Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

The public value of nanotechnology?

*Corresponding author for this work
  • Arizona State University
    ,
  • University of Georgia
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Abstract

Science and innovation policy (SIP) is typically justified in terms of public values while SIP program assessments are typically limited to economic terms that imperfectly take into account these values. The study of public values through public value mapping (PVM) lacks widely-accepted methods for systematically identifying value structures within SIP and its public policy processes, especially when there are multiple stakeholder groups. This paper advances the study of public values in SIP using nanoscale science and engineering (NSE) policy by demonstrating that quantitative analysis of value statements can provide a credible and robust basis for policy analysis. We use content analysis of over 1,000 documents with over 100,000 pages from major contributors to the NSE policy discourse to identify and analyze a wide range of public value statements. Data analysis and reduction methods reveal a multifactor structure of public values that has been consistently cited by a range of actors in an NSE research policy network.

Publication Information

Output type

Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English (US)

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 29-39 (11 pages)

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Scientometrics (Volume 85, Issue 1)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 2010

Publication status

Published - 2010

ISSN

0138-9130

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 77955842838

Publication metrics

Metrics

SciVal
FWCI
0.78
SciVal
Author count
4
SciVal
citations
15
SciVal
Paper percentile
71
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
0.25
Fractional count
3
Fractional count
0.75
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
1
Scopus
citations

PlumX, opens in new tab

Captures
91
Citation count
19

Funding Details

We analyze value-laden statements using quantitative methods in a wide variety of public documents produced by major participants the formal NSE effort. To ensure a robust yet coherent data set, we consider a ‘‘stream’’ of functionally related policy actors that comprise a distributed decision process (Fisher et al. 2006). We thus use documents from the following subgroups: the US Congress as resource allocator; the National Science Foundation (NSF) as both resource recipient and resource allocator; and the NSF-funded NSE laboratories as both resource recipients and research policy agents. 2 PVM was initially developed by the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes (CSPO) as part of a Rockefeller Foundation grant and, more recently, through the support of the NSFs Science of Science Policy (SciSIP) program. We compile and analyze 1,020 documents with over 100,000 pages of documentation, selected after consultation with SIP scholars and practitioners, including a (now former) US House of Representatives science and technology committee staff member; NSF senior advisors, program officers and staff; researchers familiar with the NSF; and laboratory directors actively funded by the NSF to conduct NSE.
FundersFunding number
NSF-funded
-
NSFs Science of Science Policy
-
NSF
-
Rockefeller Foundation
-
FP7
334452