Designing foresight studies for Nanoscience and Nanotechnology (NST) future developments

Abstract Nanoscience and Nanotechnology (NST) is widely considered as one of the most promising areas of scientific and technological development for future decades. As a consequence, almost every country in the world has chosen to invest significantly in this area. This choice, however, is only a first step in the investment decision process, given that almost any scientific discipline can be taken at the scale of a nanometre. In this paper, it is argued that foresight studies to decide where to invest in the nanotechnology area should be designed in a different way from what is normally done. Nanotechnology, in fact, has specific characteristics that should be taken into account when evaluating its expected impacts and potentialities.

[1]  G. Dosi.  Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change , 1982 .

[2]  H. van Kempen,et al.  Scanning tunnelling microscopy , 1992 .

[3]  Ben R. Martin,et al.  Research Foresight: Priority-Setting in Science , 1989 .

[4]  R. Lempert,et al.  Shaping the Next One Hundred Years: New Methods for Quantitative Long-Term Policy Analysis , 2003 .

[5]  S. Cunningham,et al.  Technology futures analysis: Toward integration of the field and new methods , 2004 .

[6]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Nanotechnology: Scenarios of development and impact , 1990 .

[7]  Zan Huang,et al.  International nanotechnology development in 2003: Country, institution, and technology field analysis based on USPTO patent database , 2004 .

[8]  R. Kostoff,et al.  Disruptive technology roadmaps , 2004 .

[9]  T. Devezas.  Evolutionary theory of technological change: State-of-the-art and new approaches , 2005 .

[10]  Michael D. Cobb,et al.  Public perceptions about nanotechnology: Risks, benefits and trust , 2004, Emerging Technologies: Ethics, Law and Governance.

[11]  Teruo Kishi.  Nanotechnology R&D Policy of Japan and Nanotechnology Support Project , 2004 .

[12]  Steven Puro,et al.  Science and Technology Policy: Priorities of Governments , 1981 .

[13]  Ahti Salo,et al.  Proceedings of the EU-US Scientific Seminar: New Technology Foresight, Forecasting Assessment Methods, Seville, May 13-14, 2004 , 2005 .

[14]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science , 2003 .

[15]  Anthony F. J. van Raan,et al.  Advanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercises , 1996, Scientometrics.

[16]  Michael Keenan,et al.  Identifying emerging generic technologies at the national level: the UK experience , 2003 .

[17]  Ben R. Martin,et al.  The use of multiple indicators in the assessment of basic research , 1996, Scientometrics.

[18]  Chunli Bai,et al.  Ascent of Nanoscience in China , 2005, Science.

[19]  Volker Wagner,et al.  The emerging nanomedicine landscape , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[20]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance , 2003 .

[21]  M. Meyer,et al.  Nanotechnology-interdisciplinarity, patterns of collaboration and differences in application , 1998, Scientometrics.

[22]  Joachim Schummer,et al.  Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology , 2004, Scientometrics.

[23]  Steven T. Walsh,et al.  Roadmapping a disruptive technology: A case study: The emerging microsystems and top-down nanosystems industry , 2004 .

[24]  J. S. Katz,et al.  What is research collaboration , 1997 .

[25]  Jürgen Altmann,et al.  Military Uses of Nanotechnology: Perspectives and Concerns , 2004 .

[26]  Ineke Malsch.  Nanotechnology in Europe: scientific trends and organizational dynamics , 1999 .

[27]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Nanostructure Science and Technology. A Worldwide Study , 1999 .

[28]  M. Roco.  Nanotechnology: convergence with modern biology and medicine. , 2003, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[29]  M. Roco.  Broader Societal Issues of Nanotechnology , 2003 .

[30]  Hajime Eto.  Interdisciplinary information input and output of a nano-technology project , 2004, Scientometrics.

[31]  O. Sorenson,et al.  Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data , 2001 .

[32]  K. Cuhls.  From forecasting to foresight processes—new participative foresight activities in Germany , 2003 .

[33]  Tibor Braun,et al.  Nanoscience and nanotecnology on the balance , 1997, Scientometrics.

[34]  Per Dannemand Andersen,et al.  Technology foresight on Danish nano‐science and nano‐technology , 2005 .

[35]  B. Martin.  Foresight in science and technology , 1995 .

[36]  William Sims Bainbridge,et al.  Public Attitudes Toward Nanotechnology , 2002 .

[37]  G. Dosi.  Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories , 1993 .

[38]  Jo-Won Lee.  Overview of Nanotechnology in Korea – 10 Years Blueprint , 2002 .

[39]  Angela Hullmann,et al.  Forecasting the development of nanotechnology with the help of science and technology indicators , 2002 .

[40]  Jacob Goldenberg,et al.  Using cellular automata modeling of the emergence of innovations , 2001 .

[41]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Publications and patents in nanotechnology , 2003, Scientometrics.

[42]  L. Georghiou,et al.  Third Generation Foresight - Integrating the Socio-economic Dimension , 2001 .

[43]  Daniel E. Goldberg.  The design of innovation: Lessons from genetic algorithms , 1998 .

[44]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Patent Related Indicators for Assessing Knowledge-Generating Institutions: Towards a Contextualised Approach , 2003 .

[45]  Tai-Yue Wang,et al.  Forecasting innovation performance via neural networks—a case of Taiwanese manufacturing industry , 2006 .

[46]  G. Binnig,et al.  Scanning tunneling microscopy , 1984 .