Scientific Communication in History

Turney, Jon

doi:10.1016/s0160-9327(00)01350-8

Cited by 2 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…8 Given certain countries are leaders of nanotechnology innovation it stands to reason that certain countries be 'left behind' [50][51][52][53][54]. The previously outlined pressure to be at the forefront of nanotechnology innovation is often driven by a belief that if a country neglects nanotechnology it will be in an unenviable position later on [54,55], having to try to "catch-up" [53]. According to Tanthapanichakoon, even a country with endogenous nanotechnology capabilities could fall behind if it did not seek to constantly develop its research position [54].…”

Section: Understanding the Nano-divide And Its Constructsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Turney and Berwick respectively spoke of a "cultural perception" and "natural tendency" to expect that nanotechnology will be a 'developed world technology' [53,55]. Interviewees such as Chirachanchai provided support for this hypothesis by speaking of the "advanced countries" assuming leadership roles in global nanotechnology innovation [66].…”

Section: The South Left Behindmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interviewees such as Chirachanchai provided support for this hypothesis by speaking of the "advanced countries" assuming leadership roles in global nanotechnology innovation [66]. Additionally, there was a belief that "developing countries are going to miss the boat… [and not take] advantage of nanotechnology to exploit their local, competitive advantages…" [55]. Dutta said that if Southern nanotechnology is to face barriers they will be barriers of Northern perception, commenting: "…some of the people may think 'what the hell can you do in nanotechnology in Thailand'" [67].…”

Section: The South Left Behindmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Others spoke of the barrier of internal cynicism. They suggested that even in a country making efforts to become active in global nanotechnology innovation, there is potential for people to think "it is just too difficult..." [55], or that the research is "too late" to catch the North, leading to the cessation of activity [66].…”

Section: The South Left Behindmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to many interviewees, lack of awareness and understanding about nanotechnology fits within a bigger picture in the South where nanotechnology innovation is 'prioritised out' by more immediate needs [55] to do with the "basic requirements of life" [58]. In this respect, Kanok-Nukulchai explained that nanotechnology is perceived as a "luxurious" investment, particularly in light of its embryonic state of development and the long-term nature of 'returns'…”

Section: The South Left Behindmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Southern Roles in Global Nanotechnology Innovation: Perspectives from Thailand and Australia

Maclurcan

2009

Nanoethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term 'nano-divide' has become a catch-phrase for describing various kinds of global nanotechnology inequities. However, there has been little in-depth exploration as to what the global nanodivide really means, and limited commentary on its early nature. Furthermore, the literature often presents countries from the Global South as 'passive' agents in global nanotechnology innovation-without the ability to develop endogenous nanotechnology capabilities. Yet others point to nanotechnology providing opportunities for the South to play new roles in the global research and development process. In this paper I report on the findings of a qualitative study that involved the perspectives of 31 Thai and Australian key informants, from a broad range of fields. The study was supplemented by a survey of approximately 10% of the Thai nanotechnology research community at the time. I first explore how the global nano-divide is understood and the implication of the divide's constructs in terms of the roles to be played by various countries in global nanotechnology innovation. I then explore the potential nature of Southern passivity and barriers and challenges facing Southern endogenous innovation, as well as an in-depth consideration of the proposition that Southern countries could be 'active' agents in the nanotechnology process. I argue that it is the nano-divide relating to nanotechnology research and development capabilities that is considered fundamental to nanotechnology's Southern outcomes. The research suggests that Southern countries will encounter many of the traditional barriers to engaging with emerging technology as well as some new barriers relating to the nature of nanotechnology itself. Finally, the research suggests that nanotechnology may offer new opportunities for Southern countries to enter the global research and development picture.

show abstract

Section: Understanding the Nano-divide And Its Constructsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The South Left Behindmentioning

confidence: 99%