IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v85y2010i1d10.1007_s11192-010-0237-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The public value of nanotechnology?

Author

Listed:
  • Erik Fisher

    (Arizona State University)

  • Catherine P. Slade

    (University of Georgia)

  • Derrick Anderson

    (Arizona State University)

  • Barry Bozeman

    (University of Georgia)

Abstract

Science and innovation policy (SIP) is typically justified in terms of public values while SIP program assessments are typically limited to economic terms that imperfectly take into account these values. The study of public values through public value mapping (PVM) lacks widely-accepted methods for systematically identifying value structures within SIP and its public policy processes, especially when there are multiple stakeholder groups. This paper advances the study of public values in SIP using nanoscale science and engineering (NSE) policy by demonstrating that quantitative analysis of value statements can provide a credible and robust basis for policy analysis. We use content analysis of over 1,000 documents with over 100,000 pages from major contributors to the NSE policy discourse to identify and analyze a wide range of public value statements. Data analysis and reduction methods reveal a multifactor structure of public values that has been consistently cited by a range of actors in an NSE research policy network.

Suggested Citation

  • Erik Fisher & Catherine P. Slade & Derrick Anderson & Barry Bozeman, 2010. "The public value of nanotechnology?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(1), pages 29-39, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:85:y:2010:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-010-0237-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-010-0237-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-010-0237-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-010-0237-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Buiter, Willem H, 1981. "The Superiority of Contingent Rules over Fixed Rules in Models with Rational Expectations," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(363), pages 647-670, September.
    2. Laura O. Taylor & Ronald G. Cummings, 1999. "Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 649-665, June.
    3. R. J. Rummel, 1967. "Understanding factor analysis," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 11(4), pages 444-480, December.
    4. Fisher, Erik, 2005. "Lessons learned from the Ethical, Legal and Social Implications program (ELSI): Planning societal implications research for the National Nanotechnology Program," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 321-328.
    5. Norton, Bryan G. & Noonan, Douglas, 2007. "Ecology and valuation: Big changes needed," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 664-675, September.
    6. Michael E. Tipping & Christopher M. Bishop, 1999. "Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 61(3), pages 611-622.
    7. Dietmar Braun & David H Guston, 2003. "Principal-agent theory and research policy: An introduction," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(5), pages 302-308, October.
    8. Louis Guttman, 1954. "Some necessary conditions for common-factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 19(2), pages 149-161, June.
    9. David H. Guston, 2008. "Innovation policy: not just a jumbo shrimp," Nature, Nature, vol. 454(7207), pages 940-941, August.
    10. Erik Fisher & Roop L Mahajan, 2006. "Contradictory intent? US federal legislation on integrating societal concerns into nanotechnology research and development," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 5-16, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cui Huang & Chao Yang & Jun Su, 2018. "Policy change analysis based on “policy target–policy instrument” patterns: a case study of China’s nuclear energy policy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 1081-1114, November.
    2. Fisher, Erik, 2019. "Governing with ambivalence: The tentative origins of socio-technical integration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1138-1149.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rodríguez, Hannot & Fisher, Erik & Schuurbiers, Daan, 2013. "Integrating science and society in European Framework Programmes: Trends in project-level solicitations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1126-1137.
    2. Marconi, Gabriele, 2014. "European higher education policies and the problem of estimating a complex model with a small cross-section," MPRA Paper 87600, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Wiek, Arnim & Zemp, Stefan & Siegrist, Michael & Walter, Alexander I., 2007. "Sustainable governance of emerging technologies—Critical constellations in the agent network of nanotechnology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 388-406.
    4. Fisher, Erik, 2019. "Governing with ambivalence: The tentative origins of socio-technical integration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1138-1149.
    5. Paola Zuccolotto, 2012. "Principal component analysis with interval imputed missing values," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 96(1), pages 1-23, January.
    6. Kaplan, Leah R. & Farooque, Mahmud & Sarewitz, Daniel & Tomblin, David, 2021. "Designing Participatory Technology Assessments: A Reflexive Method for Advancing the Public Role in Science Policy Decision-making," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    7. Richard A. Hofler & John A. List, 2004. "Valuation on the Frontier: Calibrating Actual and Hypothetical Statements of Value," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(1), pages 213-221, February.
    8. Shr, Yau-Huo (Jimmy) & Zhang, Wendong, 2024. "Omitted downstream attributes and the benefits of nutrient reductions: Implications for choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    9. Leonardo-Fabio Morales & Mauricio Quiñones & Eleonora Dávalos & Luis-Felipe Gaviria, 2025. "Spatial spillover effects in the labour market in a middle-income country," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 53-71, January.
    10. GUO-FITOUSSI, Liang, 2013. "A Comparison of the Finite Sample Properties of Selection Rules of Factor Numbers in Large Datasets," MPRA Paper 50005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Franziska Voelckner, 2006. "An empirical comparison of methods for measuring consumers’ willingness to pay," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 137-149, April.
    12. Fuchsman, Dillon & McGee, Josh B. & Zamarro, Gema, 2023. "Teachers’ willingness to pay for retirement benefits: A national stated preferences experiment," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    13. John List, 2025. "Valuing Non-Marketed Goods and Services Using a List Field Experiment," Framed Field Experiments 00809, The Field Experiments Website.
    14. Wang, Zihan & Daeipour, Mohamad & Xu, Hongyi, 2023. "Quantification and propagation of Aleatoric uncertainties in topological structures," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    15. Giles Atkinson & Sian Morse-Jones & Susana Mourato & Allan Provins, 2012. "‘When to Take “No” for an Answer’? Using Entreaties to Reduce Protests in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 497-523, April.
    16. Melanie Lefevre, 2011. "Willingness-to-pay for Local Milk-based Dairy Product in Senegal," CREPP Working Papers 1108, Centre de Recherche en Economie Publique et de la Population (CREPP) (Research Center on Public and Population Economics) HEC-Management School, University of Liège.
    17. Zhaohui Yan & Mingli Wang & Yumeng Sun & Zihui Nan, 2023. "The Impact of Research and Development Investment on Total Factor Productivity of Animal Husbandry Enterprises: Evidence from Listed Companies in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, September.
    18. Louis Guttman, 1955. "A generalized simplex for factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 20(3), pages 173-192, September.
    19. John A. List, 2001. "Do Explicit Warnings Eliminate the Hypothetical Bias in Elicitation Procedures? Evidence from Field Auctions for Sportscards," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1498-1507, December.
    20. Seokbeom Kwon & Jan Youtie & Alan Porter & Nils Newman, 2024. "How does regulatory uncertainty shape the innovation process? Evidence from the case of nanomedicine," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 262-302, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:85:y:2010:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-010-0237-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.