Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A bibliometric analysis of the development of next generation active nanotechnologies

  • Perspectives
  • Published:
Journal of Nanoparticle Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Delineating the emergence of nanotechnologies that offer new functionalities is an important element in an anticipatory approach to the governance of nanotechnology and its potential impacts. This paper examines the transition to next generation active nanotechnologies which incorporate functions that respond to the environment or systems concepts that combine devices and structures that are dynamic and which may change their states in use. We develop an approach to identifying these active nanotechnologies and then use bibliometric analysis to examine the extent of research papers and patents involving these concepts. We also examine references to environmental, health, and safety concepts in these papers, given that these next generation nanotechnologies are likely to have risk profiles that are different from those of first-generation passive nanomaterials. Our results show a steady growth overall in focus on active nanotechnologies in the research literature and in patents over the study period of 1990–2010. We also find an increase in consideration given to environmental, health, and safety topics. While gaps are highlighted in our understanding of research and innovation in active nanotechnologies, the results suggest that there is beginning to be a shift to active nanotechnologies, with the implication that governance processes need to be conscious of this shift and to prepare for it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Source Georgia Tech Global Nanotechnology dataset (see text)

Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Interviews were conducted with Mihail C. Roco by telephone on September 7, 2012, and in-person on February 18, 2013 at the National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA.

References

  • Arora SK, Porter AL, Youtie J, Shapira P (2013) Capturing new developments in an emerging technology: an updated search strategy for identifying nanotechnology research outputs. Scientometrics 95(1):351–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arora SK, Youtie J, Carley S, Porter AL, Shapira P (2014) Measuring the development of a common scientific lexicon in nanotechnology. J Nanopart Res 16(1):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baird D, Shew A (2004) Probing the History of Scanning Tunneling Microscopy. In: Baird D, Nordmann A, Schummer J (eds) Discovering the nanoscale. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 145–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Blei DM (2012) Probabilistic topic models. Commun ACM 55(4):77. doi:10.1145/2133806.2133826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BSI (2005) Vocabulary—Nanoparticles. PAS 71:2005. London: British Standards Institute

  • Buckland M, Gey F (1994) The relationship between recall and precision. J Am Soc Inf Sci 45(1):12–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charitidis CA, Georgiou P, Koklioti MA, Trompeta A-F, Markakis V (2014) Manufacturing nanomaterials: from research to industry. Manuf Rev 1(11):1–19. doi:10.1051/mfreview/2014009

    Google Scholar 

  • Cientifica (2011) Global funding of nanotechnologies and its impact. London. July

  • Dang Y, Zhang Y, Fan L, Chen H, Roco MC (2010) Trends in worldwide nanotechnology patent applications: 1991 to 2008. J Nanopart Res 12(3):687–706. doi:10.1007/s11051-009-9831-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drexler KE (1986) Engines of creation: the coming era of nanotechnology. Anchor Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • EPO (2016) PATSTAT Online v2.2.8 User Manual. European Patent Office. http://documents.epo.org/projects/babylon/eponet.nsf/0/5AE173034539C62DC1257990004F162F/$File/patstat_online_user_manual_v2.11_en.pdf

  • Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G (2008) Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, web of science, and Google scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB Journal 22:338–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fatehi L, Kuzma J, Najmaie P (2013) A Delphi approach to finding a cross disciplinary definition of “nano” for research, society, and regulation. Paper presented at the fifth annual meeting of the Society for the study of Nanoscience and Emerging Technologies, Boston, Massachusetts USA October 27–29, 2013

  • Grieneisen ML, Zhang MD (2012) The ongoing proliferation of nano journals. Nat Nanotechnol 7(5):273–274. doi:10.1038/nnano.2012.53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griggs MB (2012) How DNA origami creates supermaterials. Popular Mechanics. March 16

  • Guston DH, Sarewitz D (2002) Real-time technology assessment. Technol Soc 24(1):93–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang C, Notten A, Rasters N (2011) Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies. J Technol Transfer 36(2):145–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IRGC (2007) Nanotechnology risk governance: recommendations for a global, coordinated approach to the governance of potential risks. Policy Brief. International Risk Governance Council, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2008) Nanotechnologies—Terminology and definitions for nano-objects—Nanoparticle, nanofibre and nanoplate. ISO/TS 27687:2008(E). Geneva: International Organization for Standardization

  • Kay L, Youtie J, Shapira P (2014) Signs of things to come? What patent submissions by small and medium-sized enterprises say, about corporate strategies in emerging technologies. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 85:17–25. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2013.09.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klaessig F (2013) Setting useful nanotechnology definitions examined from the standpoint of central and peripheral claim language used in intellectual property law. In: Konrad K, Coenen C, Dijkstra A, Milburn C, van Lente H (eds) Shaping emerging technologies: governance, innovation, discourse. IOS Press, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Klaessig F, Marrapese M, Abe S (2011) Current perspectives in nanotechnology terminology and nomenclature. In: Murashov V, Howard J (eds) Nanotechnology. Springer Science + Business Media, New York, pp 21–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Kostoff RN, Koytcheff RG, Lau CGY (2007) Global nanotechnology research literature overview. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 74(9):1733–1747. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2007.04.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MANCEF (2004) International micro–nano roadmap. Micro and Nano Technology Commercialization Education Foundation, Albuquerque

  • Mogoutov A, Kahane B (2007) Data search strategy for science and technology emergence: a scalable and evolutionary query for nanotechnology tracking. Res Policy 36:893–903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy F, McAlea EM, Mullins M (eds) (2016) Managing risk in nanotechnology: topics in governance, assurance, and transfer. Springer International Publishing, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC (2012) a research strategy for environmental, health, and safety aspects of engineered nanomaterials. National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • NSTC (1999) Nanostructure science and technology: a worldwide study. Interagency Working Group on Nanoscience, Engineering and Technology and the National Science and Technology Council. Executive Office of the President, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2014) Nanotechnology in the context of technological convergence. Directorate for Science, Technology and Innovation, Working Party on Nanotechnology, DSTI/STP/NANO(2013)10/FINAL. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=dsti/stp/nano(2013)10/final&doclanguage=en

  • O’Mathúna DP (2009) Nanoethics: big ethical issues with small technology. Continuum, London

    Google Scholar 

  • OSTL (2002) New dimensions for manufacturing: a UK strategy for nanotechnology. UK Advisory Group on Nanotechnology Applications. UK Office of Science and Technology, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouellette LL (2015) Nanotechnology and innovation policy. Harv J Law Technol 29(1):34–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter AL, Youtie J, Shapira P, Schoeneck D (2008) Refining search terms for nanotechnology. J Nanopart Res 10(5):715–728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renn O, Roco M (2006) Nanotechnology and the need for risk governance. J Nanopart Res 8:153–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roco MC (2004) Nanoscale science and engineering: unifying and transforming tools. AIChE J 50(5):890–897

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roco MC, Mirkin CA, Hersam MC (2010) Nanotechnology Research Directions for Societal Needs in 2020: Retrospective and Outlook. WTEC. http://www.nano.gov/sites/default/files/pub_resource/wtec_nano2_report.pdf

  • Royal Society (2004) Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties. The Royal Society and The Royal Academy of Engineering, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Sargent JF (2016) Nanotechnology: a policy primer. Congressional Research Service. RL 34511. Washington, DC

  • Schummer J (2014). On the novelty of nanotechnology: a philosophical essay. In: Gordijn B, Cutter AM (eds) In pursuit of nanoethics, Springer, Netherlands, pp 15–29

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Scudellari M (2012) Cyborg tissue monitors cells. Technology Review, Monday, August 27

  • Shapira P, Wang J (2010) Follow the money. Nature 468(7324):627–628. doi:10.1038/468627a

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapira P, Youtie J, Kay L (2011) National innovation systems and the globalization of nanotechnology innovation. J Technol Transfer 36(6):587–604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shatkin JA (ed) (2013) Nanotechnology: health and environmental risks, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Smalley RE (2001) Of chemistry, love and nanobots. Sci Am 285(3):76–77. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0901-76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramanian V, Youtie J, Porter AL, Shapira P (2010) Is there a shift to “active nanostructures”? J Nanopart Res 12(1):1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian B, Liu J, Jin L, Tsui J, Qing Q, Suo Z, Langer R, Kohane D, Lieber C (2012) Macroporous nanowire nanoelectronic scaffolds for synthetic tissues. Nat Mater. doi:10.1038/NMAT3404

    Google Scholar 

  • Tour JM (2007) Nanotechnology: the passive, active and hybrid sides—gauging the investment landscape from the technology perspective. Nanotechnol Law Bus 2007(4):361–373

    Google Scholar 

  • UT-Battelle (2007) Productive nanosystems: a technology roadmap. Battelle Memorial Institute and the Foresight Nanotech Institute

  • Vance ME, Kuiken T, Vejerano EP, McGinnis SP, Hochella MF Jr, Rejeski D, Hull MS (2015) Nanotechnology in the real world: redeveloping the nanomaterial consumer products inventory. Beilstein J Nanotechnol 6:1769–1780. doi:10.3762/bjnano.6.181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Youtie J, Shapira P, Porter AL (2008) Nanotechnology publications and citations by leading countries and blocs. J Nanopart Res 10:981–986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Youtie J, Porter A, Shapira P, Tang L, Benn T (2011) The use of environmental, health and safety research in nanotechnology research. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 11(1):158–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou X, Porter AL, Robinson DK, Shim MS, Guo Y (2014) Nano-enabled drug delivery: a research profile. Nanomed Nanotechnol Biol Med 10(5):889–896

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank David Guston, Kathy Eggleson, and Fred Klaessig for their helpful suggestions on an earlier version of this paper, which was presented at the Workshop on the Anticipatory Governance of Complex Engineered Nanomaterials. This study was undertaken with support from the US National Science Foundation under Award # 0937591 (Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University), Award # 1235693 (Collaborative Research: Workshop on the Anticipatory Governance of Complex Engineered Nanomaterials), and Award # 1542174 (NNCI: Southeastern Nanotechnology Infrastructure Corridor). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Yin Li, Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira

  2. University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

    Philip Shapira

  3. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Espoo, Finland

    Arho Suominen

Authors
  1. Arho Suominen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan Youtie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Philip Shapira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Youtie.

Additional information

Guest Editors: Kathleen Eggleson, David H. Guston

This article is part of the Special Focus on Anticipatory Governance of Next Generation Nanotechnology

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 3.

Table 3 Initial tests of active nanotechnology keywords in nanotechnology titles and abstracts
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Suominen, A., Li, Y., Youtie, J. et al. A bibliometric analysis of the development of next generation active nanotechnologies. J Nanopart Res 18, 270 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-016-3578-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-016-3578-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation