How do laypeople perceive uncertainties about environmental health risks? How do risk-related cognitions and emotions influence these uncertainties, and what roles do sociodemographic and contextual factors, risk judgments, and information exposures play? This study explores these questions using secondary analyses of survey data. Results suggest that uncertainty reflects individual-level emotions and cognitions, but may also be shaped by a variety of social and contextual factors. Emotions (worry and anger) are strongly associated with perceived uncertainty, and perceived lack of knowledge and perceived likelihood of becoming ill are weakly associated with it. Several demographic variables, information exposures, and risk judgment variables affect perceived uncertainty indirectly, primarily through perceived knowledge and emotions. These findings raise a variety of questions about the complex and dynamic interactions among risk contexts, socioeconomic factors, communication processes, perceived knowledge, emotions, and perceived uncertainties about risks
Citizen engagement in scientific and technological issues is in vogue in recent years, and a variety of projects intended to engage citizens in science and technology is occurring worldwide. However, few academics and governments attempting to “engage in engagement” are clear about their goals and desired outcomes, and whether or not the processes they facilitate are likely to meet these ends. What are the goals—explicit and implicit—of institutionally sponsored projects that aim to engage lay citizens in science and technology? Are these exercises likely to meet these goals? and what kinds of processes could nurture more meaningful engagement, what are the barriers to this kind of engagement, and how might these barriers be overcome? Based on the experience of the authors, this article explores these questions and provides 10 recommendations for more meaningful engagement of citizens in science and technology.
Research suggests that deliberative experiences may improve citizens' perceptions of their abilities to participate meaningfully in political and societal issues. Previous studies, however, have not looked in depth at citizens' perceptions after participating in consensus conferences. In this case study, drawing on in-depth interviews with participants of a consensus conference on nanotechnology, we consider the following questions: 1) How do citizen participants feel the consensus conference experience affected their knowledge and efficacy related to participation in nanotechnology issues? 2) Which aspects of the conference (if any) do citizens think shaped their knowledge and efficacy? 3) Are citizens motivated to engage in future participatory mechanisms related to nanotechnology issues, and why or why not? Although our case study is exploratory, it suggests that even if consensus conferences have little or no influence on policy or policymakers, they may empower citizens by improving their perceived abilities to participate meaningfully in technoscientific issues.
Nanotechnologies have been called the "Next Industrial Revolution." At the same time, scientists are raising concerns about the potential health and environmental risks related to the nano-sized materials used in nanotechnologies. Analyses suggest that current U.S. federal regulatory structures are not likely to adequately address these risks in a proactive manner. Given these trends, the premise of this paper is that state and local-level agencies will likely deal with many "end-of-pipe" issues as nanomaterials enter environmental media without prior toxicity testing, federal standards, or emissions controls. In this paper we (1) briefly describe potential environmental risks and benefits related to emerging nanotechnologies; (2) outline the capacities of the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act to address potential nanotechnology risks, and how risk data gaps challenge these regulations; (3) outline some of the key data gaps that challenge state-level regulatory capacities to address nanotechnologies' potential risks, using Wisconsin as a case study; and (4) discuss advantages and disadvantages of state versus federal approaches to nanotechnology risk regulation. In summary, we suggest some ways government agencies can be better prepared to address nanotechnology risk knowledge gaps and risk management.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.