Discussing Nascent Technologies: Citizens Confront Nanotechnology in Food

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Collingridge, D. (1980). The social control of technology. London: Francis Pinter.

David, Kenneth H., & Thompson, Paul B. (2008). What can nanotechnology learn from biotechnology? Social and ethical lessons for nanoscience from the debate over agrifood biotechnology and GMOs. Amsterdam: Elsevier/Academic Press.

Deng, C.-Y., & Chia-Ling, Wu. (2010). An innovative participatory method for newly democratic societies: The “civic groups forum” on national health insurance reform in Taiwan. Social Science and Medicine, 6, 896–903.

Gavelin, K., Wilson, R., & Doubleday, R. (2007). Democratic technologies? The final report of the Nanotechnology Engagement Group (NEG). London: The Involve Foundation.

Goven, Joanna (2003). Deploying the consensus conference in New Zealand: Democracy and de-problematization. Public Understanding of Science. pp. 423–40.

Guston, D. H., & Sarewitz, D. (2002). Real-time technology assessment. Technology in Society, 4, 93–109.

Hindmarsh, Richard, & Du Plessis, Rosemary. (2008). GMO regulation and civic participation at the “edge of the world”: The case of Australia and New Zealand. New Genetics and Society, 3, 181–199.

Horlick-Jones, T., Walls, J., Rowe, G., Pidgeon, N., Poortinga, W., & O’Riordan, T. (2006). On evaluating the GM Nation? Public debate about the commercialisation of transgenic crops in Britain. New Genetics and Society, 25(3), 265–288.

Horlick-Jones, T., Walls, J., Rowe, G., Pidgeon, N., & Poortinga, W. (2007). The GM debate: Risk, politics and public engagement. London: Routledge.

Joly, P.-B., & Kaufmann, A. (2008). Lost in translation? The need for “upstream engagement” with nanotechnology on trial. Science as Culture, 3, 225–247.

Joss, S., & Durant, J. (1995). Public participation in science: The role of consensus conferences in Europe. London: Science Museum.

Juraku, K., Suzuki, T., & Sakura, O. (2007). Social decision-making processes in local contexts: an STS case study on nuclear power plant siting in Japan. East Asian Science, Technology and Society, 1, 53–75.

Kagakugijyutsu Shinkoukikou Kenkyukaihatsu Senryaku Center 独立行政法人科学技術振興機構研究開発戦略センター (Center for Research and Development Strategy, Japan Science and Technology Agency) (2007). 「フードナノテクノロジー検討会: 食品産業へのナノテク・材料技術応用」 (Working group on food nanotechnology: applying nano-technology and nano-materials to food industries). Tokyo: Center for Research and Development Strategy. Available at: http://crds.jst.go.jp/output/pdf/07wr17f.pdf . Accessed 3 September 2010.

Kerr, A., Cunningham-Burley, S., & Tutton, R. (2007). Shifting subject positions: Experts and lay people in public dialogue. Social Studies of Science, 3, 385–411.

Kleinman, D. L. (Ed.). (2000). Science, technology and democracy. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Kleinman, D. L., & Powell, M. (2005). Report of the Madison area citizen consensus conference on nanotechnology. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin.

Kleinmann, D. L., Powell, M., Grice, J., Adrian, J., & Lobes, C. (2007). A toolkit for democratizing science and technology policy: the practical mechanics of organizing a consensus conference. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 2, 154–169.

Kobayashi, Tadashi 小林傳司 (2004). Darega kagakugijyutsu nitsuite kangaerunoka: konsensasukaigi toiu jikken 誰が科学技術について考えるのか : コンセンサス会議という実験　(Who has a say in science and technology? A social experiment called “consensus conference”). Nagoya: Nagoya Daigaku shuppankai

Leroux, T., Hirtle, M., & Fortin, L.-N. (1998). An overview of public consultation mechanisms developed to address the ethical and social issues raised by biotechnology. Journal of Consumer Policy, 4, 445–481.

Macnaghten, P., Kearnes, M. B., & Wynne, B. (2005). Nanotechnology, governance, and public deliberation: What role for the social sciences? Science Communication, 2, 268–291.

Mikami, Naoyuki, Shigeo Sugiyama, Yuichiro Takahashi, Tomiko Yamaguchi, & Masashi Tachikawa 三上直之 , 杉山滋郎 , 高橋祐一郎 , 山口富子, 立川雅司 (2009). Jouryu deno sanka ni consensasu kaigi wa tsukaeruka 「上流での参加」にコンセンサス会議は使えるか (Is a consensus conference suitable for “upstream engagement”?). Japanese Journal of Science Communication, 6, 34–49

Nogyo Shokuhin Sangyogijyutsu Sogo Kenkyu Kikou Shokuhin Sougou Kenkyujyo 独立行政法人農業・食品産業技術総合研究機構食品総合研究所 (National Food Research Institute) (2010). Nosuisho Nanotekunoroji Purojiekuto: shokuhinsozai no nanosukeru kako oyobi hyokagijyutsu no kaihatsu 農水省ナノテクノロジープロジェクト : 食品素材のナノスケール加工及び評価技術の開発 (MAFF nanotechnology project: development methods for processing food materials at nano-scale and its evaluation techniques). Available at: http://www.nfri.affrc.go.jp/research/seikatenji/2007/pdf/P20.pdf . Accessed 30 September 2010

Pidgeon, N., Harthorn, B. H., Bryant, K., & Rogers-Hayden, T. (2009). Deliberating the risks of nanotechnologies for energy and health applications in the United States and United Kingdom. Nature Nanotechnology, 4, 95–98.

Rogers-Hayden, T., Mohr, A., & Pidgeon, N. (2007). Introduction: Engaging with nanotechnologies—engaging differently? NanoEthics, 2, 123–130.

Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 1, 3–29.

Rowe, G., Marsh, R., & Frewer, L. J. (2004). Evaluation of a deliberative conference. Science, Technology and Human Values, 29, 88–121.

Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering. (2004). Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: Opportunities and uncertainties. London: Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering.

Sclove, R. E. (1995). Democracy and technology. New York: Guilford.

Siegrist, M., Cousin, M.-E., Kastenholz, H., & Wiek, A. (2007). Public acceptance of nanotechnology foods and food packaging: the influence of affect and trust. Appetite, 2, 459–466.

Siegrist, M., Stampfli, N., Kastenholz, H., & Keller, C. (2008). Perceived risks and perceived benefits of different nanotechnology foods and nanotechnology food packaging. Appetite, 2, 283–290.

Stirling, A. (2008). “Opening up” and “closing down”: power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 2, 262–294.

Toumey, C. (2007). Rules of engagement. Nature Nanotechnology, 2, 386–387.

Wilsdon, J., & Willis, R. (2004). See-through science: why public engagement needs to move upstream. London: Demos.