The integration of nanotechnology’s ‘social and ethical issues’ (SEI) at the research and development stage is one of the defining features of nanotechnology governance in the United States. Mandated by law, integration extends the field of nanotechnology to include a role for the “social”, the “public” and the social sciences and humanities in research and development (R&D) practices and agendas. Drawing from interviews with scientists, engineers and policymakers who took part in an oral history of (...) the “Future of Nanotechnology” symposium at the Cornell NanoScale Facility, this article examines how nanotechnology’s ‘social and ethical issues’ are brought to life by these practitioners. From our analysis, three modes of enactment emerge: enacting SEI as obligations and problems-to-be-solved, enacting SEI by ‘not doing it’ in the laboratory, and enacting SEI as part of scientific practice. Together they paint a complex picture where SEI are variously defined, made visible or invisible, included and excluded, with participants showing their skill at both boundary-work (Gieryn Am Sociol Rev 48:781–795, 1983, 1999) and at integration. We conclude by reflecting on what this may mean for the design and implementation of SEI integration policies, suggesting that we need to transform SEI from obligations into ‘matters of care’ (Puig de la Bellacasa Soc Stud Sci 41(1):85–106, 2011) that tend to existing relationalities between science and society and implicate practitioners themselves. (shrink)

There have been several conscious efforts made by different stakeholders in the area of nanoscience and nanotechnology to increase the awareness of social and ethical issues (SEI) among its practitioners. But so far, little has been done at the laboratory level to integrate a SEI component into the laboratory orientation schedule of practitioners. Since the laboratory serves as the locus of activities of the scientific community, it is important to introduce SEI there to stimulate thinking and discussion (...) of SEI among practitioners, which would eventually contribute toward the responsible development of this technology. In this article, through an example (at the Cornell NanoScale Science and Technology Facility (CNF), practitioners of which represent a section of the nano researchers’ community in the USA), it is shown how a SEI component can be incorporated into the laboratory orientation schedule of the practitioners from diverse disciplinary and institutional backgrounds. Results show that, at CNF, the practitioners enjoyed the discussion since most of them learned about SEI for the first time in their professional career. At the same time, some of them were also knowledgeable about SEI and contributed to the debates. Moreover, the SEI orientation had significant positive impact on the scientific community enabling them to self-reflect upon their own research and its implications for the wider society. This article also describes the efforts that were undertaken to disseminate this form of SEI orientation to other 13 USA universities within the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN, one of the biggest networks funded from National Science Foundation for Nanotechnology research, of which CNF is a part). As a result of this effort, most of the NNIN sites have already started or were in the process of integrating a SEI component into their nanofabrication laboratories to make their users aware of SEI, ensuring eventual robust socio-technical integration in the NNIN laboratories. In the future, this form of SEI orientation can also be disseminated to other nanofabrication laboratories in the USA. (shrink)

English summary: The scholarly and the public discussions about the relationship between business and ethics are dominated by numerous illusions, some of which are that ethics can be seen as restraint, that morality can survive against incentives on a sustained basis, competition must be subdued, a society needs common values, our social systems can continue to exist as they have up to now, and several others as well. Christoph Lutge debunks these illusions and shows possible alternatives for realistic business (...) ethics under modern conditions. The essays in this volume range from basic issues in ethics to application problems in business ethics and ethical problems with the internet. German description: Sowohl die wissenschaftliche als auch die offentliche Diskussion uber die Beziehungen zwischen Wirtschaft und Ethik werden von zahlreichen Illusionen beherrscht: Ethik sei als Massigung zu verstehen, Moral konne sich dauerhaft gegen Anreize behaupten, der Wettbewerb musse gezahmt werden, eine Gesellschaft benotige gemeinsame Werte, unsere sozialen Systeme konnten so wie bisher weiterbestehen und einige andere mehr.Christoph Lutge wendet sich gegen solche Illusionen und zeigt Moglichkeiten einer realistischen Wirtschaftsethik unter modernen Bedingungen auf. Die hier vorliegenden Beitrage spannen den Bogen von Grundlagenfragen der Ethik uber Anwendungsprobleme der Wirtschaftsethik bis hin zu ethischen Problemen des Internets. (shrink)

Integrating corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives in business is one of the great challenges facing firms today. Societal stakeholders require much more from the firm than pursuing profitability and growth. But these societal stakeholders often simply assume that increased societal expectations can easily be accommodated within efficiently run business operations, without much attention devoted to process issues. We build upon the core—periphery thesis to explore potential avenues for firms to add recurring CSR initiatives to their existing business practices. (...) Based on Siggelkow's (Admin Sei Quart 47: 125-159, 2002) analysis of organizational change, we conceptualize seven major patterns of CSR initiative adoption. We develop a new organizing framework showing how a firm can integrate CSR initiatives in business. Within the new framework, each of the seven patterns represents an idiosyncratic path through which recurring CSR initiatives can be included as practices into conventional operations. We also explore the nature of the resulting internal fit between recurring CSR initiatives and business practices. (shrink)

The current issue of the Zeitschrift für Medien- und Kulturforschung presents a discussion of social media's future. Geert Lovink and Stefan Heidenreich debate the sense and non-sense of network-critique in light of the internet's modified usage and perception, which is commonly labeled Web 2.0. Lovink is critical about the increasing tendency towards monopolization in Web 2.0. Users, he contends, become thrilled by walled gardens , which are presented to them by big companies. Independent of the question whether the need (...) for practical information and the prevalence of economical interests is understandable or not, Lovink is most of all concerned with artistic alternatives and an activist usage of the nets. According to him, it is time for developers, programmers, freaks and nerds of all nations to become conscious of and active against the dark sides of economical and political control over the internet. Heidenreich, on the other hand, is skeptical. In contrast to the project of network-critique, he pursues a rigorously medial approach, which presents itself as unimpressed by ethical or engaged observations of social media. In his view, the heroization of hackers and nerds is informed by Science Fiction and nostalgia, both of which miss Reality 2.0. Heidenreich asserts that the internet's new generation, which has grown up with the new media, is not particularly interested in network-critique, but uses the given internetservices in various ways. German In der aktuellen Ausgabe der Zeitschrift für Medien- und Kulturforschung wird über die Zukunft der Social Media gestritten. Geert Lovink und Stefan Heidenreich debattieren über den Sinn und Unsinn von Netzkritik angesichts einer veränderten Nutzung und Wahrnehmung des Internets, die sich hinter dem Schlagwort Web 2.0 verbirgt. Lovink sieht die zunehmende Tendenz zur Monopolisierung im Web 2.0 kritisch. Die Nutzer lassen sich von walled gardens begeistern, die Großunternehmen ihnen vorsetzen. Netzkritik solle sich daher nicht in der Frage erschöpfen, wie man Facebook und Twitter am besten nutzen kann, sondern sich mit echten Alternativen im Netz auseinandersetzen. Unabhängig davon, wie nachvollziehbar der Bedarf an praktischen Informationen und die Dominanz ökonomischer Interessen ist, geht es Lovink vor allem um künstlerische Alternativen und eine aktivistische Nutzung der Netze. Es sei an der Zeit, dass Entwickler, Programmierer, Freaks und Nerds aller Nationen sich die dunklen Seiten der ökonomisch-staatlichen Kontrolle des Internets bewusst machen und dagegen aktiv werden. Heidenreich ist dagegen skeptisch. Im Gegensatz zum Projekt der Netzkritik verfolgt er einen strikt medialen Ansatz, der sich gegenüber einer ethischen oder engagierten Beobachtung sozialer Medien kühl gibt. Die Heroisierung von Hackern und Nerds ist aus seiner Sicht von Science Fiction und Nostalgie geprägt, die an der Realität 2.0 vorbeigeht. Die neue Internetgeneration, die mit dem Medium aufgewachsen ist, habe gar kein ausgeprägtes Interesse an Netzkritik, sondern nutze die gegebenen Netzwerkfunktionen auf unterschiedliche Weise. (shrink)