| dc.description.abstract | The aim of this study is to investigate attitudes towards nanomaterials and nanotechnology
among Swedish expert stakeholders. The study explores the views of these experts on a number
of topics in connection to nanotechnology innovation with a focus on perceived risk, perceived
benefits, risk regulation, and risk management. In January 2017, we distributed a web-based
questionnaire to 237 individual experts at government agencies, business corporations, and
other relevant organisations. The experts had a self-rated interest in, or connection to,
nanomaterials and nanotechnology in their work at their organisation. This study contributes to
a multidisciplinary research field addressing questions about innovation and foresight, risk
perception, and regulation of nanomaterials and nanotechnology in the public domain.
This study makes several claims.
1. The topic of nanomaterials and nanotechnology engages a broad range of Swedish
stakeholders in many different ways, including, but not limited to, research and research
funding, risk assessment, product development, as well as regulation and legislation.
2. Experts generally emphasize the benefits of nanotechnology and nanomaterials, but
perceived benefit and perceived risk varies with educational background and
organizational affiliation.
3. How experts assess risk and benefit varies depending on area of application (for example
medicine, cosmetics, coatings, electronics, agriculture and food).
4. Experts are generally supportive of further regulation of nanomaterials and
nanotechnology. They are relatively negative to taxation and self-regulation as regulatory
measures and relatively positive to selective prohibition. There is also disagreement over
appropriate regulatory measures among respondents.
5. High perceived risk correlates with a more positive attitude to regulation, and high
perceived benefit correlates with lower support for regulation.
6. A common and shared belief is that regulation should be based on science, and that
public involvement is undesirable. | sv |
