Improving Legitimacy in Nanotechnology Policy Development Through Stakeholder and Community Engagement
Forging New Pathways
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4075304 |
|---|---|
| Authors | A Wendy Russell (0000-0001-7682-1364, Australian National University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2013 |
| Volume | 30 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 566-587 |
| Publication date | 2013-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Review of Policy Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1541-132X • E-ISSN: 1541-1338 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/ropr.12037 |
| OpenAlex | W2146259442 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
| References cited | 51 |
This paper reports on a multistakeholder engagement process conducted in an Australian policy setting that led to a new community engagement framework: Science and Technology Engagement Pathways (STEP). I describe the process in the context of a lack of awareness, experience, and culture of deliberative public engagement in Australia, particularly in relation to decision making concerning science, technology, and innovation. Increasing cautiousness in government and industry approaches to nanotechnology development, in Australia and elsewhere, creates an imperative and an opening for improved stakeholder and community engagement to improve the legitimacy and sustainability of decisions. In this context, STEP may stimulate movement toward deliberative engagement by raising awareness and commitment from diverse stakeholders and providing a structure for developments in engagement and public dialog. STEP potentially provides "rules of engagement" and "intervention pathways" for ongoing public engagement with science and technology developments and for critical "science in society" perspectives to inform policy
Community engagement · Engineering ethics · Legitimacy · Political science · Politics · Public engagement · Public participation · Public relations · Sociology · Stakeholder · Stakeholder engagement · Sustainability · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Engineering · Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development · Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
Towards responsible science and technology
How Can I Contribute? Citizen Engagement in the Development of Nanotechnology for Health
Mobilization in the European Public Sphere
The role of environmental managers in knowledge co-production
Co-creation in support of responsible research and innovation
The legitimacy gap of algorithmic decision-making in the public sector
Introduction to the Special Issue
Public engagement in biosciences and biotechnologies
Keep it complex
A Novel Approach to the Appraisal of Technological Risk
Public Engagement as a Means of Restoring Public Trust in Science – Hitting the Notes, but Missing the Music?
Technology Assessment in Social Context
Risk, public engagement and reflexivity
Opening up nanotechnology dialogue with the publics
Stimulating authentic community involvement in biotechnology policy in Australia
Evolving scientific research governance in Australia
Public engagement coming of age
Dwarfing the Social? Nanotechnology Lessons from the Biotechnology Front
Nanotechnology and Public Interest Dialogue
From risk to uncertainty in the regulation of GMOs
GMO regulation and civic participation at the “edge of the world”
Hearing community voices
Community Participation in Australian Science and Technology Policy
International handbook on regulating nanotechnologies
Community Engagement to Facilitate, Legitimize and Accelerate the Advancement of Nanotechnologies in Australia
On Nanotechnology and Ambivalence
Beyond Conversation
A Social Contract for Biotechnology
From Bio to Nano
The Democratic Soup
Beyond Engagement and Participation
Turning up the Heat
Public Participation Methods
Dazzled by the Mirage of Influence
Promethean Elites Encounter Precautionary Publics
Crossing Boundaries Social Science in the Policy Room
Opening Up" and "Closing Down
Locating Scientific Citizenship
Deliberating Competence
When the Forum Meets Interest Politics
| Unique citing works | 8 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,62 |
| Citation span | 2013 - 2022 (10) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 8 |