IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v36y2016i5p1006-1024.html

Foresight Study on the Risk Governance of New Technologies: The Case of Nanotechnology

Author

Listed:
  • Sheona A. K. Read
  • Gary S. Kass
  • Hilary R. Sutcliffe
  • Steven M. Hankin

Abstract

Technology‐led innovation represents an important driver of European economic and industrial competitiveness and offers solutions to societal challenges. In order to facilitate responsible innovation and public acceptance, a need exists to identify and implement oversight approaches focused on the effective risk governance of emerging technologies. This article describes a foresight study on the governance of new technologies, using nanotechnology as a case example. Following a mapping of the governance landscape, four plausible foresight scenarios were developed, capturing critical uncertainties for nanotechnology governance. Key governance elements were then stress tested within these scenarios to see how well they might perform in a range of possible futures and to inform identification of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for nanotechnology governance in Europe. Based on the study outcomes, recommendations are proposed regarding the development of governance associated with the responsible development of new technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Sheona A. K. Read & Gary S. Kass & Hilary R. Sutcliffe & Steven M. Hankin, 2016. "Foresight Study on the Risk Governance of New Technologies: The Case of Nanotechnology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(5), pages 1006-1024, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:36:y:2016:i:5:p:1006-1024
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.12470
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12470
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.12470?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Falkner & Nico Jaspers, 2012. "Regulating Nanotechnologies: Risk, Uncertainty and the Global Governance Gap," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 12(1), pages 30-55, February.
    2. 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.
    3. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2010. "Risk Management and Governance," Risk, Governance and Society, Springer, number 978-3-642-13926-0, August.
    4. Ismael Rafols & Patrick Zwanenberg & Molly Morgan & Paul Nightingale & Adrian Smith, 2011. "Missing links in nanomaterials governance: bringing industrial dynamics and downstream policies into view," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 624-639, December.
    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. Yuwan Malakar & Justine Lacey & Paul M Bertsch, 2022. "Towards responsible science and technology: How nanotechnology research and development is shaping risk governance practices in Australia," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-14, December.
    2. Vicki Stone & Martin Führ & Peter H. Feindt & Hans Bouwmeester & Igor Linkov & Stefania Sabella & Finbarr Murphy & Kilian Bizer & Lang Tran & Marlene Ågerstrand & Carlos Fito & Torben Andersen & Diana, 2018. "The Essential Elements of a Risk Governance Framework for Current and Future Nanotechnologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(7), pages 1321-1331, July.
    3. Li, Munan & Porter, Alan L. & Suominen, Arho & Burmaoglu, Serhat & Carley, Stephen, 2021. "An exploratory perspective to measure the emergence degree for a specific technology based on the philosophy of swarm intelligence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).

    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. Sisira S. Withanachchi & Ilia Kunchulia & Giorgi Ghambashidze & Rami Al Sidawi & Teo Urushadze & Angelika Ploeger, 2018. "Farmers’ Perception of Water Quality and Risks in the Mashavera River Basin, Georgia: Analyzing the Vulnerability of the Social-Ecological System through Community Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-26, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Justo-Hanani, Ronit & Dayan, Tamar, 2014. "The role of the state in regulatory policy for nanomaterials risk: Analyzing the expansion of state-centric rulemaking in EU and US chemicals policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 169-178.
    4. Sven Ove Hansson & Terje Aven, 2014. "Is Risk Analysis Scientific?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1173-1183, July.
    5. Yang, Ya Ling, 2020. "Comparison of public perception and risk management decisions of aircraft noise near Taoyuan and Kaohsiung International Airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    6. Bleda, Mercedes & Krupnik, Seweryn, 2024. "Risks of policy failure in direct R&D support," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    7. Natalia Vladimirovna Gryzunova & Victoria Ivanovna Pyatanova & Viktoriya Valeryevna Manuylenko & Konstantin Vasilievich Ordov, 2019. "Models of credit limit-setting for companies as means of encouraging competitiveness," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 7(1), pages 615-625, September.
    8. Grzegorz Drozdowski & Joanna Rogozińska-Mitrut & Jacek Stasiak, 2021. "The Empirical Analysis of the Core Competencies of the Company’s Resource Management Risk. Preliminary Study," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-12, June.
    9. Masci, Martín Ezequiel, 2012. "Irreversibilidad e incertidumbre de las decisiones financieras en i&d [Irreversibility and uncertainty of the financial investments on r&d]," MPRA Paper 40970, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Aven, Terje, 2013. "Practical implications of the new risk perspectives," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 136-145.
    11. Aven, Terje, 2018. "How the integration of System 1-System 2 thinking and recent risk perspectives can improve risk assessment and management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 237-244.
    12. Aven, Terje & Krohn, Bodil S., 2014. "A new perspective on how to understand, assess and manage risk and the unforeseen," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-10.
    13. Daniel J. Rozell, 2018. "The Ethical Foundations of Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(8), pages 1529-1533, August.
    14. Sander C. S. Clahsen & Irene van Kamp & Betty C. Hakkert & Theo G. Vermeire & Aldert H. Piersma & Erik Lebret, 2019. "Why Do Countries Regulate Environmental Health Risks Differently? A Theoretical Perspective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 439-461, February.
    15. Juliana Aurora de Oliveira Lopes & Léo Heller, 2020. "Explanatory Matrices on the Causes of a Tailing Dam Collapse in Brazil: The (Dis)Articulation of Epistemes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(12), pages 2524-2538, December.
    16. Ayman Nagi & Meike Schroeder & Wolfgang Kersten, 2021. "Risk Management in Seaports: A Community Analysis at the Port of Hamburg," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.
    17. Reeko Watanabe & Tsunemi Watanabe, 2020. "Does Haze Drive Pro-Environmental and Energy Conservation Behaviors? Evidence from the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Area in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-17, November.
    18. Rio Yonson & Ilan Noy, 2020. "Disaster Risk Management Policies and the Measurement of Resilience for Philippine Regions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(2), pages 254-275, February.
    19. Abrahamsen, Eirik Bjorheim & Selvik, Jon Tømmerås & Milazzo, Maria Francesca & Langdalen, Henrik & Dahl, Roy Endre & Bansal, Surbhi & Abrahamsen, Håkon Bjorheim, 2021. "On the use of the ‘Return Of Safety Investments’ (ROSI) measure for decision-making in the chemical processing industry," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    20. Robert Tomas & Matthew Harrison & José Barredo & Florian Thomas & Miguel Llorente Isidro & Manuela Pfeiffer & Otakar Čerba, 2015. "Towards a cross-domain interoperable framework for natural hazards and disaster risk reduction information," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 78(3), pages 1545-1563, September.

    More about this item

    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:wly:riskan:v:36:y:2016:i:5:p:1006-1024. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.