Till startsida
Till innehåll Läs mer om hur kakor används på gu.se

Attitudes towards nanomaterials and nanotechnology among Swedish expert stakeholders: Risk, benefit and regulation

Författare Simon Larsson
Åsa Boholm
Magnus Jansson
Förlag Gothenburg Research Institute, School of Business, Economics and Law, Gothenburg University
Förlagsort Gothenburg
Publiceringsår 2017
Publicerad vid Gothenburg Research Institute (GRI)
Institutionen för globala studier
Språk en
Länkar https://gupea.ub.gu.se/handle/2077/...
Ämnesord nanomaterials; benefit; risk; innovation; regulation
Ämneskategorier Socialantropologi


The aim of this study is to investigate attitudes towards nanomaterials and nanotechnology among Swedish expert stakeholders. The study explores the views of these experts on a number of topics in connection to nanotechnology innovation with a focus on perceived risk, perceived benefits, risk regulation, and risk management. In January 2017, we distributed a web-based questionnaire to 237 individual experts at government agencies, business corporations, and other relevant organisations. The experts had a self-rated interest in, or connection to, nanomaterials and nanotechnology in their work at their organisation. This study contributes to a multidisciplinary research field addressing questions about innovation and foresight, risk perception, and regulation of nanomaterials and nanotechnology in the public domain. This study makes several claims. 1. The topic of nanomaterials and nanotechnology engages a broad range of Swedish stakeholders in many different ways, including, but not limited to, research and research funding, risk assessment, product development, as well as regulation and legislation. 2. Experts generally emphasize the benefits of nanotechnology and nanomaterials, but perceived benefit and perceived risk varies with educational background and organizational affiliation. 3. How experts assess risk and benefit varies depending on area of application (for example medicine, cosmetics, coatings, electronics, agriculture and food). 4. Experts are generally supportive of further regulation of nanomaterials and nanotechnology. They are relatively negative to taxation and self-regulation as regulatory measures and relatively positive to selective prohibition. There is also disagreement over appropriate regulatory measures among respondents. 5. High perceived risk correlates with a more positive attitude to regulation, and high perceived benefit correlates with lower support for regulation. 6. A common and shared belief is that regulation should be based on science, and that public involvement is undesirable.

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion|Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11

På Göteborgs universitet använder vi kakor (cookies) för att webbplatsen ska fungera på ett bra sätt för dig. Genom att surfa vidare godkänner du att vi använder kakor.  Vad är kakor?