Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
NanoEthics
Erschienen in: NanoEthics 1/2008

01.04.2008 | Original paper

The Role of the Humanities and Social Sciences in Nanotechnology Research and Development

verfasst von: Mette Ebbesen

Erschienen in: NanoEthics | Ausgabe 1/2008

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The experience with genetically modified foods has been prominent in motivating science, industry and regulatory bodies to address the social and ethical dimensions of nanotechnology. The overall objective is to gain the general public’s acceptance of nanotechnology in order not to provoke a consumer boycott as it happened with genetically modified foods. It is stated implicitly in reports on nanotechnology research and development that this acceptance depends on the public’s confidence in the technology and that the confidence is created on the basis of information, education, openness and debate about scientific and technological developments. Hence, it is assumed that informing and educating the public will create trust, which will consequently lead to an acceptance of nanotechnology. Thus, the humanities and social sciences are seen as tools to achieve public acceptance.
In this paper, the author argues that this is a narrow apprehension of the role of the humanities and social sciences. The humanities and social sciences have a critical function asking fundamental questions and informing the public about these reflections. This may lead to scepticism, however, the motivation for addressing the social and ethical dimensions of nanotechnology should not be public acceptance but informed judgement. The author illustrates this critical function by discussing the role, motivation and contribution of ethics as an example. Lastly, the author shows that a possible strategy for incorporating the humanities and the social sciences into nanotechnology research and development is Real-Time Technology Assessment, where the purpose is to integrate natural science and engineering investigations with ethical, legal and social science from the outset.
Nächster Artikel Beyond Therapy and Enhancement: The Alteration of Human Nature

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
1
Research and Development (R&D).
 
2
National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI)
 
3
Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science (NBIC).
 
4
An example of an interdisciplinary nanotechnological research network is the Frontiers Network of Excellence funded by EU’s Sixth Framework Programme. The network consists of 12 partners from all over Europe researching into physics, chemistry, materials science, electronics, molecular biology, and health sciences. To integrate the social sciences and the humanities in the interdisciplinary network, it is stressed that a sociologist and an ethicist are part of the network. At Cambridge University, which is one of the partners, the sociologist Robert Doubleday had a post doctoral position until year 2006. He has a background in chemistry and sociology. The University of Aarhus, which is also a member of the network, has employed an ethicist, Mette Ebbesen, who has degrees in molecular biology, philosophy, and ethics.
 
5
Over past decades, participatory consensus conferences have spread internationally in an attempt to prevent societal conflicts over controversial technologies. The model of participatory consensus conferences—widely referred to as “the Danish Model” was originally developed by The Danish Board of Technology in the mid-1980s. Researchers point out that evaluations of such conferences seem to rest on the assumption that this type of procedure has universally agreed goals and meanings and that therefore consensus conferences can readily be interpreted and applied across national boundaries [26]. However, Nielsen et al. [26] investigated three consensus conferences on GMOs which took place in France, Norway and Denmark and concluded that interpretations of the concept of participation, the value attributed to lay knowledge versus technical expertise, ideas about the role of laypersons as well as what role public participation would be allowed to play in a democratic society vary considerable from country to country. Hence, the model of consensus conferences needs to be interpreted in the context where it is to be implemented.
 
Literatur
1.
Roco MC (2003) Broader societal implications of nanotechnology. J Nanopart Res 5:181–189CrossRef
2.
National Science and Technology Council, USA (1999) Nanotechnology research directions: IWGN workshop report. In: Roco MC, Williams S and Alivisatos P (eds) Vision for nanotechnology research and development in the next decade
3.
Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (2004) Technology foresight on danish nanoscience and nanotechnology
4.
European Commission (2004) Towards a European strategy for nanotechnology
5.
Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (2004) How big can small actual be? Study Group on the Consequences of Nanotechnology
6.
National Science Foundation (NSF) (2001) Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology. Report of a workshop run by NSF, 28–29 September 2000. Roco MC (eds) Bainbridge WS
7.
European Commission (2004) Science and society action plan
8.
European Commission (2003) Europeans and biotechnology in 2002. Eurobarometer 58.0
9.
Williams-Jones B (2004) A spoonful of trust helps the nanotech go down. Health Law Rev 12(3):10–13
10.
Marris C (2001) Public views on GMOs: deconstructing the myths. Stakeholders in the GMO debate often describe public opinion as irrational. But do they really understand the public. EMBO Rep 2(7):545–548CrossRef
11.
Sjoeberg L (2004) Principles of risk perception applied to gene technology. EMBO Rep 5:S47–s51CrossRef
12.
Gaskell G, Allum N, Bauer M, Jackson J, Howard S, Lindsey N (2003) Climate change for biotechnology? UK Public Opinion 1991–2002. Agbioforum 6(1&2):55–67
13.
Lassen J, Jamison A (2006) Genetic technologies meet the public. Sci Technol Human Values 31(1):8–28CrossRef
14.
Tveit GK, Madsen H, Sandoe P (eds) (2003) Biotechnology and the public. Danish Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment
15.
NSF/DOC (2002) Converging technologies for improving human performance, nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science. NSF/DOC-sponsored report. Roco MC, Bainbridge WS (eds), pp ix–x
16.
Ebbesen M, Andersen S, Besenbacher F (2006) Ethics in nanotechnology: starting from scratch? Bull Sci Technol Soc 26(6):451–462CrossRef
17.
Rickerby DG (2004) Risks and ethical challenges of nanotechnology in healthcare. In: Nanotechnologies: a preliminary risk analysis on the basis of a workshop 1–2 March 2004 European Commission, pp 127–131
18.
Robison W (2004) Nano-ethics. In: Baird D, Nordmann A, Schummer J (eds) Discovering the Nanoscale. IOS, Amsterdam, pp 285–301
19.
Gorman ME (2004) Societal dimensions of nanotechnology as a trading zone: results from a pilot project. In: Baird D, Nordmann A, Schummer J (eds) Discovering the nanoscale. IOS, Amsterdam, pp 63–77
20.
Satava RM (2002) Disruptive visions: moral and ethical challenges from advanced technology and issues for the new generation of surgeons. J Surg Endosc 16:1403–1408CrossRef
21.
Drexler E (1986) Engines of creation: the coming era of nanotechnology. Anchor, USA
22.
Beauchamp TL, Childress JF (2001) Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press, Oxford
23.
24.
Fisher E Mahajan RL (2006) Contradictory intent? US federal legislation on integrating societal concerns into nanotechnology research and development. Sci Public Policy 33(1):5–16CrossRef
25.
Guston DH, Sarewitz D (2002) Real-time technology assessment. Technol Soc 24:93–109CrossRef
26.
Nielsen AP, Lassen J, Sandøe P (2007) Democracy at its best? The consensus conference in a cross-national perspective. J Agric Environ Ethics 20:13–35CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
The Role of the Humanities and Social Sciences in Nanotechnology Research and Development
verfasst von
Mette Ebbesen
Publikationsdatum
01.04.2008
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
NanoEthics / Ausgabe 1/2008
Print ISSN: 1871-4757
Elektronische ISSN: 1871-4765
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-008-0033-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2008

NanoEthics 1/2008 Zur Ausgabe

Original Paper

How Should We Do Nanoethics? A Network Approach for Discerning Ethical Issues in Nanotechnology

Original paper

Risk Management Principles for Nanotechnology

Book review

Nanotechnology: Risks, Ethics and Law. Edited by Geoffrey Hunt and Michael Mehta. London: Earthscan, 2006. 296 pp.

Original paper

Regulating Nanomedicine—The Smallest of Our Concerns?

Original paper

European Regulatory Issues in Nanomedicine

Original paper

Risk Regulation, EU Law and Emerging Technologies: Smother or Smooth?