publication . Article . Other literature type . 2012

Factors influencing societal response of nanotechnology: an expert stakeholder analysis

Nidhi Gupta; Ivo A. van der Lans; Lynn J. Frewer; Lynn J. Frewer; Arnout R. H. Fischer;
Open Access English
  • Published: 01 May 2012 Journal: Journal of Nanoparticle Research, volume 14, issue 5 (issn: 1388-0764, eissn: 1572-896X, Copyright policy)
  • Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Nanotechnology can be described as an emerging technology and, as has been the case with other emerging technologies such as genetic modification, different socio-psychological factors will potentially influence societal responses to its development and application. These factors will play an important role in how nanotechnology is developed and commercialised. This article aims to identify expert opinion on factors influencing societal response to applications of nanotechnology. Structured interviews with experts on nanotechnology from North West Europe were conducted using repertory grid methodology in conjunction with generalized Procrustes analysis to examin...
free text keywords: Research Paper, Nanotechnology, Societal response, Expert opinion, Factors, Applications of nanotechnology, Repertory grid method, Generalized Procrustes analysis, Societal implications, Modelling and Simulation, General Materials Science, Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics, Bioengineering, General Chemistry, Condensed Matter Physics, repertory grid methodology, genetically-modified foods, consumers perceptions, risk perceptions, united-kingdom, attitudes, acceptance, benefits, opinion, Materials Science(all), Chemistry(all), Emerging technologies, Expert judgement, North west, Repertory grid, Stakeholder analysis, Materials science
Related Organizations
63 references, page 1 of 5

Barke, RP, Jenkins-Smith, HC. Politics and scientific expertise: scientists, risk perception, and nuclear waste policy. Risk Anal. 1993; 13: 425-439 [OpenAIRE] [PubMed] [DOI]

Bauer, MW. Distinguishing red and green biotechnology: cultivation effects of the elite press. Int J Public Opin Res. 2005; 17 (1): 63-89 [OpenAIRE] [DOI]

Berube, DM, Cummings, CL, Cacciatore, M, Scheufele, D, Kalin, J. Characteristics and classification of nanoparticles: expert Delphi survey. Nanotoxicology. 2011; 5 (2): 236-243 [OpenAIRE] [PubMed] [DOI]

Besley, J, Kramer, V, Priest, null. Expert opinion on nanotechnology: risks, benefits, and regulation. J Nanoparticle Res. 2008; 10 (4): 549-558 [OpenAIRE] [DOI]

Blok, A, Jensen, M, Kaltoft, P. Social identities and risk: expert and lay imaginations on pesticide use. Public Underst Sci. 2008; 17: 189-209 [OpenAIRE] [PubMed] [DOI]

Brossard, D, Scheufele, DA, Kim, E, Lewenstein, BV. Religiosity as a perceptual filter: examining processes of opinion formation about nanotechnology. Public Underst Sci. 2009; 18 (5): 546-558 [OpenAIRE] [DOI]

Burri, RV, Bellucci, S. Public perception of nanotechnology. J Nanaopart Res. 2008; 10: 387-391 [DOI]

Cobb, MD, Macoubrie, J. Public perceptions about nanotechnology: risks, benefits and trust. J Nanopart Res. 2004; 6 (4): 395-405 [OpenAIRE] [DOI]

Conti, J, Satterfield, T, Harthorn, BH. Vulnerability and social justice as factors in emergent U.S. nanotechnology risk perceptions. Risk Anal. 2011; 31 (11): 1734-1748 [OpenAIRE] [PubMed] [DOI]

Corley, EA, Scheufele, DA, Hu, Q. Of risks and regulations: how leading U.S. nanoscientists form policy stances about nanotechnology. J Nanopart Res. 2009; 11: 1573-1585 [OpenAIRE] [PubMed] [DOI]

Crow, MM, Sarewitz, D. Nanotechnology and societal transformation. 2001

Flynn, J, Slovic, P, Mertz, C. Decidedly different: expert and public views of risks from a radioactive repository. Risk Anal. 1993; 13: 643-648 [OpenAIRE] [DOI]

Frewer, LJ, Howard, C, Hedderley, D, Shepherd, R. What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs. Risk Anal. 1996; 16 (4): 473-485 [OpenAIRE] [PubMed] [DOI]

Frewer, LJ, Howard, C, Shepherd, R. Public concerns in the United Kingdom about general and specific applications of genetic engineering: risk, benefit, and ethics. Sci Technol Hum Values. 1997; 22 (1): 98-124 [OpenAIRE] [DOI]

Frewer, LJ, Lassen, J, Kettlitz, B, Scholderer, J, Beekman, V, Berdal, KG. Societal aspects of genetically modified foods. Food Chem Toxicol. 2004; 42 (7): 1181-1193 [OpenAIRE] [PubMed] [DOI]

63 references, page 1 of 5
Any information missing or wrong?Report an Issue