Nanotechnology & public opinion. Hilary Sutcliffe, Director, MATTER

Transcription

1 Nanotechnology & public opinion Hilary Sutcliffe, Director, MATTER

2 Think tank promoting a responsible approach to innovation Focus on social benefit, effective governance and involvement of society Multi-stakeholder working, inclusive approach About MATTER

3 About Hilary Sutcliffe Set up Responsible Nano Forum in 2008, became MATTER 2010 Developed Responsible Nano Code of Conduct for Business New public dialogue on Nano Products 2014/5 On World Economic Forum Global Agenda Council on Nanotechnologies BSI/ISO Nanotechnology Standards Committee CEFIC Nano Governance Project Created pilot website for public to respond to requests for information from public consultations

4 So what does the public think about nanotechnologies in food?

5 They have been asked. Nanotechnology & Food: FSA Citizen s Forum; TNA-BMRB Report 2011 An Evidence Review of Public Attitudes to Emerging Food Technologies Executive Summary, Brook Lyndhurst NanoDialogues, Experiments with Public Engagement with Science - DEMOS 2007 Small Talk: Discussing Nanotechnologies. Melanie Smallman Adam Nieman 2006 Nano Jury UK Provisional Recommendations, Greenpeace 2005 Nanologue - European Union Framework 6 Programme on the Social and Ethical Implications of Nanotechnologies. Deepen Project - Reconfiguring Responsibility - Deepening Debate on Nanotechnology; a research report from FP7 Funded Deepen project, Prof Phil McNaughten, Durham Uni Nano & Me Consultation Analysis Prepared by Hilary Sutcliffe and Craig Freer on behalf of the Responsible Nano Forum 2009

6 What does the public think about nano & food?

7 Opinions wide-ranging with some excitement about potential benefits - but concern focuses on

8 Is it really necessary? Are you just messing around with food because you can, or just to make more money? Would more conventional approaches achieve similar goals - such as government campaigns for healthy eating in relation to nutraceuticals for example? How can we tell?

9 Questions about whose interests would really be served by nanotechnology Suspicion that industry gain would be pursued to the detriment of consumer interests For example by raising prices or providing lower quality, marginally effective or even risky products.

10 Questions about whether the benefits associated with nano and food applications were worth the risk Reflected a considerable focus on concerns about risk Particularly about impacts on long-term health and the environment

11 Observations These dialogues were done when there was little information about the behaviours of nano materials Much hype about nano as a technology Concerns about risks related to newness & other areas but not much evidence of actual products and now? Focus more on nano as a materials technology - Grey Goo more of a worry for biotech!

12 So how should business respond? We asked Investors, retail buyers and NGOs Explored their concerns and views on what businesses can do to build confidence in their innovations

13 Responding also to the public? We also analysed public views in over 23 publications & dialogues in Europe around all emerging technologies Both reports on our website

14 So how should companies respond?

15 Openness about when a technology is being used a no brainer A richer picture needed about benefit When it goes wrong, who carries the can? A desire for trustworthy and independent sources of reassurance Don t force it on us it s about choice Dialogue how will we know are being listened to?

16 What s the benefit for us? Understand & mitigate risks - including social, ethical & environmental Consider how each department in your organisation can practice Responsible Innovation Involve stakeholders from the start Check out our Prezi on involving stakeholders in Innovation