Community engagement to facilitate, legitimize and accelerate the advancement of nanotechnologies in Australia

Lyons, K and Whelan, J. (2010) Community engagement to facilitate, legitimize and accelerate the advancement of nanotechnologies in Australia. NanoEthics, 4 1: 53-66.


Author Lyons, K
Whelan, J.
Title Community engagement to facilitate, legitimize and accelerate the advancement of nanotechnologies in Australia
Journal name NanoEthics  (ERA 2012 Listed)    (ERA 2010 Rank B)   Check publisher's open access policy
Publication date 2010-04
Sub-type Article
DOI 10.1007/s11569-009-0070-2
Volume number 4
Issue number 1
ISSN 1871-4757
1871-4765
Start page 53
End page 66
Total pages 14
Place of publication New York, NY, U.S.A.
Publisher Springer
Collection year 2011
Language eng
Abstract There are increasing calls internationally for the development of regulation and policies related to the rapidly growing nanotechnologies sector. As part of the process of policy formation, it is widely accepted that deliberative community engagement processes should be included, enabling publics to have a say about nanotechnologies, expressing their hopes and fears, issues and concerns, and that these will be considered as part of the policy process. The Australian Federal and State governments have demonstrated a commitment to these ideals, undertaking a number of public engagement activities in recent years. However, despite promises that these community engagement activities will enable policy makers to identify complex and contested community attitudes, and that these will be included as part of the policy making process, a closer look at Australia's engagement activities reveals something quite different. Through an analysis of a number of Australia's nano-engagement activities, this paper demonstrates the limits of public engagement related to the development of nanotechnology related policies and regulation in Australia. Our analysis reveals the extent to which industry interests have captured policy makers and regulators, dissenting voices have been excluded from engagement processes, and engagement processes have not connected with actual policy making activities. Reflecting on these limits, this paper concludes with recommendations for improving public engagement processes related to nanotechnologies in Australia. © 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
Keyword Community engagement
Deliberative governance
Nano-regulatory debates
Nanodialogues
Public engagement
Publics
Regulation
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article
Collections: Non HERDC
School of Social Science Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: Scopus Citation Count Cited 4 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 44 Abstract Views  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Wed, 02 Feb 2011, 10:35:44 EST by Debbie Lim on behalf of School of Social Science