The Risk Debate on Nanoparticles: Contribution to a Normalisation of the Science/Society Relationship?

Grunwald, Armin; Hocke, Peter

doi:10.1007/978-90-481-2834-1_9

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(Nordmann 2014, 93) In these short retrospects it is easy to recognize that the attribution of meaning in the early phase of nanotechnology was an incremental experimentation, shaped by conflicts and in part extremely diverging projections. Contrary to many fears that this discussion would result in a massive social rejection of nanotechnology, the normalization described above took place (Grunwald and Hocke-Bergler 2010). The gradual hermeneutic appropriation of nanotechnology likely made a major contribution to this.…”

Section: Observations From the Nanotech Debatementioning

confidence: 89%

The hermeneutic side of responsible research and innovation

Grunwald

2014

Journal of Responsible Innovation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Observations From the Nanotech Debatementioning

confidence: 89%

The hermeneutic side of responsible research and innovation

Grunwald

2014

Journal of Responsible Innovation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…From this perspective, nanotechnology became a pragmatic neighbor of new materials, new chemicals, and fine and ultrafine particles, far away from paradise-like or apocalyptic projections. This development demonstrates how a complete shift of assigned meaning was characterized by a 'normalisation' of nanotechnology (Grunwald and Hocke-Bergler 2010) while the assignments of more utopian meanings migrated to other fields such as human enhancement (Jotterand 2008) and Synthetic Biology (de Vriend 2006). Hence, the dominant meaning assigned to nanotechnology has varied considerably over time due to interventions into the hermeneutic circle, which was indeed a 'learning' one.…”

Section: Processing the Societal Meaning Of Technologymentioning

confidence: 95%

The objects of technology assessment. Hermeneutic extension of consequentialist reasoning

Grunwald

2019

Journal of Responsible Innovation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the beginning of this century, the established consequentialist approach of technology assessment (TA) has been seriously challenged by several new and emerging sciences and technologies (NEST). TA's established mode of assessing and evaluating the anticipated consequences and impacts of technology no longer works. The paper asks for the objects of TA to be assessed beyond consequentialism. It identifies the societal meaning attached to new technology as the core object of TA reasoning. This view brings the processes of generating, disseminating, and contesting the meaning assigned within the focus of TA. These processes will be modeled as hermeneutic circles with inputs and outputs, where competing offers of meaning enter the field, motivating modifications and enabling reflexive learning. This allows complementing the consequentialist approach of TA with hermeneutic investigation and reflection, as well as drawing several conclusions for TA, e.g. with respect to role concepts and the Control Dilemma.

show abstract

“…in the natural sciences, may struggle more to see such benefits [57], especially when public engagement requires comprehensive information about the field prior to the involvement, e.g. in nanotechnologies [58]. Additionally, public interest in such basic research may be limited.…”

Section: Research Priority Setting To Research Agenda Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limits and benefits of participatory agenda setting for research and innovation

Gudowsky

2021

Eur J Futures Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current governance of science, technology and innovation (STI) faces tough challenges to meet demands arising from complex issues such as societal challenges or targets, e.g. the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. For decades, scholars and civil society institutions have called for increased public participation in STI, and political institutions have been taking up the request to integrate engagement activities into their decision-making processes, at least in the form of consultations. Moving engagement in research and development further upstream makes early interventions and social shaping of technologies and innovation possible. Since research has also faced repeated requests towards taking on more responsibility for solving societal problems, engagement processes thus help in shaping research. Here, the earliest point for possible engagement can be found within the constituting phase of research agendas as topics, general lines of enquiry and targets are shaped in this phase. These are the boundaries in between which researchers later navigate. This article serves as introduction to this journal’s topical collection on participatory agenda setting for research and innovation (PASE). It provides a review of the literature on theory and practice of PASE activities, summarises the topical collection’s contributions regarding current international cases and analyses respective PASE limits and benefits, thereby promoting its conceptual and practical understanding.

show abstract

The Risk Debate on Nanoparticles: Contribution to a Normalisation of the Science/Society Relationship?

Cited by 5 publications

References 13 publications

The hermeneutic side of responsible research and innovation

The hermeneutic side of responsible research and innovation

The objects of technology assessment. Hermeneutic extension of consequentialist reasoning

Limits and benefits of participatory agenda setting for research and innovation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About