Chinese Public and Nanoresearchers’ Perceptions of Benefits and Risks of Nanotechnology
NanoEthics 13 (3):155-171 (2019)
Abstract
Public and experts’ perceptions of benefits and risks of nanotechnology constitute an important element of nanoethics studies. On the one hand, compared with traditional ethics, nanoethics is a future-oriented ethics. The construction of ethical norms requires public participation. On the other hand, nanotechnology is characterized by uncertainty. Our previous research showed the Chinese public’s support for nanotechnology was associated more with beliefs, including views of technology and the weighing of benefits and risks of nanotechnology, and less with knowledge about nanotechnology; the support was high but might change over time. Meanwhile, Chinese researchers have been actively conducting studies on nanotechnology while being highly aware of nanosafety issues. In this context, we further examined in the present study Chinese nanoresearchers’ perceptions of specific benefits and risks of nanotechnology, compared them with those of the Chinese public, and examined the Chinese nanoresearchers’ perceptions of risks of specific nanoapplications. Initial cross-regional comparisons were made with results from equivalent US and European surveys. Results showed Chinese nanoresearchers perceived a higher level of overall nanobenefits than the public and an almost equal level of overall nanorisks with the public. Four nanorisks were perceived by a higher proportion of experts than public; the experts likely relied on technical expertise while the public, possessing little knowledge about nanotechnology, might have exercised caution based on experiences and observations of other technologies. Of 23 nanoapplications, Chinese nanoresearchers regarded food using nanomaterials as the most risky and displays using nanomaterials as the least risky. Similarities and differences were observed in comparisons of Chinese with US and European survey results. In our age of technology and economic globalization, this research is of significance both for China’s formulation of nanotechnology development strategies and for the further study on nanoethics and good governance of emerging technologies such as nanotechnology worldwide.Author's Profile
My notes
Similar books and articles
Why do we need to know what the public thinks about nanotechnology?Craig Cormick - 2009 - NanoEthics 3 (2):167-173.
Nanotechnology — a new field of ethical inquiry?Armin Grunwald - 2005 - Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (2):187-201.
Public Perceptions of Nanotechnology: A Survey in the Mega Cities of Iran.Mehdi Rahimpour, Mahmoud Rahimpour, Hosna Gomari, Elham Shirvani, Amin Niroumanesh, Kamelia Saremi & Soroush Sardari - 2012 - NanoEthics 6 (2):119-126.
Risk management principles for nanotechnology.Gary E. Marchant, Douglas J. Sylvester & Kenneth W. Abbott - 2008 - NanoEthics 2 (1):43-60.
Global Ethics and Nanotechnology: A Comparison of the Nanoethics Environments of the EU and China. [REVIEW]Sally Dalton-Brown - 2012 - NanoEthics 6 (2):137-150.
Ethics, Risk and Benefits Associated with Different Applications of Nanotechnology: a Comparison of Expert and Consumer Perceptions of Drivers of Societal Acceptance.L. J. Frewer, A. R. H. Fischer & N. Gupta - 2015 - NanoEthics 9 (2):93-108.
Would You Mind, If We Record This? Perceptions on Regulation and Responsibility among Indian Nanoscientists.Subhasis Sahoo - 2013 - NanoEthics 7 (3):231-249.
Understanding Public Debate on Nanotechnologies.Rene von Schomberg (ed.) - 2010 - Publications Office of the European Union.
Avoiding empty rhetoric: Engaging publics in debates about nanotechnologies.Renee Kyle & Susan Dodds - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):81-96.
Nanoethics and Policy Education: a Case Study of Social Science Coursework and Student Engagement with Emerging Technologies.Jessica Smith Rolston, Skylar Huzyk Zilliox, Corinne Packard, Carl Mitcham & Brian Zaharatos - 2014 - NanoEthics 8 (3):217-225.
Representations of nanotechnology in norwegian newspapers — implications for public participation.Kamilla Lein Kjølberg - 2009 - NanoEthics 3 (1):61-72.
Nanotechnology: a new regime for the public in science?Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent - 2012 - Scientiae Studia 10 (SPE):85-94.
What is Nanotechnology and why Does it Matter?: from Science to Ethics.Laura Yenisa Cabrera Trujillo - 2014 - NanoEthics 8 (2):211-213.
Consumer attitudes towards nanotechnologies applied to food production.L. J. Frewer, N. Gupta, S. George, A. R. H. Fischer, E. L. Giles & David Coles - unknown
The Role of the Humanities and Social Sciences in Nanotechnology Research and Development.Mette Ebbesen - 2008 - NanoEthics 2 (1):1-13.
Analytics
Added to PP
2019-12-02
Downloads
2 (#1,402,186)
6 months
1 (#450,993)
2019-12-02
Downloads
2 (#1,402,186)
6 months
1 (#450,993)
Historical graph of downloads