• UCSB_GradPost twitter avatar
    Grad Students' Guide to a Successful Resume https://t.co/XA6OajtaJZ #UCSB
    4 hours 58 min ago
  • ArtsandLectures twitter avatar
    The @BanffMtnFest lineup is up! Here's the full list for Feb. 24, including Bluehue: https://t.co/5R91c7ItYm https://t.co/NVduem5pVl
    7 hours 59 min ago
  • ArtsandLectures twitter avatar
    The @BanffMtnFest lineup is up! Here's the full list for Feb. 23, including Climbing Ice: https://t.co/8VL9mAPi2O https://t.co/DOSTswtF0n
    8 hours 2 min ago
  • ucsantabarbara twitter avatar
    UCSB econ department has played a major role in helping graduating seniors find jobs. https://t.co/QvwiPfLa7U https://t.co/46pkwVEgtG
    8 hours 45 min ago
  • brenucsb twitter avatar
    RT @NOAADebris: Fishermen make most of closed crabbing season removing derelict pots: https://t.co/dnUPP7qdBO
    9 hours 46 min ago
  • brenucsb twitter avatar
    RT @jane_black: Crop insurance to ensure diversity. A new program moves ag in the right direction. https://t.co/uCHbJ5qKvv
    9 hours 50 min ago
  • ucsantabarbara twitter avatar
    @RaquelABC15 Great to have you back!
    10 hours 9 min ago
  • ucsantabarbara twitter avatar
    @JulieCohenUCSB Thanks for sharing that, and for noting the spelling correction. Our apologies to Professor Lubin.
    10 hours 24 min ago
  • ucsantabarbara twitter avatar
    #UCSB #Physics professor Philip Lubin discusses his innovative work. https://t.co/fAZZVuNf9d
    10 hours 40 min ago
  • ArtsandLectures twitter avatar
    Discover the inestimable talent of @TaylorMacNYC through A 24-Decade History of Popular Music https://t.co/lephouCBDS
    10 hours 57 min ago
  • brenucsb twitter avatar
    Bren partner .@EDFOceans on territorial use rights fisheries (TURFs); sound mgt for local fisheries. https://t.co/9skTEYKAk1
    12 hours 46 min ago
  • ucsantabarbara twitter avatar
    Truly out of this world! #UCSB #Physics professor Phillip Dubin discusses his innovative concept. https://t.co/j4i1mUWLC0
    13 hours 11 min ago
  • brenucsb twitter avatar
    RT @NYTScience:Join 100,000+ people this Pres weekend to count millions of birds https://t.co/39QA1rPBM5
    13 hours 46 min ago
  • ucsantabarbara twitter avatar
    #UCSB physicist explains how math used in sewing & knitting also describes cosmic curvature in theory of relativity. https://t.co/5kXO45Wus2
    14 hours 15 min ago
  • brenucsb twitter avatar
    RT @Interior: .@POTUS protects #California desert w/ 3 new national monuments #FindYourPark https://t.co/1Gm1GW6UWm
    14 hours 46 min ago

People in the U.S. and the U.K. Show Strong Similarities in their Attitudes Toward Nanotechnologies, According to a New Study

Tuesday, December 9, 2008 - 16:00
Santa Barbara, CA

The results of a new U.S.–U.K. study published in this week's journal Nature Nanotechnology show that ordinary people in both countries hold very positive views of nanotechnologies and what the future of these technologies might bring. Participants in both countries indicated a significantly higher comfort level with energy applications of nanotechnologies than with applications used in health treatments.

Nanotechnology –– the science and technology of exceptionally small materials and processes –– is among the latest new technologies to raise public concerns about health and environmental risks.

The article reports on the first study of its kind. It involved four workshops, held at the same time in Santa Barbara and Cardiff, Wales. Workshop participants deliberated about two broad types of nanotechnology applications –– energy and health.

The study was carried out in the United States by the NSF Center for Nanotechnology in Society at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and in the United Kingdom by a collaborating research team from the School of Psychology at Cardiff University.

Barbara Herr Harthorn, director of the UCSB Center, led the interdisciplinary, international research team. She noted that one of the unexpectedly strong findings of the study was that the type of nanotechnology mattered greatly to the participants. She said participants in both countries viewed energy applications of nanotechnology more positively than health technologies, in terms of risks and benefits.

"Much of the public perception research on nanotechnology in the U.S. and abroad has focused on a generic ‘nanotechnology' risk object," said Harthorn. "This work moves to a higher level of specificity and in doing so finds striking differences in views of benefit depending on application context.

"More specifically, perceived urgency of need for new energy technologies is strongly associated with high perceived benefit and lower risk perception, regardless of what materials, processes, or environmental risks are associated," she said.

Nick Pidgeon, who led the research team at the School of Psychology at Cardiff University, explained, "The Royal Society's 2004 report on nanotechnologies recommended public engagement and deliberation on nanotechnology risks and benefits. This study represents the first ever such public engagement exercise to be simultaneously conducted in two different countries."

The results include the following key findings:

 

  • Overall participants in both countries focused on the benefits rather than the risks of nanotechnologies, and also exhibited a high degree of optimism regarding the future contribution of new technologies to society. This pattern was very similar in the workshops in both the United States and Britain.

 

 

  • Some small cross-country differences were present. U.K. participants were generally more aware of recent technological controversies and risk governance failures (examples include genetically modified organisms, bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), and foot and mouth disease), leading some to voice specific concerns about future nanotechnology risks.

 

 

  • Greater differences were observed when participants (irrespective of their country) discussed the different applications. In particular, new technology developments for energy applications were seen as unproblematic, while questions of human health were felt to raise moral and ethical dilemmas. As was found by the U.K. Royal Society in 2004 for Britain, in the current study participants in both the U.K. and U.S. questioned whether those responsible (governments, industry, scientists) could be fully trusted to control nanotechnologies in the future.

 

The research was funded primarily by the National Science Foundation with additional support to Cardiff University provided by the Leverhulme Trust.

The NSF Center for Nanotechnology in Society at UCSB (www.cns.ucsb.edu) was formed in 2006, and serves as a national research and education center, a network hub among researchers and educators concerned with societal issues and nanotechnologies, and a resource base for studying these issues.

For more information,

To reach Barbara Herr Harthorn please contact Barbara S. Gilkes at
(805) 893-3995 or bgilkes@cns.ucsb.edu.

To reach Professor Nick Pidgeon please contact Victoria Dando at the Cardiff University press office: tel: +44 29 2087 9074 or dandov2@cardiff.ac.uk.

The NSF Center for Nanotechnology in Society at UCSB

After reading this article I feel