Advertisement

Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

, Volume 6, Issue 1, pp 13–23 | Cite as

The Social Impacts of Nanotechnology: an Ethical and Political Analysis

  • Robert SparrowEmail author
Article

Abstract

This paper attempts some predictions about the social consequences of nanotechnology and the ethical issues they raise. I set out four features of nanotechnology that are likely to be important in determining its impact and argue that nanotechnology will have significant social impacts in—at least—the areas of health and medicine, the balance of power between citizens and governments, and the balance of power between citizens and corporations. More importantly, responding to the challenge of nanotechnology will require confronting “philosophical” questions about the sort of society we wish to create and the role that technology might play in creating it. This in turn will require developing institutions and processes that allow the public to wield real power in relation to technological trajectories. My ultimate contention is that the immediate task established by the likely social impacts of nanotechnology is not so much to develop an ethics of nanotechnology as to facilitate an ethical conversation about nanotechnology.

Keywords

Nanotechnology Ethics Social impact 

References

  1. Altmann, J. 2004. Military uses of nanotechnology: perspectives and concerns. Security Dialogue 35(1):61–79. doi: 10.1177/0967010604042536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altmann, J. 2006. Military nanotechnology: Potential applications and preventive arms control. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Altmann, J., and M. Gubrud. 2004. Anticipating military nanotechnology. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 23(4):33–40. doi: 10.1109/MTAS.2004.1371637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berube, D.M. 2006. Nano-hype: the truth behind the nanotechnology buzz. Amherst, New York: Promethus Books.Google Scholar
  5. Boot, M. 2006. The paradox of military technology. New Atlantis (Washington, D.C.), (Fall), 13–31.Google Scholar
  6. Bowman, D.M., and G.A. Hodge. 2008. A big regulatory tool-box for a small technology. NanoEthics 2(2):193–207. doi: 10.1007/s11569-008-0038-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brumfiel, G. 2003. A little knowledge. Nature 424(6946):247–248. doi: 10.1038/424246a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crandall, B.C. 1997. Nanotechnology: speculations on global abundance. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, England: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. DeFrancesco, L. 2003. Little science, big bucks. Nature Biotechnology 21(10):1127–1129. doi: 10.1038/nbt1003-1127.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Donaldson, K., V. Stone, C.L. Tran, W. Kreyling, and P.J.A. Borm. 2004. Nanotoxicology. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 61:727–728. doi: 10.1136/oem.2004.013243.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dreher, K.L. 2004. Health and environmental impact of nanotechnology: toxicological assessment of manufactured nanoparticles. Toxicological Sciences 77(1):3–5. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfh041.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Drexler, E. 1986. Engines of creation. New York: Anchor Press.Google Scholar
  13. Drexler, E., C. Peterson, and G. Pergamit. 1991. Unbounding the future: The nanotechnology revolution. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc.Google Scholar
  14. Dunlap, Charles J. Junior. 1999. Technology: Recomplicating moral life for the nation’s defenders. Parameters: US Army War College Quarterly Autumn, 24–53.Google Scholar
  15. Ebbesen, M. 2008. The role of the humanities and social sciences in nanotechnology research and development. NanoEthics 2(1):1–13. doi: 10.1007/s11569-008-0033-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ETC Group. 2004. Down on the farm. Ottawa: ETC Group.Google Scholar
  17. Friends of the Earth. 2006. Size does matter. Nanotechnology: Small science—big questions. Special issue (Issue 97) of Chain Reaction.Google Scholar
  18. Gingrich, N. 1999. We must fund the scientific revolution. Washington Post, October 18. In Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, eds. M.C. Roco, and W.S. Bainbridge, 270. New York: Springer, 2001.Google Scholar
  19. Hansen, S.F., A. Maynard, A. Baun, and J.A. Tickner. 2008. Late lessons from early warnings for nanotechnology. Nature Nanotechnology 3:444–447. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2008.198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hamilton, C. 2004. Growth fetish. London; Stirling, VA: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hassan, Mohammed H.A. 2005. Small things and big changes in the developing world. Science 309(5731):65–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hepburn, J. 2006. Technology, risk and values—from genetic engineering to nanotechnology. Chain Reaction 97:40–41.Google Scholar
  23. Helmus, M. 2007. The need for rules and regulations. Nature Nanotechnology 2:333–334. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2007.165.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hodge, G., D. Bowman, & K. Ludlow (eds.). 2007. New global frontiers in regulation: The age of nanotechnology. Cheltenham UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
  25. Hood, E. 2004. Nanotechnology: looking as we leap. Environmental Health Perspectives 112(13):A741–A749.Google Scholar
  26. Joy, W. 2000. Why the future doesn’t need us. Wired 8.04:238–262.Google Scholar
  27. Lane, R.E. 2000. The loss of happiness in market democracies. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Matsuura, J.H. 2006. Nanotechnology regulation and policy worldwide. Norwood, MA: Arteck House.Google Scholar
  29. Mehta, Michael D. 2002. Privacy and survelliance: how to avoid a nano-panoptic future. Canadian Chemical News November-December, 31–33.Google Scholar
  30. Meridian Institute. 2005. Nanotechnology and the poor: Opportunities and risks. Available http://www.meridian-nano.org/gdnp/NanoandPoor.pdf. Accessed 8 January 2009.
  31. Miller, G., and R. Senjen. 2006. What would a nano world look like? Chain Reaction 97:12–14.Google Scholar
  32. Mulhall, D. 2002. Our molecular future: How nanotechnology, robotics, genetics, and Artificial Intelligence will transform our world. Amherst, N.Y: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  33. National Science and Technology Council. 1999. Nanotechnology: Shaping the world atom by atom. National Science and Technology Council: Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  34. Nanotechnology, N. 2007. Beware of big brother. Nature Nanotechnology 2(1):1.Google Scholar
  35. Nordan, M.M., and M.W. Holman. 2005. A prudent approach to nanotechnology environmental, health, and safety risks. Industrial Biotechnology 1(3):146–149. doi: 10.1089/ind.2005.1.146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ratner, D., and M.A. Ratner. 2003. Nanotechnology and homeland security: New weapons for new wars. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  37. Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering. 2004. Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: Opportunities and uncertainties. London: Royal Society & Royal Academy of Engineering.Google Scholar
  38. Salamanca-Buentello, F., D.L. Persad, E.B. Court, D.K. Martin, A.S. Daar, and P.A. Singer. 2005. Nanotechnology and the developing world. PLoS Medicine 2(5):100–103. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Senjen, R. 2006a. Small nano + large corporations = giant profits. Chain Reaction 97:32–34.Google Scholar
  40. Senjen, R. 2006b. Nanobiotechnology: the “science” of vandalising life. Chain Reaction 97:30–31.Google Scholar
  41. Service, Robert F. 2005. Calls rise for more research on toxicology of nanomaterials. Science 310:1609.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Smalley, R.E. 2001. Of chemistry, love and nanobots. Scientific American (September):76–77.Google Scholar
  43. Sparrow, R. 2007a. Revolutionary and familiar, inevitable and precarious: Rhetorical contradictions in enthusiasm for nanotechnology. NanoEthics 1(1):57–68. doi: 10.1007/s11569-007-0008-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sparrow, R. 2007b. Negotiating the nanodivides. In New global frontiers in regulation: The age of nanotechnology, eds. G. Hodge, D. Bowman, and K. Ludlow. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  45. Sparrow, R. 2008. Hypocrisy about nanotechnology is a worrying sign. Friends of the Earth Nanotechnology Project. Available via http://nano.foe.org.au/node/191.
  46. Stix, G. 1996. Waiting for breakthroughs. Scientific American (April):94–99.Google Scholar
  47. UNESCO. 2006. The ethics and politics of nanotechnology. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation.Google Scholar
  48. U. S. Environmental Protection Authority. 2007. Nanotechnology white paper. Washington: Science Policy Council, US Environmental Protection Agency. Available at http://es.epa.gov/ncer/nano/publications/whitepaper12022005.pdf.
  49. Van Den Hoven, Jerome. 2006. Nanotechnology and privacy: the instructive case of RFID. The International Journal of Applied Philosophy 20(2):215–228.Google Scholar
  50. Wood, S., R. Jones, and A. Geldart. 2003. The social and economic challenges of nanotechnology. Swindon, UK: Economic and Social Research Council.Google Scholar
  51. Zuo, L., W. Wei, M. Morris, J. Wei, M. Gorbounov, and C. Wei. 2007. New technology and clinical applications of nanomedicine. The Medical Clinics of North America 91:845–86. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2007.05.004.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Philosophy and Bioethics, Faculty of ArtsMonash UniversityVictoriaAustralia

Personalised recommendations