Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2009 Feb;4(2):95-8.
doi: 10.1038/nnano.2008.362. Epub 2008 Dec 7.

Deliberating the risks of nanotechnologies for energy and health applications in the United States and United Kingdom

Comparative Study

Deliberating the risks of nanotechnologies for energy and health applications in the United States and United Kingdom

Nick Pidgeon et al. Nat Nanotechnol. 2009 Feb.

Abstract

Emerging nanotechnologies pose a new set of challenges for researchers, governments, industries and citizen organizations that aim to develop effective modes of deliberation and risk communication early in the research and development process. These challenges derive from a number of issues including the wide range of materials and devices covered by the term 'nanotechnology', the many different industrial sectors involved, the fact that many areas of nanotechnology are still at a relatively early stage of development, and uncertainty about the environmental, health and safety impacts of nanomaterials. Public surveys have found that people in the United States and Europe currently view the benefits of nanotechnologies as outweighing their risks although, overall, knowledge about nanotechnology remains very low. However, surveys cannot easily uncover the ways that people will interpret and understand the complexities of nanotechnologies (or any other topic about which they know very little) when asked to deliberate about it in more depth, so new approaches to engaging the public are needed. Here, we report the results of the first comparative United States-United Kingdom public engagement experiment. Based upon four concurrent half-day workshops debating energy and health nanotechnologies we find commonalities that were unexpected given the different risk regulatory histories in the two countries. Participants focused on benefits rather than risks and, in general, had a high regard for science and technology. Application context was much more salient than nation as a source of difference, with energy applications viewed in a substantially more positive light than applications in health and human enhancement in both countries. More subtle differences were present in views about the equitable distribution of benefits, corporate and governmental trustworthiness, the risks to realizing benefits, and in consumerist attitudes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Risk Anal. 2007 Feb;27(1):59-69 - PubMed
    1. Nat Nanotechnol. 2006 Dec;1(3):153-5 - PubMed
    1. Nat Nanotechnol. 2007 Jul;2(7):386-7 - PubMed
    1. Nat Nanotechnol. 2007 Dec;2(12):732-4 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources