首页> 外文学位 >The Role of Science in Nanotechnology Decision-making: Toward Evidence-based Policy Making
【24h】

The Role of Science in Nanotechnology Decision-making: Toward Evidence-based Policy Making

机译:科学在纳米技术决策中的作用:基于证据的决策

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Science can help inform policy decisions by providing information on the risks and benefits of a technology. In the field of nanotechnology, which is characterized by high degree of complexity and uncertainty, there are high demands for scientists to take an active role in policy debates with regulators, policy-makers and the public. In particular, policy-makers often rely on scientific experts to help them make decisions about regulations. However, scientists' perceptions about policy and public engagement vary based on their individual characteristics, values, and backgrounds. Although many policy actors are involved in nanotechnology policy process, there are few empirical studies that focus on the establishment of coalitions and their impact on policy outputs, as well as the role of scientists in the coalitions. Also, while the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has regulatory authority over nanoscale materials, there is a lack of literature that describes the use of science on EPA's decision making of nanotechnology.;In this dissertation, these research gaps are addressed in three essays that explore the following research questions: (1) how are nano-scientists' individual characteristics and values associated with their perceptions of public engagement and political involvement? (2) how can the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) can be applied to nanotechnology policy subsystem? and (3) how does the EPA utilize science when making regulatory decisions about nanotechnology? First, using quantitative data from a 2011 mail survey of elite U.S. nanoscientists, the dissertation shows that scientists are supportive of engaging with policy-makers and the public about their results. However, there are differences among scientists based on their individual characteristics. Second, qualitative interview analysis suggests that there are two opposing advocacy groups with shared beliefs in the nanotechnology policy subsystem. The lineup of coalition members is stable over time, while the EPA advocates less consistent positions. The interview data also show a significant role of scientific information in the subsystem. Third, the dissertation explains the EPA's internal perspective about the use of science in regulatory decision making for nanotechnology. The dissertation concludes with some lessons that are applicable for policy-making for emerging technologies.
机译:科学可以通过提供有关技术风险和收益的信息来帮助指导政策决策。在以高度复杂性和不确定性为特征的纳米技术领域,强烈要求科学家在与监管机构,决策者和公众的政策辩论中发挥积极作用。特别是,决策者通常依靠科学专家来帮助他们做出有关法规的决策。但是,科学家对政策和公众参与的看法因其个人特征,价值观和背景而异。尽管许多政策参与者都参与了纳米技术政策的制定过程,但很少有实证研究关注联盟的建立及其对政策产出的影响以及科学家在联盟中的作用。此外,尽管环境保护署(EPA)对纳米级材料具有监管权,但缺乏描述EPA纳米技术决策科学方法的文献。在这篇论文中,这些研究空白在三篇论文中得到了解决:探索以下研究问题:(1)纳米科学家的个人特征和价值观如何与他们对公众参与和政治参与的看法相关联? (2)倡导联盟框架(ACF)如何应用于纳米技术政策子系统? (3)EPA在制定有关纳米技术的监管决策时如何利用科学?首先,利用2011年美国纳米科学家的邮件调查的定量数据,论文表明科学家支持与决策者和公众就其结果进行互动。但是,根据科学家的个人特点,它们之间存在差异。其次,定性访谈分析表明,在纳米技术政策子系统中有两个对立的拥护者,他们拥有共同的信念。联盟成员的阵容随着时间的推移是稳定的,而EPA则主张立场不太一致。访谈数据还显示了科学信息在子系统中的重要作用。第三,论文解释了EPA关于在纳米技术的监管决策中使用科学的内部观点。本文以一些适用于新兴技术政策制定的经验教训作为结束。

著录项

  • 作者

    Kim, Youngjae.;

  • 作者单位

    Arizona State University.;

  • 授予单位 Arizona State University.;
  • 学科 Public policy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2017
  • 页码 152 p.
  • 总页数 152
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号