Managing Nanotechnology Risks in Vulnerable Populations: A Case for Gender Diversity

Abstract

Funded by the National Science Foundation and the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN), this study asks qualitatively analyzes interviews with 48 nanoscientist users at four NNIN facilities. The main research questions were: (1) Do nanotechnologies pose unique social and ethical concerns?; (2) how are the risks associated with nanotechnology distributed among different human populations?; (3) what are specific policy steps that can be used to manage such risks? This study purposefully oversampled female scientists to correct for the historical underrepresentation of women in the nanotechnology workforce. By amplifying the voice of this science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce minority, the policy discussion contained herein better reflects the concerns of the general population. The results, analyzed with the aid of qualitative data analysis software, yield interesting differences in risk characterization among the scientists and innovative policy suggestions for the nanoscience community and regulators alike.

Politics and policy of Artificial Intelligence

“…Exactly ten years ago, Review of Policy Research published a special issue on one of the main emerging technologies of the time, namely, nanotechnology (Guston, 2013). Reading it today and comparing it with discussions about AI, we encounter a number of similar themes including awareness of and engagement with socio‐political aspects of emerging technology (Guston, 2013), interrogation of agenda‐setting and policy shaping in response to societal concerns (Anderson & Slade, 2013; Michelson, 2013), risks to vulnerable populations (Savath & Brainard, 2013) and scrutiny over industry's responsibility in the development of new technology (Shelley‐Egan & Davies, 2013). At the same time, we also observe that, with wide‐ranging applications of AI, the topics of politics and power in the context of emerging technologies have become even more salient.…”

Analysis of Environmental Risk Perceptions and Scores of Preservice Science Teachers in Terms of Some Variables

“…"Risk perception" is defined as sensory perceptions or information about risks and dangers adopted by the individual, processed in the mind, and evaluated (Renn, 2002). Many fields in academic literature have studies in risk perception, including the fields of various accidents (Andersson, 2011;DeJoy, 1992;Rundmo, 1996), tourism (Türker, 2013;Yanık, 2014), economy (Kahyaoğlu, 2011;Tuncay, 2008), psychology and sociology (Geçer, 2014;Gökulu, 2011;Koçak, 2010), and nanotechnology (Güzeloğlu, 2015;O'Brien & Cummins, 2011;Savath & Brainard, 2013;Siegrist & Keller, 2011). These risk perception studies can be related to environmental risks and environmental risk perception.…”

Introduction to the Special Issue: Nanotechnology and Political Science

“…Vivien Savath and Suzanne Brainard () approach the issue of nanotechnology risk from a different perspective than either Corley et al. or Brown and Kuzma.…”