Advertisement

Minerva

, Volume 51, Issue 4, pp 513–519 | Cite as

On Guidebooks, Lists and Nanotechnology

Fritz Allhoff, Patrick Lin and Daniel Moore, What is Nanotechnology and Why Does It Matter? Wiley-Blackwell, 2010, 293 pp, £22.99
  • Matthew KearnesEmail author
BooK Review
  • 196 Downloads

Much like an exotic city, a computer programme or an artistic exhibition, new technologies often require guidebooks. This is particularly the case for nanotechnology, a multifaceted and diverse research programme characterised by canonical origin stories, seemingly limitless claims about its potential to transform everything from sunscreen to space travel, the nascent ingredients for a public risk controversy and state-level coordination of research funding and support measures. If ever anyone was in any doubt, What is Nanotechnology and Why Does It Matter? confirms that nanotechnology has arrived.

Its authors open with a straightforward narrative outlining the significance of nanotechnology and the importance of understanding what its novelty is, stating:

New and emerging technologies both excite and worry us … and nanotechnology today is certainly a flashpoint for irrational exuberance and fears. By definition, there is a knowledge gap during the nascent stages of any new technology,...

References

  1. Åm, H. 2013. ‘Don’t make nanotechnology sexy, ensure its benefits, and be neutral’: Studying the logics of new intermediary institutions in ambiguous governance contexts. Science and Public Policy 40: 466–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bowker, G.C., and S.L. Star. 1999. Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  3. Burt, R. 2004. Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology 110: 349–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Callon, Michel, P. Laredo, and V. Rabeharisoa. 1992. The management and evaluation of technological programs and the dynamics of techno-economic networks: The case of the AFME. Research Policy 21: 215–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Drexler, K.E. 1986. Engines of creation: The coming era of nanotechnology. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  6. Drexler, K.E. 2013. Radical abundance: How a revolution in nanotechnology will change civilization. New York: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar
  7. Feynman, Richard. 1960. There’s plenty of room at the bottom: An invitation to enter a new field of physics. Engineering and Science 23(5): 22–36.Google Scholar
  8. Gallo, J. 2009. The discursive and operational foundations of the National Nanotechnology Initiative in the history of the National Science Foundation. Perspectives on Science 17(2): 174–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Groves, C. 2009. Nanotechnology, contingency and finitude. Nanoethics 3: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kearnes, Matthew, and Matthias Wienroth. 2011. A new mandate? Research policy in a technological society. Durham: Durham University.Google Scholar
  11. Kearnes, Matthew B. 2006. Chaos and control: Nanotechnology and the politics of emergence. Paragraph 29(2): 57–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kearnes, Matthew B., M. Macnaghten, and J. Wilsdon. 2006. Governing at the nanoscale: People, policies and emerging technologies. London: Demos.Google Scholar
  13. Klerkx, L., and C. Leeuwis. 2008. Balancing multiple interests: Embedding innovation intermediation in the agricultural knowledge infrastructure. Technovation 28(6): 364–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Meyer, M., and Matthew Kearnes. 2013. Intermediaries between science, policy and the market. Science and Public Policy 40: 423–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Milburn, C. 2008. Nanovision: Engineering the future. Durham, NC: Durke University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Mody, Cyrus. 2006. Small, but determined: Technological determinism in nanoscience. In Nanotechnology challenges: Implications for philosophy, ethics and society, eds. J. Schummer, and D. Baird, 95–130. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.Google Scholar
  17. Mody, Cyrus. 2011. Instrumental community: Probe microscopy and the path to nanotechnology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mody, Cyrus, and M. Lynch. 2010. Test objects and other epistemic things: A history of a nanoscale object. BJHS 43(3): 423–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nordmann, Alfred. 2004. Nanotechnology’s worldview: New space for old cosmology. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 23(4): 48–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pollock, N., and R. Williams. 2010. The business of expectations: How promissory organizations shape technology and innovation. Social Studies of Science 40(4): 525–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schwarz, A.E. 2004. Shrinking the ecological footprint with nanotechnoscience? In Discovering the nanoscale, eds. D. Baird, A. Nordmann, and J. Schummer, 203–209. Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  22. Schwarz, A.E. 2009. Escaping from limits to visions of space? In Visionen der Nanotechnologie, eds. A. Ferrari, and S. Gammel, 129–142. Berlin: Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  23. Selin, C. 2007. Expectations and the emergence of nanotechnology. Science, Technology & Human Values 32(2): 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Environmental Humanities Programme, School of Humanities and LanguagesUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations