What is the problem? A literature review on challenges facing the communication of nanotechnology to the public

Abstract

Ethical and societal issues concerning justice, safety, risks, and benefits are well-established topics in the discourses of nanotechnology innovation and development. That nanotechnology innovation should be socially and ethically responsible is generally accepted by scientists, policymakers, regulators, and industry, and the idea of public involvement and communication is part and parcel of the conceptualization of responsible technology development. This paper systematically reviews the social science research literature accumulated between 2002 and 2018 on the communication of nanotechnology. A critical and constructivist perspective on policy problems guides the analysis. Two questions are asked of this literature: what problems are identified regarding the communication of nanotechnology to the public? How can these problems be managed and/or resolved? Three different problem themes are identified: the public, societal institutions, and nanotechnology itself. While for some identified problems, there are corresponding solutions; in other instances, there is little alignment between problems and solutions. In conclusion, the paper recommends that in communicating nanotechnology to the public: (i) the objectives of communication should be defined; (ii) previous research should be used responsibly; (iii) communication strategies should be adapted to the context; and (iv) effort should not be spent trying to develop a generic framework for communication.

Risk and benefit perceptions of human enhancement technologies: The effects of Facebook comments on the acceptance of nanodesigned food

“…Among the participants high on initial dread, those who read the mixed set of comments scored highest on risk perception. This might perhaps be due to the uncertainty or negative affect evoked by the comments of mixed valence (Boholm & Larsson, ). Contrary to expectation, among participants high on initial dread, those who read the negative comments scored lowest.…”

“…Research showed attitudes toward nanotechnology to be moderately positive across many areas of application. Benefits were expected to occur predominantly in relation to medicines and health, and technological development, rather than to agriculture and food (Boholm & Larsson, 2019;Capon et al, 2015;Conti, Satterfield, & Harthorn, 2011;Frewer, 2017;Frewer et al, 2014;Giles, Kuznesof, Clark, Hubbard, & Frewer, 2015;Priest, 2009;Siegrist et al, 2007;Yue, Zhao, Cummings, & Kuzma, 2015). Food-related applications were also more likely to raise societal concern than other applications, and the application of nanotechnology in food was perceived to be less beneficial than in food packaging (Capon et al, 2015;Siegrist et al, 2007;Siegrist et al, 2008).…”

“…Another reasoning is that information of mixed valence contains contradictory elements. As contradictory information leads to uncertainty (Boholm & Larsson, 2019) and as uncertainty increases risk perception, one might hypothesize that information of mixed valence would have a similar effect as negative information. To answer this question, we conducted an experiment involving a fictitious Facebook page on the application of nanodesigned food, that included four comments beneath a broad question that differed in valence (all positive, all negative, mixed [2 positive, 2 negative]).…”

“…Another reasoning is that information of mixed valence contains contradictory elements. As contradictory information leads to uncertainty (Boholm & Larsson, ) and as uncertainty increases risk perception, one might hypothesize that information of mixed valence would have a similar effect as negative information.…”

Examining the Invariance of a Measurement Model of Teachers’ Awareness and Exposure Levels to Nanoscience by Using the Covariance Structure Approach

“…However, describing a world people cannot see and physically interact needs enhancement of understanding these emerging technologies using science communication/citizen-science to reach its full revolutionary potential. Public attitudes, and reflexive governance are essential to public acceptance of NSNT innovation (Boholm & Larsson, 2019). It is one of the most rapidly growing/broad multidisciplinary fields in science, technology, life sciences and engineering research/innovation and is founded on the convergence of traditional disciplines to create, study, and apply materials at the nanoscale (Holland et al, 2018).…”