdon J., Wynne B. From bio to nano: learning the lessons, interrogating the comparison. Science as Culture 2006, 15:291-307.
182. Nader R. Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile 1965, Grossman.
183. Rogers-Hayden, T. and Pidgeon, N. (2006). Deliberating emerging nanotechnologies in the UK and beyond. Session on Risk Perceptions and Social Responses to Emerging Technologies, Society for Social Studies of Society annual meeting, Vancouver, November 2, 2006.
184. Rowe, G., Horlick-Jones, T., Walls, J., and Pidgeon, N. (2006). Evaluating public engagement: The case of the 2003 "GM Nation?" public debate. Proceedings: Values in Decisions on Risk, Stockholm, Sweden, pp. 423-431.
185. Tansey J. Ships that Pass in the Night: Cultural Theory and Risk Management or Cloning the Pangolin 2005, Maurice Young Centre for Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia.
186. Terpstra V., David K. The Cultural Environment of International Business 1991, South Western Press. 3rd edn.
187. Toumey C. National discourses on democratizing nanotechnology. Quaderini 2006, 61:81-101.
188. Velikovsky I. Worlds in Collision 1950, Macmillan.
189. Verloop J. Insight in Innovation 2004, Elsevier.
190. Feynman, R. P. (1959). Plenty of room at the bottom. http://www.its.caltech.edu/~feynman/plenty.html.
191. Wikipedia (2007a). Whale oil. http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whale_oil.
192. Baum R. Nanotechnology: Drexler and Smalley make the case for and against "molecular assemblers". Chem Eng News 2003, 81:37-42.
193. Bishop G.F. The Illusion of Public Opinion: Fact and Artifact in American Public Opinion Polls 2004, Rowman & Littlefield.
194. Cobb M., Macoubrie J. Public perceptions about nanotechnology: risks, benefits and trust. J Nanoparticle Res 2004, 6:395-405.
195. Gaskell G., Einsiedel E., Hallman W., Priest S., Jackson J., Olsthoorn J. Social values and the governance of science. Science 2005, 310:1908-1909.
196. Gaskell G., Eyck T.T., Jackson J., Veltri G. Imagining nanotechnology: cultural support for technological innovation in Europe and the United States. Public Understanding Sci 2005, 14:81-90.
197. Gutteling J.M. Mazur's hypothesis on technology controversy and media. Int J Public Opin Res 2005, 17:23-41.
198. Mazur A. Media coverage and public opinion on scientific controversies. J Commun 1981, 31:106-115.
199. Miller J. Reaching the attentive and interested publics for science. Scientists and Journalists: Reporting Science as News 1986, 55-69. American Association for the Advancement of Science. S. Friedman, S. Dunwoody, C. Rogers (Eds.).
200. Nordmann, A. (2006). Invisible foundations: Herbert Gleiter and the contribution of materials science. Unpublished paper delivered at Nanoculture Seminar, University of South Carolina, April.
201. Priest S. A Grain of Truth: The Media, the Public, and Biotechnology 2000, Rowman & Littlefield.
202. Priest S. Misplaced faith: communication variables as predictors of encouragement for biotechnology development. Sci Commun 2001, 23:97-110.
203. Priest S. The public opinion climate for gene technologies in Canada and the United States: competing voices, contrasting frames. Public Understanding Sci 2006, 15:55-71.
204. Priest S., Eyck T.Ten Peril and promise: news media framing of the biotechnology debate in Europe and the U.S. Biotechnology: Between Commerce and Civil Society 2004, Transaction Publishers. N. Stehr (Ed.).
205. Priest, S. and Fussell, H. (2006). Nanotechnology: constructing the public and public constructions. Unpublished paper, University of South Carolina.
206. Priest S., Bonfadelli H., Rusanen M. The "trust gap" hypothesis: predicting support for biotechnology across national cultures as a function of trust in actors. Risk Anal 2003, 23:751-766.
207. Smalley R. Nanotechnology, education, and the fear of nanobots. Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology. Final Report of the Workshop Held at the National Science Foundation, Sept. 28-29 2000 2001, National Science Foundation. M.C. Roco, W.S. Bainbridge (Eds.).
208. Stephens F.L. News narratives about nano S&T in major U.S. and non-U.S. newspapers. Sci Commun 2005, 27:175-199.
209. Sturgis P., Allum N. Science in society: reevaluating the deficit model of public attitudes. Public Understanding Sci 2004, 13:55-74.
210. Becker J.W., Brownson F.O. What price ambiguity? Or the role of ambiguity in decision making. J Political Econ 1964, 72:62-73.
211. Bruner J. Narrative and paradigmatic modes of thought. Learning and Teaching the Ways of Knowing 1985, University of Chicago Press. E. Eisner (Ed.).
212. Bruner J. Actual Minds, Possible Worlds 1986, Harvard University Press.
213. Cantley M. Public perception, public policy, the public interest and public information: the evolution of policy for biotechnology in the European Community, 1982-92. Biotechnology in Public 1992, Science Museum. J. Durant (Ed.).
214. Douglas M., Wildavsky A. Risk and Culture. An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Danger 1982, University of California Press.
215. Einsiedel E., et al. Brave new sheep-the clone named Dolly. Biotechnology: The Making of a Global Controversy 2001, 313-347. Cambridge University Press. M.W. Bauer, G. Gaskell (Eds.).
216. Ellsberg D. Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms. Q J Econ 1961, 75:643-699.
217. Frazer J.G. The Golden Bough: Studies in Magic and Religion 1930, Macmillan.
218. Gaskell G., Bauer M.W. Biotechnology 1996-2000: the Years of Controversy 2001, Science Museum.
219. Gaskell G., Allum N., Wagner W., Kronberger N., Torgersen H., Bardes J. GM foods and the misperception of risk perception. Risk Anal 2004, 24:183-192.
220. Gaskell G., et al. Europeans and Biotechnology: Patterns and Trends 2007, Directorate-General for Research European Commission, Brussels.
221. Hampel J., et al. Public mobilization and policy consequences. Genomics and Society: Legal, Ethical and Social Dimensions 2006, 77-94. Earthscan. G. Gaskell, M.W. Bauer (Eds.).
222. Jasanoff S. Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States 2005, Princeton University Press.
223. Kahneman D., Tversky A. Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 1979, 47:263-291.
224. Kessler D.A., et al. The safety of foods developed by biotechnology. Science June 26 1992, 256(5065):1747-1749. 1832.
225. Kilman S., Burton T.M. Monsanto Boss's Vision Now Confronts Reality. Wall Street Journal 1999, December 21.
226. Nordmann, A. (2004). Converging Technologies-Shaping the Future of European Societies. Report of a High Level Group. European Commission.
227. Rayner S. Cultural theory and risk analysis. Social Theories of Risk 1992, Praeger. S. Krimsky, D. Golding (Eds.).
228. Science, Technology and Social Responsibility 1999, Royal Society, The Royal Society.
229. Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties 2004, Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering, The Royal Society (UK) and the Royal Academy of Engineering.
230. Rozin P., Nemeroff C. The laws of sympathetic magic. Cultural Psychology-Essays on Comparative Human Development 1990, 205-232. Cambridge University Press. J. Stigler, R. Sweder, G. Herdt (Eds.).
231. Starr C. Social benefit versus technological risk. Science 1969, 165:1232-1238.
232. Swindler A. Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. Am Sociol Rev 1986, 51:273-286.
233. Thompson P., Dean W. Competing conceptions of risk. Risk: Health, Safety and Environment 1996, 12:361-384. [Fall].
234. Wagner W., Kronberger N., Gaskell G., et al. Nature in disorder: the troubled public of biotechnology. Biotechnology 1996-2000: the Years of Controversy 2001, Science Museum. G. Gaskell, M.W. Bauer (Eds.).
235. Brammer M., Dixon F., Ambrose B. Monsanto and Genetic Engineering: Risks for Investors 2003, Innovest Strategic Value Advisors.
236. Brown S.A. Revolution at the Checkout Counter 1997, Harvard University Press.
237. Organismes Génétiquement Modifiés: 5 Ans d'Engagements Carrefour 2002, Carrefour, Carrefour.
238. Charles D. Lords of the Harvest: Biotech, Big Money, and the Future of Food 2001, Perseus Publishing Company.
239. Ag Biotech: Thanks, But No Thanks? 1999, Deutsche Bank, Deutsche Bank.
240. Dunlop, J. T. (2001). The diffusion of UCC standards. In: Haberman, A. L., ed. Twenty-five Years behind Bars: the Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of the U.P.C. at the Smithsonian Institution, September 30, 1999. Harvard University Press, pp. 12-24.
241. Eichenwald K. Redesigning nature: hard lessons learned. New York Times 2001, January 25:A1.
242. Ervin D.E., Batie S.S., Welsh R., et al. Transgenic Crops: An Environmental Assessment 2000, Henry A. Wallace Center for Agricultural and Environmental Policy at Winrock International.
243. Forster J. GM foods: why fight labeling?. Business Week 2002, 3807:44.
244. Furtan, W. H., Gray, R. S., and Holzman, J. J. (2002). The optimal time to license a biotech "lemon." Unpublished paper.
245. Gillis J. Farmers grow a field of dilemma; drug-making crops' potential hindered by fear of tainted food. The Washington Post 2002, December 23:A01.
246. Haberman, A. L., ed. (2001). Twenty-five Years behind Bars: the Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of the U.P.C. at the Smithsonian Institution, September 30, 1999. Harvard University Press.
247. Jasanoff S., Grove-White R., Busch L., Wynne B., Winickoff D. Adjudicating the GM food wars: science, risk, and democracy in world trade law. Yale J Int Law 2005, 30:81-123.
248. Kilman S. Food industry shuns bioengineered sugar. Wall Street Journal 2001, April 27:B5.
249. Latour B. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society 1987, Open University Press.
250. Lin W., Price G.K., Allen E. StarLink: where no Cry9C corn should have gone before. Choices 2001/2002, 31-34.
251. Monsanto to stop producing genetically altered potatoes. Nation's Restaurant News 2001, April 9:70. Nation's Restaurant News.
252. Perrow C. Normal Accidents 1984, Basic Books.
253. Pollack A. Farmers joining state efforts against bioengineered crops. New York Times 2001, March 24:A1.
254. Rogers E.M. Diffusion of Innovations 1995, Free Press.
255. Simon S. The food industry loves engineered crops, but not when plants altered to "grow" drugs and chemicals can slip into its products. Los Angeles Times 2002, December 23(Part 1):1.
256. Smith A. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations 1994 [1776], Modern Library.
257. Wisner, R. (2003). GMO spring wheat: its potential short-term impacts on U.S. wheat export markets and prices. Unpublished paper.
258. Heinz (2003). Genetically modified ingredients. Heinz. Accessed on May 27,. http://www.heinz.co.uk/.
259. Iceland Foods (2003). Welcome to. Accessed on May 10,. http://www.iceland.co.uk.
260. Monoprix (2003). Tableau de bord de notre démarche de progrès. Monoprix. Accessed on May 27,. http://www.monoprix.fr/common/res/monoprix/fr/dev_dur_2000/tableaux/tab_1.htm.
261. Royal Ahold (2003). Ahold Media Information. Royal Ahold. Accessed on May 27,. http://www.ahold.com/mediainformation/faq/.