Transcript Slide 1

Center for Nanotechnology in Society at University of California, Santa Barbara
(NSEC # SES 0531184)
PIs: Barbara Herr Harthorn, Richard P. Appelbaum, Bruce Bimber, W. Patrick McCray, Christopher Newfield
University of California, Santa Barbara
IRG 1 – Origins, Institutions, and Communities (McCray) examines instrumentation, research
CNS Mission
IRG 2 – Innovation, Intellectual Property (Newfield) develops a comprehensive understanding
communities, scientists’ careers, national and state policy, and the role of public imagination.
of processes of innovation, commercialization, and global development and diffusion of nanotechnology.
Examine the emergence and
societal implications of
nanotechnologies with a focus on
the global human condition in a time
of sustained technological
innovation. Promote the socially and
environmentally sustainable
development of nanotechnologies in
the US and around the globe.
Semiconductor Technologies & the Road to Nanoelectronics
• develop a portfolio of integrated
multi-method research on
nanoscience/nanotechnologies in
dynamic interaction with society,
from invention to global distribution,
and lab to consumer to environment;
• Development of thin-film (MBE) technology and semiconductor roadmaps
of the mid-1980s
• Survey about the interdisciplinary and multi-institutional
collaboration process
Institutions of Interdisciplinarity
Meso level: The Nanoscale Innovation System
• Understanding nano in the context of federally-funded interdisciplinary centers and the institutional
transformation of university-government relationships since the 1970s
• Origins of the NSECs, and interdisciplinarity in present-day nanoscale research at NNI sites
Nanotechnology Oral History Project
• 24+ oral histories, archived at the Chemical Heritage Foundation
and/or the Center for History of Physics
Survey Result
H3:nanosacle
researchers find
collaboration to be
productive . . . But
more so inside the
discipline
• Patent analysis of quantum dots,
on research lineages and commercial uptake
Macro level: Technology Transfer Policy
Alan G. MacDiarmid
(1927 - 2007)
University of Pennsylvania
Nobel Prize, 2000
• Limits of “transfer” paradigm at the nanoscale
• Interviews with licensing officials and PIs
• solar photovoltaic R&D case study
(Nano)Technological Enthusiasm and the Public Imagination
• The political and social context of exploratory/fringe technologies the researchers, futurists, and businesspeople working at the border
between scientific fact and fiction in the 1970s/80s, and how we view
modern technological utopias. Book in progress (Princeton Univ. Press)
200
Cultures of Innovation
• Public culture and technology narratives, and
narrative analysis of NNI-related public research discourse
Number of QD and NC Patents
Research Objectives
Micro level: Nanoscale Laboratory Work
issued patents
pending apps
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
International
• Australian National University
• Beijing Institute of Tech., China
• Cardiff University, Wales, UK
• Centre National de la
Recherché Scientifique, France
• Univ. of British Columbia, CA
• Univ of East Anglia, UK
• Univ. of Edinburgh, UK
• Univ. of Sussex, UK
• Venice International Univ, Italy
http://cns.ucsb.edu
community of nano scientists & engineers (NSE), social scientists, and educators, and to achieve broader
impacts through engagement of diverse audiences in dialogue about nanotechnology and society.
Speakers series
Website
Conferences and Workshops
Blog
NanoDays community events
Weekly Clips
Policy Presentations
Formal Education
Faculty PI
• Interdisciplinary Research & Training Opportunities for Undergraduate and
Graduate Students
IRG
- Graduate Research Fellowships in Social Science (5 annually) and Science &
Engineering (4 annually)
Soc Sci
Sci/Engr
Fellow
- 8-week Summer Undergraduate Research Internships (4 community college &
Fellow
UCSB students annually)
• 9 publications with Grad Fellow co-authors; 17 conference presentations
• Professional development, travel funds, public engagement
• Mentoring & training for 3 Postdoctoral Scholars
• Curricula: CNS Seminar; 7 graduate & 8 undergrad courses with CNS content; NSF
STS award for community college course development (with CNSI)
• Exceeding diversity goals for student participants
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
Nano-Meeter (science café)
Newsletters
Public Presentations
Podcasts
Distribution Database
Media outreach
Leaders from NGOs, government, the private sector, science and technology and academia met
to discuss technology-based solutions in energy/environment, water, food security, and health
issues. Participants were from the US, Europe, and Japan, three of the largest emerging
economies (China, India, and Brazil) and other developing countries. Co-sponsored by the
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. http://nanoequity2009.cns.ucsb.edu
IRG 3 – Nano Risk Perception and the Public Sphere (Harthorn) studies nanotech risk
IRG 4 – Globalization (Appelbaum) develops a comprehensive understanding of global
perception among experts and publics; media framing of nano risks; and methods for engaging diverse US
publics in upstream deliberation about new technologies in society.
development and diffusion of nanotechnology with an emphasis on E and S Asia.
China’s Developmental State: Becoming a 21st Century Nanotech Leader
Experts’ Views on the Benefits and Risks of Nanomaterials and Technologies
• Rapid advances in Chinese nanotechnology due to:
- high level of international collaboration
- targeted governmental spending on nano-related R&D
and commercialization
• Expert interviews with nanoscale scientists and engineers, nanotoxicologists, regulators; nanotox publication
analysis; co-funding by NSF UC CEIN for 2009 study of industry views on environmental risks
Public Deliberation about Nanotechnology R&D
• Comparative US and UK deliberation on energy and health applications—both US & UK positive re: energy apps.
• New Study on Gender and Risk - 6 US workshops vary groups by both gender and energy & health apps.
Nanotechnology & Sustainable Development:
Comparative Study of India & China
Comparison of US and CN Nano Sci Lit Articles, 1988-2007
14000
12000
number of articles, US
number of articles, CN
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Emergent Public Perceptions of Benefits and Risks
88
19
89
19
90
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
United States
• Chemical Heritage
Foundation
• Duke University
• Quinnipiac University
• Rice University
• SUNY Levin Institute
• SUNY New Paltz
• UC Berkeley
• UC Los Angeles
• Univ of Washington
• Univ of Wisconsin, Madison
CNS Tools for Outreach & Engagement
Role of International Collaboration in
Fostering High-Impact Chinese Nano Research
• Quantitative meta-analysis of 17 published surveys in
US, Canada, Europe, Japan, 2002-2008 found benefit
frame predominant but 44% “not sure”
• What drives perception? US survey 2008 found benefit
frame contingent on trust, affect & regulatory responsibility
• Preliminary experimental UK study finds attitude
polarization when given more information
• Publication analysis: By 2007 China equaled or possibly
surpassed the U.S. in terms of total output, with a substantial
increase in publication rate beginning in 2003.
Drivers of Nano commercialization in China: Patent Analysis
19
INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL
COLLABORATIONS
Education and Public Engagement programs at CNS-UCSB aim to nurture an interdisciplinary
Number of articles published
• serve as a network hub in the
emerging national and international
network of scholars and activists
concerned with nanotechnology in
society.
Year of Filing
Year
Chinese Nanotech Patent Applications
3500
Number of Applications
• identify and dialogue with a wide
array of public, media, government,
NGO, and private sector
constituents;
1989
• provide interdisciplinary training for
a new generation of societallyattuned scientists and science-aware
social scientists;
1988
0
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
The Nano Value Chain: Case study of a Chinese Solar Company
Nano and the Media Agenda
35
• 3000 news stories since 2006 indicate no net increase of attention
to nano, episodic coverage around federal agency action and expert reports.
• LexisNexis vs. Google News: substantial differences in search results
30
By Kenneth Chang, Wednesday, May
21, 2008
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Year
2008-2009 Highlights
• 38 publications, 69 presentations
15
Nanotubes May Pose Health Risks
Similar to Asbestos
2001
25
Regulation
• Content analysis revealed four dominant frames in US newspaper
coverage: Progress, Regulation, Conflict, and Generic Risk
• Testing theoretical framework combining cognitive
bias, anchoring effects, and framing
In Study, Researchers Find
2000
Annual Number of Stories in 10 Largest US Newspapers
by Frame Type
20
Framing of Nanotechnology
1999
Conflict
Generic Risk
• Presentations to US Congressional Nanotechnology Caucus (Harthorn), US-China
Economic & Security Commission (Appelbaum), UK House of Lords (Pidgeon)
10
Progress
5
0
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
• 2008 Conference: CNS/CNSI Educators Workshop - Undergraduate courses that
integrate nano & society, Sept. 10-12, 2008, UCSB
2007