Governing nanosafety in Austria – Striving for neutrality in the NanoTrust project
New and emerging technologies such as nanotechnology and advanced materials are characterized by manifold areas of application and high uncertainty, making the anticipation of effects difficult. Since 2007, the Austrian technology assessment project “NanoTrust” is dedicated to assisting policy-maker...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Technological forecasting & social change 2019-02, Vol.139, p.23-31 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | New and emerging technologies such as nanotechnology and advanced materials are characterized by manifold areas of application and high uncertainty, making the anticipation of effects difficult. Since 2007, the Austrian technology assessment project “NanoTrust” is dedicated to assisting policy-makers in issues surrounding the safety of nanotechnology applications. The choice was made early on to build and maintain a governance network and to take a more active role in contributing to pre-emptive risk management and the initiation of new processes. Characterized by a dominant risk frame and a broad scope, the Austrian nanotechnology discourse places a distinct focus on scientific expertise and strong interdisciplinary efforts. Ten years into the project, the Austrian nano governance network has shown signs of undergoing an institutionalisation process and we reflect on how we have sought to maintain our neutrality and independence as TA practitioners. This exercise in reflection seeks to gain insights on the strategies employed in practice when shaping technologies at stages of high uncertainty and engaging closely with actors in governance networks over longer periods of time.
•TA-project NanoTrust has high proximity to the Austrian nano risk governance system.•Project focus is on creation of reliable & publicly accessible knowledge on risk and safety issues.•This pro-active accompanying TA process relies strongly on communication efforts.•Institutionalisation of networks & processes can increase independence.•“Active” neutrality can be pursued through common good objectives. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0040-1625 1873-5509 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.06.024 |