Anticipating the perceived risk of nanotechnologies

Abstract

Understanding emerging trends in public perceptions of nanomaterials is critically important for those who regulate risks. A number of surveys have explored public perceptions of their risks and benefits. In this paper we meta-analyse these surveys to assess the extent to which the following four hypotheses derived from previous studies of new technologies might be said to be valid for nanotechnologies: risk aversion will prevail over benefit appreciation; an increase in knowledge will not result in reduced aversion to risks; judgements will be malleable and subject to persuasion given riskcentric information; and contextual, psychometric and attitudinal predictors of perceived risk from prior studies can help anticipate future perceptions of nanotechnologies. We find that half the public has at least some familiarity with nanotechnology, and those who perceive greater benefits outnumber those who perceive greater risks by 3 to 1. However, a large minority of those surveyed (44%) is unsure, suggesting that risk judgements are highly malleable. Nanotechnology risk perceptions also appear to contradict some long-standing findings. In particular, unfamiliarity with nanotechnology is, contrary to expectations, not strongly associated with risk aversion and reduced 'knowledge deficits' are correlated with positive perceptions in this early and controversy-free period. Psychometric variables, trust and affect continue to drive risk perceptions in this new context, although the influence of both trust and affect is mediated, even reversed, by demographic and cultural variables. Given the potential malleability of perceptions, novel methods for understanding future public responses to nanotechnologies will need to be developed.

Is the risk from nanomaterials perceived as different from the risk of ‘chemicals’ by the Australian public?

“…7 Specifically, being male, young, white, educated, familiar with nanotechnologies and trusting of regulators have all been linked to lower risk perception of nanotechnologies. 7 However, we are unaware of any publication that has examined the perceptions of nanomaterials and chemicals in the manner described in this study. In this study, we found that, overall, the general public perceives chemicals as riskier than nanomaterials, with the exception of their use in medicines.…”

“…7 Australian regulators of nanomaterials have suggested that nanomaterials should be framed as chemicals. [8][9][10] It is important to determine the consequences that this framing may have on public perceptions.…”

Innovative and responsible governance of nanotechnology for societal development

“…2 Research on ethical, legal, and social issues is vital to understanding how to create social and environmental value in the development of science and technology (e.g., see Hamlett et al 2008;Pidgeon et al 2009a, b;Satterfield et al 2009;Scheufele and Corley 2008;Corley and Scheufele 2010), which includes development of processes to address the diversity of views across different publics.…”

Innovative and Responsible Governance of Nanotechnology for Societal Development

“…2). A meta-analysis of 22 public surveys conducted from 2002 to 2009 in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Japan found ongoing low levels of public familiarity with nanotechnology, with benefits viewed as outweighing risks by 3 to 1, but also a large (44%) minority who had not yet made up their minds about benefits or risks (Satterfield et al 2009). …”

“…Develop operational aspects of anticipatory and participatory governance (e.g., Roco, 2008;Barben et al 2008;Satterfield et al 2009;Sclove, 2010) Transition from a research-centric to a demand/user/application-centric focus J Nanopart Res -Support access of industry to data bases, research projects, user facilities and international collaboration -Provide education and supporting tolls for the introduction of nanotechnology for economical benefit and better paying jobs, to increase penetration of nanotechnology in both emerging and traditional industries.…”