NanoDialogue Case Study

2nd CIPAST Training Workshop17 – 21 June 2007

Procida, Italy

Simon Joss & Katherine Ng

University of Westminster

Development of the NanoDialogue Project: March 2005 – February 2007

Attempted to establish an integrated process of communication & social debate within a European context, by providing information to raise awareness among publics regarding the latest developments in this field of research.Mohr, A. & Ng, K. (2007) NanoDialogue Citizens’ Feedback Assessment. pp. 7

The NanoDialogue Exhibition: eight accessible modules

• Objective: – to raise awareness among publics by

communicating scientific information & knowledge

– to pose E.L.S.E issues and challenges to the visitor

DevelopmentExhibition Game Workshop to design the content of the exhibition

The exhibition addressed the following issues:

- fact or fantasy- nano basic facts- how nano-systems are produced- who controls N&N- applications- risks and benefits

Common content

• Translated into national languages and regional dialects

• Each interactive module included:

– real objects

– hands-on exhibits

– multimedia and educational products

on N&N

– website for disseminating information

– locally organised events

– science demonstrations and debates

Displayed in science museums, science centres and public spaces

• Città della Scienza, Naples

• Bourgoin-Jallieu library

• Grenoble Minatec

• A hydro-electricity museum, Vaujany

• Technopolis, Mechelen

• Deutches Museum, Munich

• Universeum, Stockholm

• Ciência Viva, Lisbon

• Ciência Viva, Aveiro

• A shopping centre in Tallinn

• Parc Cientific de Barcelona

The Citizens’ Feedback Assessment• Collection & analysis of visitors feedback

• Explored visitors’ perceptions & expectations regarding N&N

• Examined a period from March – October 2006

• Aim: to develop recommendations regarding the present and future R&D of N&N in the European Research Area, related policy-making and its ethical assessment

• Presentation at the European Parliament, 5 February 2007

Methodology

Questionnaires

Comprised 3 sections:- Socio-demographic profile of the visitor- Their perceptions and expectations regarding N&N- Their assessment of the potential benefits and risks

Target of 800 completed questionnaires: 100 from each of the 8 participating countries

Focus groups

Aims- Qualitative, in-depth information about participants’ knowledge and attitudes - Information about participants’ experience and views- Encourage participants to share their thoughts, feelings, attitudes and ideas on N&N

• 8-10 Visitors, an observer and a moderator• 24 focus groups: 3 in each participating country

NanoDialogue RecommendationsResearch and development

• R1 It is recommended that levels of government funding of N&N research and development be competitive

with the private sector to attract leading scientists and technologists.

• R2 It is recommended that both the public and private sectors engage ‘upstream’ with publics on their research and development activities to ensure openness, participation, and accountability.

• R3 It is recommended that research and development of N&N for military or defence purposes is tightly

regulated and subject to public engagement.Mohr, A. & Ng, K. (2007) NanoDialogue Citizens’ Feedback Assessment. pp. 39-40

Regulation and control

• R4 It is recommended that an international body be established to oversee the standardisation of regulatory parameters where feasible.

• R5 It is recommended that regulatory bodies regularly communicate across national borders to ensure that any regulatory gaps are identified at an appropriate stage.

• R6 It is recommended that regulatory bodies are advised by ethical committees to ensure public

accountability.

Current or future uses and applications

• R7 It is recommended that regulatory bodies and their advisors engage with publics to discuss future uses and applications of N&N to ensure that any

regulatory gaps are identified at an appropriate stage.

Human health and the environment

• R8 It is recommended that all regulatory bodies review their existing regulations and take any appropriate measures to protect humans and the environment from the risks mentioned in this report.

• R9 It is recommended that the release of nano-particles into the environment be prevented until more is known about their impact on human health and the environment.

Economic aspects

• R10 It is recommended that industry and government liaise to control the economic impact of N&N, by ensuring its widespread affordability and availability.

• R11 It is recommended that governments undertake a review of their patent legislation economic impacts

of patents law on public access to N&N products.

Information and understanding

• R12 It is recommended that governments’ fund and initiate widespread public dialogue on the research and development of N&N to increase public awareness

and understanding and to improve decision-making processes.

Ethical, legal and social aspects

• R13 It is recommended that government funding programmes support interdisciplinary research into the

ethical, legal and social issues surrounding N&N.

• R14 It is recommended that nano-products be comprehensibly labelled to inform consumer choice.