Societal implications of nanoscience and nanotechnology: Maximizing human benefit
Source abstract
Abstract
The balance between the potential benefits and risks of nanotechnology is discussed based on judgments expressed by leading industry, academe and government experts at a U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) sponsored meeting. The results are summarized in various themes related to: economic impacts and commercialization; social scenarios; technological convergence; quality of life; ethics and law; governance, public perceptions, and education.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Nanotechnology research and applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (15)
Show source-provided references
1. ETC, 2003. No small matter II: The case for a global moratorium size matters!. ETC Occasional Paper Series (see report on http://www.etcgroup.org/documents/Occ. Paper_Nanosafety.pdf)
2. European Commission, 2004. Nanotechnology: A preliminary risk analysis on the basis of a preliminary workshop. Brussels, March 1 2, 2004 (see report on europa.eu.int/comm./health/ph_risk/documents/ev_20040301_en.pdf)
3. Greenpeace, 2004. Nanotechnology. Greenpeace (see report on http://www.greenpeace.org.uk)
4. Meridian Institute, 2004. Summary of the International Dialogue for Responsible R&D of Nanotechnology. Sponsored by NSF, Alexandria, Virginia, US. (http://www.nsf.gov/home/crssprgm/nano/dialog.htm)
5. NSET, 2003a. NNI Grand Challenge Workshop: Nanoscale Processes for Environmental Improvement, Arlington, VA, May 8 10, 2003 (see report on the website http://www.nano.gov)
6. NSET, 2003b. NNI Workshop on Nanobiotechnology, Arlington, VA, October 9 11, 2003 (see report on the website http://www.nano.gov)
7. Roco M.C., R.S. Williams, & P. Alivisatos, eds., 1999. Nanotechnology Research Directions. U.S. National Science and Technology Council, Washington, D.C., (also Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2000, 316 pages), (see report on http://www.nano.gov and http://www.nsf.gov/nano)10.1007/978-94-015-9576-6 ↗
8. Roco M.C. & W.S. Bainbridge, eds., 2000. Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology. National Science Foundation Report, Arlington, Virginia (also published by Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2001, 370 pages; see report on http://www.nano.gov and http://www.nsf.gov/nano)10.1007/978-94-017-3012-9 ↗
9. Roco M.C. & W.S. Bainbridge, eds., 2005. Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology (II): Maximizing Human Benefit. NSET Report, Arlington, Virginia (also published by Springer Science, forthcoming; see report on http://www.nano.gov and http://www.nsf.gov/nano)10.1007/s11051-004-2336-5 ↗
10. M.C. Roco · J. Nanoparticle Res. · 2002 · 4 · 28110.1023/A:1021152023349 ↗
11. Roco, M.C., 2003. Broader Societal Issues of Nanotechnology. J. Nanoparticle Res., 5(3 4), 181?189 (see paper on the website http://www.nsf.gov/nano)10.1023/A:1025548512438 ↗
12. M.C. Roco · J. Nanoparticle Res. · 2004 · 6 · 110.1023/B:NANO.0000023243.25838.73 ↗
13. The Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering, 2004. Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties. London, UK. (see report on http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk)
14. Swiss Re, 2004. Nanotechnology: Small matter, many unknowns. Swiss Re, Switzerland (see report on http://www.swissre.com)
15. 2004