technologies

ART50.pdf

Socio-demographic, economic and technological changes were taking place at a fast speed with nonlinear patterns

the legal framework, the technology base and the management skills. This conceptual model may vary a lot from one country to other.

Likewise, several articles by the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies have drawn attention to the potential of territorial foresight for decision making at the regional level (IPTS

Nowadays, GIS technology provides a wide array of functionalities to display alphanumeric data on a digital map.

This axis included all critical uncertainties regarding the abundance or scarcity of technological, economic, human, institutional, and natural resources.

Public and private agents are fully aware of the need for sustainable development due to a lack of response by the economic and technological realm.

Forlearn Online Guide (n d.)and Millennium Project (n d.))shows that most scenarios exercises conclude with a description of the geopolitical, economic, societal and technological contexts.

frequent disputes between political, social and economic stakeholders hinder consensus. Horizontal elements such as legislation, technology and management are weak in the first stages of the planning stages,

B Modify mobility patterns by incorporating technological and energy innovations. B Modernize public administration so that it can implement an advanced, transparent governance model.

because it feels confident that new technologies will solve most environmental threats. In this context, there is a need for strict policies

Figure 9 Spatial implications of Scenario B (2025) PAGE 330 jforesight jvol. 14 NO. 4 2012 B Pursue a massive incorporation of new technologies into public administration to improve

B The development model will have to be integrated more, more participatory, more coordinated, more technology-friendly,

B The urban planning processes will have to incorporate breakthrough innovations and subsequently, be totally reengineered. B The transformation of the planning process will require reciprocal changes in the legal framework and the governance model.

Foresight for Regional development Network (2001), Practical Guide to Regional foresight, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Sevilla.

Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (2001),‘Special issue on foresight and regional development'',The IPTS Report No. 59, pp. 1-47.

ART51.pdf

It proposes the application of future-oriented analysis (FTA) as a common umbrella term that encompasses foresight, forecasting and technology assessmentmethods and tools to the legal sphere.

and risk, neglecting as a consequence the use of forecasting techniques, foresight methods and technology assessment procedures.

), Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Seville, Spain. The views expressed in this article are purely those of the author

forecasting and technology assessment methods and tools to the legal sphere. 2. Future-oriented technology analysis (FTA)‘‘Future-oriented technology analysis''(FTA) was created the term to encompass the different tools

and in some cases shape technological futures 2. It was used first by the European commission's (EC) Joint research Centre Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (JRC-IPTS) as a common umbrella term for technology foresight

, technology forecasting and technology assessment 3. The JRC-IPTS, through the FTA overarching concept and a series of sponsored biennial seminars 4,

technology forecasting and technology assessment communities, along with the broader field of future studies) have come together to discuss

''As a comprehensive term, FTA is anchored firmly‘‘in the relation between science and technology on the one hand,

and social needs on the other''(Cagnin and Keenan, 2008), acknowledging thus the co-evolution of science and technology (S&t) together with society in their approach and work.

and shape technological futures (Rader and Porter, 2008). In addition, this particular community of scholars and practitioners has managed also to provide a collective definition of FTA,

This has been mainly due to the increasing importance of technological and organisational innovation; the development of service economies;

which aimed to describe specific situations and actions in forthcoming technological worlds. These scenarios were used

They thus constituted isolated and factual narratives of a future technological world, which aimed to alert the policy maker to the legal implications of such prospective scenarios.

a modelling system with the ambitious plan of turning massive amounts of data into knowledge and technological progress.

the police have turned to new technologies to improve their efficiency, using ICT to optimize their increasingly scarce and limited resources,

Based on comprehensive computer statistics, technology has allowed the law enforcement community to rapidly identify and address crime hot spots,

A concrete example of a predictive policing technology can be found in Compstat, a computerized crime mapping system developed by NYPD in 1993

3. These various tools and strategies differ according to the range of technology targeted, the time horizon span, their goals and outcomes, etc.

For a clarification on the differences and similarities among the wide array of terms, methods and approaches that are included in the umbrella term of FTA, such as technology forecasting, technology assessment, roadmapping, technology foresight,

For the distinction between technology assessment, foresight and technology forecasting made by the European Science and Technology observatory Network (ESTO), see Rader (2001).

The latter was revised, moreover in Rader (2001, p. 4); and revised in Tu bke et al. 2001):

Technological Analysis and Strategic management vol. 20 (3; Technological forecasting and Social Change, vol. 72 (9; as well as to the publication of the book Cagnin et al.

and prioritizing the future areas of regulation. 6. These were the cases of the future-oriented technology assessment exercises conducted during the period 1974-1995 by the US Office of Technology assessment (OTA).

but on the other side of the Atlantic, we currently have the example of the Scientific Technology Options assessment (STOA),

which advises the European parliament in policy issues involving scientific and technological options. Recurring again to Johnston's (2008) observations,

‘‘t he studies for the STOA panel of the European parliament have served to pinpoint critical aspects of technologies and their application

''Regarding technology assessment, it is interesting to note that it‘‘originally emerged with the aim of contributing to the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches of government,

but has moved increasingly towards providing knowledge suitable for actively shaping technology'',in Rader and Porter (2008).

and analyse the social, economic, legal, technological and ethical issues related to identity, privacy and security in the forecasted

and to contribute to the technologies and infrastructures needed. See Rannenberg et al. 2009). ) 13. For a detailed analysis of those trends, uncertainties, scenarios (including its likely triggers),

For an overview of data mining technologies and their use for competitive advantages, see Porter and Cunningham (2005.

Impact of fta Approaches on Policy and Decision-making, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Seville. Bo rjeson, L.,Ho jer, M.,Dreborg, K.-H.,Ekvall, T. and Finnveden, G. 2006),‘Scenario types and techniques:

), Tech Mining: Exploiting New technologies for Competitive advantage, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. Rader, M. 2001),‘Monitoring of technology assessment activities'',report by the European Science and Technology observatory Network, Seville.

Rader, M. and Porter, A l. 2008),‘Fitting future-oriented technology analysis methods to study types'',in Cagnin, C.,Keenan, M.,Johnston, R.,Scapolo, F. and Barre',R

. Eds), Future-oriented technology analysis: Strategic intelligence for an Innovative economy, Springer, Berlin. Rannenberg, K.,Royer, D. and Deuker, A. 2009), The Future of Identity in the Information society:

About the author Norberto Nuno Gomes de Andrade is a Scientific Officer at the Information society Unit of the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) of the European commission's Joint research Centre.

and technology (including biotechnology, neuroscience, artificial intelligence, genetics and genomics, digital environments, ambient intelligence), data protection and privacy law, intellectual property, philosophy of law and legal theory.

In 2009 he co-edited and published Law and Technology: Looking into the Future Selected Essays.

ART6.pdf

Assessing emerging technologies Methodological challenges and the case of nanotechnologies Torsten Fleischer*,Michael Decker, Ulrich Fiedeler Institute for Technology assessment and Systems analysis (ITAS), Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe Gmbh, P. O. B

accepted 2 october 2004 Abstract Technology assessment reflecting on R&d and technological trends in the area of nanotechnology and its implications is confronted with the problem that most scientific endeavours of nanotechnology can be allocated to basic research

while most of the technological visions related to nanotechnology are far (N10 years) in the future. Since technology assessment has to integrate the socioeconomic context of a technical product

in order to be comprehensive, in the case of nanotechnology a preparing step is necessary which connects the ongoing basic research with the visions communicated either by the scientist themselves or by the media.

In this paper we propose to adapt the well known tool droadmappingt to contribute to the solution of this problem.

Science and technology roadmapping; Technology assessment; Nanotechnology 1. Introduction Emerging technologies pose considerable challenges for dclassicalt technology assessment (TA.

If TA focuses on the outcomes or impacts of a technology, it can be performed only at later stages of technology development

10.1016/j. techfore. 2004.10.005*Corresponding author. Tel.:++49 7247 824571; fax:++49 7247 824806. E-mail address:

Torsten. Fleischer@itas. fzk. de (T. Fleischer. Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1112 1121 other hand, decision support and policy making require information on the potential consequences of the introduction of new technologies before they are implemented widely,

i e. at early stages of their development when the direction of the innovation process already can be influenced

The assessment of emerging technologies implies the introduction of new methods into the toolkit of the TA practitioner.

and tested. 2. Assessment of emerging technologies changing framework and new questions Technology assessment (TA) is a scientific,

interactive and communicative process with the aim to contribute to the public and political opinion forming on science and technology related societal aspects 1 like exploitation of potential, dealing with secondary effects,

and technological risks, overcoming problems of legitimacy and technology conflicts. It produces knowledge, orientation and procedures to deal with societal challenges in coping with technology.

Over the last years, the landscape for Technology assessment has changed significantly. TA has started with the investigation of large complex technologies (conventional or nuclear energy technologies, aerospace technologies...

which were developed and deployed with significant participation of national governments for dcustomerst in politics like parliaments or administrations.

During the last years, the technological focus has shifted somewhat towards rather small, widely distributed (some would say decentralised) technologies where the impacts arise rather from a single component itself but from the large number of components and their widespread application,

from the new type of complexity and interdependence that these components form when they are interacting,

and from the change in economic and societal patterns initiated by the almost ubiquitous usage of these technologies.

Some technologies to be investigated are so-called denabling technologiest. They are often crucial technological prerequisites for other technologies

products and processes which are expected to impact existing technologies by expanding their usefulness, to enable new technological approaches

and to trigger wider applications in a number of industries. Enabling technologies often have no direct easily recognisable connection with applications

which makes it difficult to even determine relevant impact categories. Therefore it is necessary to perform intermediate analysis steps to connect these technologies to applications or visions for their integration in application technologies or products.

Together with the new kinds of technologies to be assessed, the role of governments or politics as important players in the innovation process has changed.

First there is a significant shift away from a direct governmental participation in the innovation process towards a concentration of national governments on the shaping of framework conditions for innovation.

This is due to many reasons: Globalisation has altered the roles and influence of national policies and industries, political paradigms have changed, EU legislation and international competition leave less room for direct governmental activities in many technological fields.

In the last years, in many countries due to economic and social pressures there is a shift of focus towards technologies that stimulate

or support economic growth, sometimes corresponding with the requirement to develop technologies that contribute to sustainable development (whatever the criteria for that might be).

T. Fleischer et al.//Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1112 1121 1113 Most funding organisations

or contract awarders require valid, scientifically sound, knowledge-based, often quantitative, information on future developments of technology and its interaction with society before they are implemented widely,

i e. at early stages of their development when the direction of the innovation process already can be influenced.

But most questions about the relevant consequences and options to influence it arise in the later phases of the innovation process, from the diffusion to the market, the use of technology and its disposal.

This holds considerable methodological challenges with respect to analysis and assessment for all emerging technologies but especially for emerging enabling technologies.

The principle of taking into account the knowledge about presumed or probable technology impacts in decisions already at an early stage is part of the basic concept of technology assessment.

It was introduced, in its very beginning, as an early warning of technological risks and unintended consequences, later also as a tool for an early diagnosis of the chances and potential of technology.

It is perhaps not ill-founded to state that the treatment of central challenges of the sustainability discussion,

particularly the sustainability assessments of technology, is prepared by decades of experiences with technology assessments. Consideration of the long term perspective

and methodical approaches of technology assessment for sustainability assessments of technology 2. The requirements on sustainability assessments and their consideration in decision-making represent until now unknown degree of methodical challenges even with regard to very ambitious concepts of technology assessment,

It is no exaggeration to say that the known methodological problems of technology assessment come to a head here. 3. Nanotechnology Nanotechnology is among the most prominent emerging technologies,

they are heralded as a key technology for the 21st century. These potential innovations offer numerous benefits. There are great expectations among policymakers,

scientists and industry representatives that nanotechnology may or will contribute to economic prosperity and sustainable development (for an up-to-date and comprehensive overview see Ref. 3). On the other hand,

nanotechnology has been the subject of an extensive public debate in Europe and the United states. Especially the risks of nanotechnology from the suspected asbestos-like properties of some nanoscopic materials and the resulting dangers for human health to the potential thread by self-replicating nanobots turning the entire world into dgrey

goot got broad media coverage and public awareness. Obviously nanotechnology is a case for technology assessment.

Technology assessment of nanotechnology has to deal with several methodological challenges: First of all: Up to now it is blurred quite what in detail should be considered as dnanotechnologyt and what not.

Until now, there is no definition of nanotechnology that is generally accepted in the scientific community. Perhaps such a definition is impossible at all.

The ddefinitionst proposed and used(?by research policy or its think tanks and consultants are rather broad and unspecific,

Neuenahr-Ahrweiler (European Academy for the study of the consequences of scientific and technological advance) 4:

Nanotechnology is dealing with functional systems based on the use of sub-units with specific size-dependent properties of the individual sub-units or of a system of those...

Functional systems are systems where the (technological or natural) functionality to be considered provides the criteria for defining system boundaries...

Surprisingly, this definition does not refer to a particular part of the length scale where nanotechnology usually is expected to be dat homet.

Common ddefinitionst traditionally limit nanotechnology to structures with a size somewhere between 0. 1 and 100 nm in at least one dimension.

They propose that the name-giving order of magnitude of nanotechnology should not be mentioned in the definition,

According to this definition (but also interpreting other widely used descriptions of the field), nanotechnology is neither a specific technology nor is it a definite group of technologies.

Nanotechnology comprises a wide range of approaches that are quite heterogeneous with regard to their subjects of investigation, possible applications and imaginable periods of realisation.

Many of the developments called dnanotechnologyt are scientific findings and curiosities rather than R&d results close to a technological application.

even the engineering and economic feasibility has not yet been clarified. What does that mean for the technology assessment of nanotechnology?

The first part of the answer is rather simple: For a valid and sound assessment, the monolith dnanotechnologyt has to be blasted into sensible and workable pieces.

Many discussions about nanotechnology tend towards a problematic generalisation. When scientists, politicians, journalists or dpeople in the streetst are discussing nanotechnology,

they all have their own ideas and assumptions, interpretations and examples, scientific approaches and experiences in the back of their head.

or write about nanotechnology das a wholet and very often avoid or prevent a constructive discussion.

Most activities that are considered as R&d in the field of nanotechnology are basic or applied research rather than technology development.

Nanomaterials are an essential part of the overall field of nanotechnology. They can be T. Fleischer et al./

As so-called, denabling technologies',they are technological prerequisites for numerous innovations in many technological fields from comparatively simple technologies for every day use (like cosmetics or pigments in paints),

energy technologies or information and communication up to biotechnologies without their interdependence being always obvious at first glance.

Some nanomaterials-based products and processes are already on the marketplace, many more will very likely be seen in the near or mid-term future.

Nanomaterials show great economic potential e g. by substituting other materials or by making available new functionalities and thus enabling new products and creating new markets.

It is expected also that nanomaterials may contribute to the reduction of the ecological footprint of classical production processes by reducing energy and material consumption.

For nanomaterials, two layers of assessment exist. The first one is the assessment of the impacts of its production.

or about the health and environmental hazards that actually can arise from nanomaterials, the general methodology can be adapted from procedures that are used broadly in the assessment of conventional materials technologies.

Methods like Life cycle Analysis or Materials Flow Analysis are comparatively sharp swords in the analysis and assessment of ecological and economic impacts of new materials technologies.

These established methods are common in technology assessment and widely accepted internationally 5 . But the hopes and questions reach much further.

Rather than the nanomaterials themselves, their use in new products and processes and their application in existing or new contexts,

and the structural changes in technology, economy and society possibly initiated by them will have considerable consequences.

Since many nanotechnology-related developments are still in an early phase at present and in the future researchers, developers and users are faced with strategic decisions on the continuation of their efforts again and again.

In this situation, is it possible to find ways to consider knowledge about the potential impacts of a technology which admittedly is gained with high uncertainty and its assessment with regard to sustainability already in early phases of technology development?

Are there approaches to let it become part of decisions which are taken already at early stages of an R&d project about its objectives,

in order to identify and to strengthen positive sustainability effects, the bsustainability potentialq of technologies, and to recognise, to mitigate

The aim rather is to initiate a process of shaping of technology in which the emergence of new technologies is accompanied by mutual co-operation between technology development and impact analysis, between sustainability research and nanosciences,

and perhaps also between market research and technology assessment. Such a reflexive procedure surely would take into account the numerous demands from the debate on sustainable research and technology policies. 4. Roadmapping methodology as a tool for technology assessment of nanotechnology?

4. 1. Science and technology roadmapping a brief introduction A standard definition of roadmap or droadmappingt does not exist.

There is considerable diversity among practitioners as to what constitutes a roadmap and the roadmapping techniques employed 6. T. Fleischer et al./

/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1112 1121 1116 The term droadmapt is used widely, starting from graphical representations of technology development paths and their application environments up to detailed and ambitious

descriptions of future technology requirements and research needs. Even in politics the term is used for implementation plans of political goals.

and apply technology roadmapping in the mid-1980s. It has become a widely used technique during the past two decades from the perspective of both individual companies and entire industries.

a bs and T (science and technology, T. F.)roadmap provides a consensus view or vision of the future S and T landscape available to decision makers.

Q 6 The probably most comprehensive overview of relevant research on and current knowledge about roadmapping, together with a critical discussion of the potential of roadmapping approaches which are applied usually to sustaining technologies to offer insights into disruptive technologies,

and/or technology. 4. 2. Roadmapping as a precursor of a TA process for specific nanotechnology applications The situation described above rather broad and largely unstructured field of investigation, mostly enabling technologies at early stages of development,

and risks and calls for technology assessment of these technologies, political requirements to orientate R&d budgets on the potential contribution of new developments to sustainable development puts some pressure on the TA practitioner.

Similar to roadmapping, there is no general methodology for technology assessment. TA projects can differ by task, subjects and questions of investigation and addressee.

or distinctions and often using varying terminology the following basic elements (1) definition of task and system (2) analysis of technology, their applications and framework (3) impact assessment (4) evaluation and development

Many activities that are considered as nanotechnology are closer to R&d for enabling technologies than they are embedded in a product (or process) development,

/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1112 1121 1117 be as specific and reliable as necessary to be the basis for a valid and sound technology assessment

and should include not only the perspectives and knowledge of the developers and proponents of a technology,

and technology roadmapping to include it as a precursor into the TA process for selected applications of nanotechnology.

(or architecture) that shows how the different technological elements fit together, interact, depend on each other or are constrained by technical (or occasionally socioeconomic) factors.

qualified estimates about technological hurdles and the degree of difficulty to overcome them and related time horizons,

and visionary applications thought up by proponents (and sometimes propagandists) of nanotechnology, about the realism and the realisation periods of these concepts as well as about the potential of competing conventional technologies.

Enable and teach interdisciplinary communication which for nanotechnology researchers is of special importance;!Discover new research options and alternative pathways;!

and risks of nanotechnology. Very often, in these discussions the existing or expected benefits arising from nanotechnology-based

or-related innovations are claimed for nanotechnology. However, some of the ideas for products or visions for applications raise also considerable questions with respect to their nontechnical implications.

Their reference to nanotechnology then is denied frequently, the responsibilities are assigned to the other disciplines involved or other groups participating in the innovation process,

a discussion of these consequences in the context of nanotechnology often refused. Such an argumentative asymmetry for many observers leaves the impression of dishonesty or disguise

which may lead to public distrust and rejection and support disaster assumptions and dystopic fantasies. 4. 3. Roadmapping nanotechnology the trials Currently,

we are following two different lines to test the applicability of roadmapping in nanotechnology and the quality of the outcomes.

Within the project dnano Road SMET that recently has been started, science and technology roadmaps in the domain of nanomaterials will be developed.

In the first phase, an international working group integrating roadmap developers nanomaterials experts and knowledge transfer organisations will build branch specific roadmaps for three different industrial sectors on

which nanomaterials are expected to have major influence. In a second step, these roadmaps shall be adapted to the business culture of small and medium enterprises (SME.

SME are important drivers of some European industrial sectors and potential users of nanomaterials-based innovations.

But they usually don't have either competence or capacity to investigate the potential of nanomaterials for their purposes

or to perform a roadmapping process din houset. Among other goals, the project aims at structuring the R&d field of nanomaterials,

at building a knowledge base for further detailed investigations about the potential of nanomaterials, especially with regard to sustainable development,

but also at being a learning experience and serving as a communication tool for the participants.

and institutes (representing basic research on nanotechnology related phenomena, material researchers and developers, systems engineering, toxicology of nanoscopic structures,

and assessing technological dopportunity spacest for new phenomena and material properties by developing dproperty profilest that can be linked to needs derived

or made possible through the usage of nanomaterials. Some reflections on the role that science roadmapping can play for research organisations

how the experiences with technology roadmapping in companies or industries can be adapted for our T. Fleischer et al./

and what further benefits of the roadmapping process beyond structuring the field of nanotechnology can be expected. 5. Summary

and outlook The landscape for Technology assessment has changed over the last few years. Political priorities are altering

Also, the characteristics of technologies to be assessed are changing. These developments have put pressure on the TA practitioners to rethink their approaches

when TA results are expected to contribute to the sustainability assessment of emerging technologies. Nanotechnology is considered mainly as one of the technological developments to have far-reaching impacts on the industries of this century.

Together with the hopes for nanotechnology's exploitation for wealth creation, competitiveness, sustainability and health, growing concerns about its potential to change ways of living,

its health impacts and environmental consequences or the threat to stimulate new understandings of dnaturalt

Nanotechnology is a clear case for technology assessment. Because of the diversity of scientific and technological approaches pursued under the umbrella of dnanotechnologyt, for TA purposes some preparatory steps are needed.

We propose an adaptation of the concept of science roadmapping and its application to selected segments of the overall field of nanotechnology.

This aims at inter alia, structuring the research field, linking research activities with visions of products

whose results can be fed back into the scientific, technological and also societal decision-making and agenda-setting processes.

On the other hand, there is some experience with similar doubts about the potential of technology roadmapping. In the words of Robert Galvin:

bin engineering, the roadmapping process has influenced so positively public and industry officials that their questioning of support for fundamental technology support is muted...

Just as engineers first scoffed at them (roadmaps, T. F), . so will some scientists. But who better than scientists to experiment with an experiment that can strengthen sciences'support

and accelerate its generation of knowledgeq 9. References 1 D. Bu tschi, R. Carius, M. Decker, S. Gram, A. Grunwald, P. Machleidt, S. Steyaert, R

Technology assessment Methods and Impacts, Springer Heidelberg, New york, 2004. T. Fleischer et al.//Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1112 1121 1120 2 T. Fleischer, A. Grunwald, Technikgestaltung fu r mehr Nachhaltigkeit Anforderungen an die Technikfolgenabscha

A definition of nanotechnology. Graue Reihe 36, European Academy Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler, Germany. 5 T. Fleischer, Technikgestaltung fu r mehr Nachhaltigkeit:

M. Boden, Y. Punie, M. Zappacosta, Science and technology roadmapping: from industry to public policy, IPTS Report 73 (2003.

from sustaining to disruptive technologies, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 71 (1 2)( 2004) 1 3. 9 R. Galvin, Science roadmaps, Science 280 (5365)( 1998) 803.10 A. Grunwald, Technikfolgenabscha tzung eine

Einfu hrung, Edition Sigma, Berlin, 2002.11 S. Walsh, Roadmapping a disruptive technology: a case study: the emerging microsystems and top-down nanosystems industry, Technol.

Change 71 (1/2)( 2004) 161 185.12 S. Walsh, J. Elders, International Roadmap on MEMS, Microsystems, Micromachining and Top Down Nanotechnology, MANCEF, Naples

, Florida, 2003.13 Microelectronics advanced research initiative, technology roadmap for nanoelectronics, in: R. Compan o, L. Molenkamp, D. J. Paul (Eds.

European commission, IST Programme Future and Emerging technologies, 1999.14 G. Fernholz, Roadmaps in MEMS/MST: what do they offer

mstnews 5, 2003, pp. 42 44.15 Technology Futures analysis Methods Working group, Technology futures analysis: toward integration of the field and new methods, Technol.

After serving as a project manager for several technology assessment studies for the Institute for Technology assessment and Systems analysis (ITAS) of Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Germany,

and the Office of Technology assessment at the German Parliament (TAB), he is currently heading the project group btechnology Assessment for Nanotechnologiesq at ITAS.

and studies dealing with methodological aspects of Technology assessment. Since 2003 he is a member of the scientific staff and since February 2004 deputy head of the Institute for Technology assessment and System Analysis (ITAS) at the Research centre Karlsruhe.

Ulrich Fiedeler is a Postdoc Research Associate in the Institute for Technology assessment and Systems analysis (ITAS) of Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe.

He has a background in physics with emphasis in the field of semiconductors and solar cells.

At present he is working in several projects concerning technology assessment of nanotechnology. T. Fleischer et al.//Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1112 1121 1121

< Back - Next >