Search news
Most searched tags
What policy makers need to realise about scientists’ professional judgement
Published: Friday 19 June 2009
‘[T]he public tends to focus on the benefits — rather than potential environmental and health risks — when making decisions about nanotechnology regulation, whereas scientists mainly focus on potential risks and economic values.’ This is one of the conclusions of a study, entitled ‘Of risks and regulations: how leading U.S. nanoscientists form policy stances about nanotechnology’, which aimed to explore the relationship between nanoscientists’ risk and benefit perceptions and their support for nanotech regulation. The study, conducted by researchers from the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Arizona State University (ASU), used data survey questionnaires filled out by 363 of the most highly cited and most active U.S.-affiliated scientists in the nanotechnology field.
‘We think that nanoscientists view regulations as protections for the public, and that's part of the reason why they focus on the potential risks,’ says Corley, the Lincoln Professor of Public Policy, Ethics and Emerging Technologies in ASU's School of Public Affairs in an interview on the University of Wisconsin-Madison website. ‘On the other hand, the public seems to think of nanotechnology regulations as restricting their access to new products and other beneficial aspects of nanotechnology.’
‘This says less about scientists than it does about the lack of conclusive data about risks related to nanotechnology,’ says Scheufele, a life sciences communications professor at UW-Madison. ‘Policymakers need to realize that when they ask scientists to give them advice about inconclusive findings, they will get both their professional judgment and their personal views.’
The paper concludes ‘that nanoscientists are more supportive of regulating nanotechnology when they perceive higher levels of risks; yet, their perceived benefits about nanotechnology do not significantly impact their support for nanotech regulation.’
The researchers also found ‘some gender and disciplinary differences among the nanoscientists. Males are less supportive of nanotech regulation than their female peers and materials scientists are more supportive of nanotechnology regulation than scientists in other fields.’
Follow these links to read the full interview, or to access the full paper, published in the Journal of Nanoparticle Research (online publication: 17th June 2009; full paper available to subscribers only).