Folie 1

1
Preparing NANOTECHNOLOGY for Politics
Copenhagen, September 2005
2
preparing

• microscopists prepare samples for analysis
• nanoscale researchers, science policy makers,
  foresight analysts, ethicists, journalists, and
  other actors prepare nanotechnology for public
  discussion

3
NANOTECHNOLOGY

• preparing nanotechnology
• cant be done
• for obvious reasons (hybris vs. humility/Sheila
  Jasanoff)
• must be done
• because NANOTECHNOLOGY is formless, amorphous,
  unwieldy, monstrous
• everyone does it

4
Too big to handle?

• It doesnt matter whether we define
• nanotechnology manipulating/positioning atoms at
  will, thus sooner or later molecular
  manufacturing, global abundance, end of work,
  infinite consumption, nothing will stay the same
• (today we are in principle in a position to
  construct new materials atom by atom and molecule
  by molecule, analogously to building a model out
  of Lego bricks)

5
Too big to handle?

• or instead
• nanotechnology the study of phenomena and
  manipulation of materials at atomic, molecular,
  and supramolecular scales, where properties
  differ significantly from those at a larger
  scale
• (Due to the enabling character of nanosciences
  and nanotechnologies advances can be made in
  virtually all technology sectors)

6
Too big too handle?

• The substantial visionary and the empty enabling
  conceptions
• cannot be distinguished as short or long term, as
  speculative/false and sober/true
• neither is bounded
• both present hopeful monstrosities (Joel
  Mokyr) Monstrosity doesnt refer to monster,
  but to a contraption or entity which cant do
  very much yet. Like a baby. And also like a baby,
  it is hopeful because it embodies potential,
  promises. (Arie Rip)

7
Managing monstrous unwieldiness?

• it is essential that this is done on the basis
  of recent insights into the unpredictable nature
  of the process of innovation
• one approach understand social dynamics, analyze
  rhetorical strategies, for example how does
  nanotechnology become defined by various actors
  in the context of different time-frames (Selin)
• another approach show how three different
  conceptions of nanotechnology open overlapping
  spaces for political action and the importance
  of clearly positioning oneself

8
Nanotechnology in the singular

• Nanotechnology as a template for envisioning the
  future (Arie Rip NANOTECHNOLOGY as ideograph).
• That template can be suggestive of utopian/
  dystopian visions or it can invite social
  imagination,
• it can suggest technological determinism (this is
  coming!) or allow for social shaping, moratoria.
• Nanotechnology is a generic technology, able to
  pave the way for a new industrial revolution,
  equal to those ushered in by the introduction of
  the steam engine, electrification and computer
  technology.

9
Nanotechnology in the singular

• Nanotechnology as a template or ideograph
• has nothing to do with actual research, with more
  or less realism it is not about innovation
• but has everything to do with the kind of
  technical future we imagine or fear, it is about
  who we are and want to become
• it is about the possible breakdown of central
  assumptions We are mortal, only living
  creatures think, human life is invaluable, the
  earth will remain habitable, etc. (George
  Whitesides)

10
Nanotechnology in the singular

• Public discourse manages unwieldiness by
  entertaining it.
• Since it is not about actual research and
  development, it is not right or wrong about
  nanotechnology.
• Drexlers, Rocos, EUs, Danish promises and
  their threat that this is coming! are on a par
  (grey goo scenario, cascading effects,
  natures nanotechnology the virus are
  interchangeable).
• There are no ethical issues other than those
  governing public discourse (for example,
  respect).
• NANOTECHNOLOGY is out of the hands of science
  and science policy.

11
Nano as a Key Technology

• Key or enabling technologies designates a
  manner of doing research (somewhat familiar from
  synthetic chemistry, materials science).
• The primary objective ... is to promote real
  industrial breakthroughs .... This requires
  changes in emphasis in Community research from
  short to longer term as well as in innovation,
  which must move from incremental to radical
  innovation and breakthrough strategies, while
  emphasising an integrating approach. (FP6
  Workprogramme)

12
Nano as a Key Technology

• Key or enabling technologies
• research in the design mode contextualized
  within projects that have long-term application
  perspectives (fundamental science research is
  replaced by fundamental technology research)
• open to numerous applications, essentially
  underdetermined (as opposed to nuclear power, war
  on cancer, man on the moon, artificial
  intelligence)
• providing keys but which doors should be
  opened?

13
Key or Fundamental Technology

• The openness of nanotechnology emerges also from
  a philosophy of science analysis of its interests
  and methods. The Danish Foresight report likens
  it prematurely to Pasteur or Hansen.

14
Key or Fundamental Technology

• We acquired the capability for controlled
  growth of carbon nanotubes on a silicon substrate
  surely, this is of enormous practical
  importance.

Closeness to application
??
NT
??
Interest in acquiring basic capabilities and
achieving control in the exotic territory of
the nanocosm.
15
Key or Fundamental Technology

• Further qualifications are needed Regarding
  particles, coatings, or fabrics nanotechnology
  has achieved much that is Edisonian already.
  But as the history of materials science shows,
  only a few individuals want to explore
  fundamental issues regarding nanostructured
  materials.

Closeness to application
Development and critique of fundamental theories
??
Basic theories as tools for understanding novel
properties
NT
??
Interest in acquiring basic capabilities and
achieving control in the exotic territory of
the nanocosm.
16
Social Imagination for Nano

• Key technologies offer unique opportunities for
  public engagement, for the discovery of local or
  niche capabilities and opportunites, for public
  and private investment (and for citizens to
  become vested).
• Thus, Danish nanotechnology centers as innovation
  incubators as research design centers as contexts
  of mediation where supply push of technological
  visions is matched with demands?

17
Social Imagination for Nano

• Science policy, foresight, upstream technology
  assessment, public engagement manages
  unwieldiness by editing proposals for
  technological solutions to societal problems (and
  by matching national capabilities, interests,
  demands).
• A creative, proactive role for ethics we need to
  learn how to wish well (Aladdin).

18
Issues, Implications, Impacts?

• By definition, key or enabling technologies have
  vast potential but no specific implications.
• It is illusory to address societal and ethical
  issues on this level.
• Doing so anyway is mere posturing, creates a
  false sense of security and cannot go beyond the
  obvious
• Familiar-sounding impacts (nanoparticle toxicity)
  are addressed in familar ways, unknown risks must
  be considered.

19
Issues, Implications, Impacts?

• In this respect, the Danish Foresight Report is
  more honest (by saying less) than the European
  Action Plan.
• Alongside the expected favourable opportunities
  and consequences, considerable uncertainties and
  new and partially unknown hazards are also
  attached to nanotechnology. Any negative aspects
  should therefore be carefully considered and
  dealt with in the individual activities.
• It is important that applications that are
  evidently dangerous should be halted or subjected
  to regulation with strict toxicological controls.
  This is very important in order to maintain
  confidence that the widespread use of
  nanotechnology will not have undesirable
  consequences.

20
Issues, Implications, Impacts?

• In contrast, the European Action Plan outlines in
  detail an effective dialogue with all
  stakeholders.
• But instead of drawing on specific opportunities
  for public engagement in the design of research,
• it outlines what might as well be a campaign for
  nuclear power
• the public to be informed about nanotechnology
• its attitudes measured
• impacts and risks will be studied
• where is the dialogue?

21
nano-technologies

• After NANOTECHNOLOGY (in the singular), nano as
  key technology, third and last nano-technologies
  (in the plural).
• Managing unwieldiness by focusing on one
  specific technology at a time
• each with its own potential benefits, societal
  impacts, ethical and cultural implications.

22
nano-technologies

• What do these three nanotechnological
  possibilities have in common?
• Development and design of biocompatible materials
  for drug delivery, solving problems of slow
  release, passage of the blood-brain barrier, etc.
• Development of nanobiotechnology for the repair
  of defective neurons by the application of
  electrically conducting nanostructures.
• Practical application of alloys or ceramic
  materials that crystallise with very small grain
  size (high strength and good workability) for
  high-value products, from the micro to the macro
  scale, from implants to sports equipment.

23
nano-technologies

• What do these three nanotechnological
  possibilities have in common?
• each involves more or less direct control of
  molecular structure (this was a weak or trivial
  common denominator before nano, why should it be
  strong and significant now?)
• each has benefits, impacts, ethical issues of its
  own
• the development of each is an open-ended
  experiment where society is the laboratory we
  need to be vested in order to share the risk

24
nano-technologies

• If they dont have anything significant in common
  why lump them together?
• National Nanotechnology Initiatives should
  prepare transition to sectoral nano-technologies
• now one unit for funding development of medical
  lab-on-a-chip, stain-resistant fabrics,
  artificial bacteria for environmental cleanup,
  nanotags for product identification
• why not? one unit to fund modelling of global
  warming, nano-sensors for environmental
  monitoring, artificial bacteria for environmental
  cleanup, social attitudes and incentives for
  environmentally responsible manufacturing etc.

25
nano-technologies

• One way to read the Danish Technology Foresight
  report (and others)
• Nano as a key technology needs to be oriented
  towards specific projects and affords opportunity
  to build on local strengths, to meet local
  demands, etc.
• Thus, an attempt is made to identify specific
  technological research programs.
• But under the spell and pull of nanotechnology
  the specificity gets lost again seven very broad
  high-priority technology areas that exclude very
  little

26
Conclusion

• NANOTECHNOLOGY (in the singular) Public
  discourse manages unwieldiness by entertaining
  it. An important conversation with little
  immediate relevance for science policy.
• Nano as a Key Technology Science policy,
  public engagement manages unwieldiness by
  editing proposals for technological solutions to
  societal problems. A unique opportunity for
  responsible and productive design of research.
• nano-technologies For the consideration of
  issues, implications, impacts we need to manage
  unwieldiness by focusing on one specific
  technology at a time.

Three conceptions acting together.