Nanotechnology

Nano artifact (19)
Nanoelectronics (8)
Nanomaterial (28)
Nanomedicine (3)
Nanoparticle (28)
Nanoscale (23)
Nanoscience (33)
Nanostructure (14)
Nanotech (462)
Nanotube (137)

Synopsis: Technologies: Nanotechnology:

The two following articles, focusing on Technology assessment (TA) and, using as case study nanotechnology, stress the pressure that new technology developments are posing to the field of TA.

A three-level framework on the case of nanotubes is presented to analyse and visualise the dynamics in three interrelated context:

CENELEC and ETSI published by the European commission 38 to develop a standardisation work programme to support the internal market for the service sectors. 3. 2. 3. The future needs for standards in nanotechnology based on a survey among stakeholders

of Germany's nanotechnology community Besides the examples reported above, we present another example of a survey,

Nanotechnology is still in an emerging phase, according to our conceptual model. The current standardisation activities are focused still on terminology and measurement and testing standards.

A first approach was launched in Germany by a study to identify future themes for standardisation based on the negative experiences in the case of nanotechnology,

This paper discusses, based on a first round application in the field of micro and nanotechnologies for single cell analysis, the methodology of such a new approach.

Out project is embedded in a particular network of excellence on nanotechnology called Frontiers. Among the central aims of the Frontiers Network-of-Excellence (Noe) programme1 are a. the coordination of research activities in the research institutes that comprise the Noe (alignment;

This includes actors outside the network, in the case of nanotechnology, start-ups and SMES which have a lot at stake in entering such risky innovation chains.

which allow the Frontiers network to develop strategies for a number of different issues relevant to particular areas within nanotechnologies for the life sciences.

which aim to coordinate activities in enabling nanotechnologies for research in the life sciences. The Technology assessment Programme is part of the Science to Industry work package and the Ethical and Societal Aspect package,

T. Propp/Technological forecasting & Social Change 75 (2008) 517 538 of alignment to allow for the creation of innovation chains in the field of micro and nanotechnology.

'4 Even though group leaders may use roadmap-type forecasts to organize financial support for their research. 5 As the Dutch Minacned consortium did in 2006 with their‘Roadmap Micro/Nanotechnology in Food';

'cf http://www. minacned. nl/nl/activiteiten/roadmap mnt food nutrition. php. 6 MANCEF is based the US Micro and Nanotechnology Commercialization and Education Foundation;

12 It was developed as a framework to study emerging alignments and entanglements in the field of nanotechnology,

lab-on-a-chip devices for cell analysis The vision of performing laboratory experiments at a micro or even nanoscale was posed first by Terry 50 who linked the idea of integrated microelectronics to the notion of integrated

Around 2000 nanotechnology started entering this field, offering improvements to existing chip components, but also providing novel concepts for separation and detection, cell analysis, cell manipulation etc.

nanotechnology based tools are beginning to emerge as promising devices for single cell and subcellular analysis. Although current microtechnologies (including microfluidics) provide a foundation for creating a nanotechnology interface with single cells,

both the integration of multiple functions and automated analysis and data handling remain to be accomplished in a selfconttaine cell-on-a-chip.

technical dimension Lab-on-a-chip specifically for cell analysis is particularly relevant for Frontiers research lines due to its focus on instrumentation based on nanotechnologies for the life sciences.

Of particular interest is the proliferation of research and development of nanotechnologies for cell analysis the laboratory, the proliferation of expectation of applications for such cell-on-a-chip devices,

microfabrication and nanotechnology tools for cell analysis and (2) start-up companies and small-and medium-sized enterprises (SMES) relating to specific cell analysis techniques and lab-on-a-chip technology.

Networks of start-ups and SMES related to micro and nanotechnology (cf Minacned) already exist. Thus a form of co-option would be desired the goal to take the step of integration together

and nanotechnology SME networks such as Minacned. 21 Innovation chain 4 is currently occurring at the University of Twente (NL) where a start-up company with a specific sensor is acting as platform integrator.

The IP issue can be generalised to many projected nanotechnology innovations where technologies cannot be products in themselves

and teaching. 23 One way of doing this is developing an integrated platform based on an interesting 18 This agglomeration effect of technology platforms is particularly strong for nanotechnologies 67.

sensors etc. enabled through nanotechnology. Exceptions however include coatings and catalysts, which can in themselves be turned into innovations. 23 This also a general issue in relation to the current situation of strategic science and application oriented research. 532 D. K. R. Robinson, T. Propp/Technological forecasting

Acknowledgements This work was funded through the Technology assessment Program of the Dutch Nanotechnology Consortium Nanoned led by Arie Rip (University of Twente)

Prerequisites and potential benefits for assessing Nanotechnology, EU US Seminar: New technology Foresight, Forecasting & Assessment Methods, Seville, May 2004, pp. 13 14.28 T. Fleischer, M. Decker,

U. Fiedeler, Assessing Emerging technologies Methodical Challenges and the Case of Nanotechnologies, EU US Seminar: New technology Foresight, Forecasting & Assessment Methods, Seville, May 2004, pp. 13 14.29 S. Kuhlmann, et al.

and measuring lab-on-a-chip of increasing irreversibility in the emergence of nanotechnology paths.

32 A. Rip, D. K. R. Robinson, Socio-technical paths as a multilevel phenomenon, exemplified in the domain of nanotechnology,

the case of nanotubes, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 72 (2005) 1094 1111.48 R. O. van Merkerk, D. K. R. Robinson, Characterizing the emergence of a technological field:

Cheltenham, 2005, pp. 251 281.67 D. K. R. Robinson, A. Rip, V. Mangematin, Technological agglomeration and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology, Res.

K. R. Robinson, The use of the path concept and emerging irreversibilities in the analysis and modulation of nanotechnologies, EIASM Workshop on organising paths paths of organising, Berlin, November 2006, pp. 3 4

and management relating to the dynamics of emerging nanotechnologies, where studies of expectations and paths are combined with strategy articulation tools to provide strategic intelligence for reflexive governance and management of Emerging s&t.

A Case for Critical systems Thinking in Nanotechnology; examines how vitally important the foresight objective of inclusiveness in the embracement of diverse stakeholders is for the credibility of an innovation process.

Using contemporary examples associated with the challenges of nanotechnology, they develop the case for ensuring that foresight offers a democratic rather than just a technocratic input to the future and to the policy processes

An application to prospecting futures of the responsible development of nanotechnology, a research project exploring potential co-evolutions of nanotechnology and governance arrangements.

This involved the inclusion of pre-engagement analysis of potential co-evolutions in the form of scenarios into interactive workshop activities, with the aim of enabling multi-stakeholder anticipation of the complexities of co-evolution.

In addition to the key papers, the technical note of Greg Tegart on Energy and nanotechnologies: Priority areas for Australia's future features an excellent case example of the importance and learning being experienced from the application of novel FTA METHODOLOGIES to explore the possibilities offered by the use of nanotechnologies to contribute to new and improved approaches to energy conversion,

storage and distribution in Australia. 1136 Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1135 1137 We conclude with the observation of Scott Cunningham

governance of converging new technologies integrated from the nanoscale, Paper Presented at the Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology, Portland, 2007.2 A. De Haan, K. Mulder, Sustainable air transport:

such as those that nanotechnologies, population aging, or climate change will pose to the society. In addition, business, policy making and the whole broad spectrum of decision making call for future-oriented technology analysis as well as risk assessment.

Other institutions like the Technical University of Berlin, the Institute for Nanotechnology (INT) of the Research centre Karlsruhe, the RWTH Aachen, the Austrian Research centres Gmbh (ARC), Systems Research Division Dept

1. Life sciences and biotechnology 2. Information and communication technology 3. Materials and their production processes 4. Nanotechnology 5. Optics/photonics/optoelectronics 6. Industrial production processes

A case for critical systems thinking in nanotechnology Denis Loveridge, Ozcan Saritas Manchester Institute of Innovation research, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, M13 9pl Manchester, UK a r

The current paper discusses the application of the‘situation'cum CSH metaphor for the case of nanoscience,

nano-technology and nano artifacts that are being adopted widely in areas such as materials, ICTS, and medicine. As a result of the growing interest for nano-field, nanoartiifact are now reaching the consumer markets within a large number of branches.

and health risks of nano artifacts along with the ethical and legal issues arising as a result of the widespread use of these products.

ethical and social impacts of nanosciences,-technologies, and-artifacts. The paper suggests that Inclusive foresight, reinforced with the principles of CSH, can be of use in the nano-field providing wider stakeholder representation during the research and development processes.

and environmentally responsive nano artifacts. 2009 Published by Elsevier Inc. Keywords: Foresight Inclusivity Critical systems Heuristics Nanotechnology 1. Institutional Foresight Institutional Foresight programmes(‘Foresight'hereafter) now occupy a prominent position in the minds of public policy makers.

In the 1990s most of these programmes were driven by the economic mantra of technologically dependent competitiveness and its importance to national economies.

Nano-technology, as will be discussed later, lies in the same ground as GMOS. 2. Expectations of Inclusive foresight The sheer practical arduousness of attempting to run Inclusive foresight in the way outlined below means that expectations of it need to be modest,

23.1217 D. Loveridge, O. Saritas/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1208 1221 5. Foresight's democratic deficit and nano artifacts The root of Foresight's deficit lies

or rejects the desirability of nano artifacts. Immediately this raises questions of inclusivity and exclusivity, and of the nature of what is colloquially, vaguely and incorrectly called‘nanotechnology'.

'The clash between the general notions of inclusivity and exclusivity, and how it might be ameliorated have been discussed earlier

The Sources of Knowledge part of the metaphor draws attention to the use of the term nano artifacts.

of any kind that depends on the systemic interaction between nanoscience, nano-technology and the artifacts themselves for their evolution into desirable artifacts:

Furthermore, the omnibus term‘nanotechnology'misleads the participants in any Foresight study into believing that they are confronting a homogeneous and coherent technology

Nano artifacts depend on the convergence of sets of sciences and technologies, elsewhere called genus sciences and technologies 23, of very different kinds for their evolution into feasible and (hopefully) desirable artifacts.

The difference between nano artifacts and their biotechnological counterparts is more extreme as will become clearer later

The public and corporate worlds The public acceptance of nano artifacts Public participation in Foresight. Much of this interaction concerns the current drive toward regulation

or severely restrict the future evolution of nano artifacts many of which are already on sale and widely accepted as desirable artifacts including high factor sun screens, tennis racquets reinforced with carbon nanotubes,

car body parts incorporating carbon nanotubes, dendrimers and many other artifacts. Regulation, product liability, case law and patent law have existed long

and though created for different circumstances will certainly apply to nano artifacts. The influence of the EU's Code of conduct (the Code hereafter) for nanoscience

nano-technology and nano artifacts is a further matter shaping the future situation surrounding the nano-field.

The seven principles of the Code are: Precaution Inclusiveness though not in the sense used in this paper Integrity Better and constant vigilance to assess developments

and effectiveness of governance Realising societal benefits Credibility and trust for good governance and openness to public scrutiny of risks and expectations Protection of fundamental rights in the absence of the precautionary principle through unavoidable situations.

technological feasibility and artifact desirability of a nano artifact. 1218 D. Loveridge, O. Saritas/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1208 1221 participation in Foresight relating to these issues.

and patenting are major themes for Foresight relating to the dynamic evolution of nano artifacts and the situations that arise as a result.

The spectrum of feasible and possible nano artifacts is very wide. Foresight then needs to appreciate how public acceptance

or rejection of nano artifacts may shift according to the nature of the artifacts presented to the public.

Critical to public acceptance is the growth of a critical mass of opinion favourable to any particular form of nano artifact and its supporting sciences and technologies:

and briefly sets out how the metaphor relates to nano artifacts and their enabling sciences, and technologies.

The future of nanotechnologies and their impacts on society require widespread participation in elucidating their acceptability in society.

Such process will contribute to the development of more socially and environmentally responsive nano artifacts. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Denis Loveridge and Penny Street,

Converging technologies at the nanoscale: the making of a new world? Technology and Strategic management 20 (1)( 2008) 29 44 January 24 P. Berg, et al.

An application to prospecting futures of the responsible development of nanotechnology Douglas K. R. Robinson STEPS, University of Twente, Enschede, The netherlands a r t i c l e i n

Nanotechnology is no exception, promising many benefits through nano-enabled applications across multiple sectors and with the potential of affecting many parts of our society.

At present, during its early stages, a wide variety of actors are anticipating both on the potential benefits and risks of the development of nanotechnologies and their embedment into markets and into society.

and develop appropriate governance strategies for nanotechnologies need to consider both thewide spectrumof nanotechnology research and development lines,

the governance landscape surrounding nanotechnology and the application areas it will affect, and how these may co-evolve with each other.

and around the notion of Responsible Research and Innovation of nanotechnologies as an opportunity to develop support tools for exploring potential co-evolutions of nanotechnology and governance arrangements.

Co-evolutionary scenarios Selection environment Nanotechnology Responsible development Anticipatory coordination 1. Introduction The path to innovation is journey-like, certainly so for radical innovation.

For those wishing to enable beneficial technology applications stemming from potentially breakthrough areas of science and technology, such as nanotechnology,

In the field of nanotechnology these challenges are compounded further due to the early stage of nano developments

and risks that may become reality as nanotechnology matures. It is uncertain what sort of sectors will be impacted

(or created) by nanotechnology innovations and how the regulatory, economic and societal landscapes will co-evolve.

Therefore, those wishing to develop strategies for managing nanotechnology emergence not only face the general challenge of prospecting possible pathways for innovation they also are challenged to prospect the changing environments

& Social Change 1. 1. Anticipatory coordination for the responsible development of nanotechnology These general challenges become very specific in the case of nanoscience and nanotechnology.

There is a call for anticipatory governance 1 often phrased as the need for responsible development of nanotechnology or responsible innovation in nanotechnology,

1 where activities are underway to enable those nanotechnologies which would provide benefit whilst constraining those that may cause harm.

But the potential breakthrough nature of nanotechnologies as enablers of radically new applications may mean a complex reconfiguration of the environments that a nanotechnology innovation may traverse during its‘lifetime'from concept to well embedded technology in our society.

Only then can effective strategies be developed to shape the emerging nanotechnology governance arrangement. Such an emerging reconfiguration of actor relations, their roles and responsibilities is particularly striking in nanotechnology in the diverse activities in

and around Responsible Research and Innovation of Nanotechnology. 2 That is why it became the subject of a research project

and workshop within a programme of future-oriented technology analysis (FTA) in a nanotechnology research network called Frontiers. 3 The FTA ACTIVITIES in this network revolve around multi-(potential) stakeholder workshops where the aim is to explore the complex dynamics in and around specific areas of nanotechnology important for the Frontiers

Network of Excellence (Frontiers Noe). The objective of the programme was to gain a deeper understanding of issues,

This creates a requirement for rich and easy to digest strategic intelligence for which can prepare the ground for interactive workshops on complex and highly uncertain topics such as nanotechnology.

governance of new and emerging nanotechnologies has become a highly visible debate, disagreements on efficacy of current governance arrangements proliferate,

(or are in the process of being formed to shape possible new configurations of roles and responsibilities in the development of nanotechnology.

which aim to coordinate activities in enabling nanotechnologies for research in the life sciences. The Technology assessment Programme was part of the Science to Industry work package and the Ethical and Societal Aspect package,

Nanotechnology, even at this nascent stage, is stimulating a lot of speculation on shifts in these landscapes leading to a desire to explore the potential mutual co-evolution of nanotechnologies

and their internalisation 3. 1. A project is initiated In Autumn 2007 (as still the case 2 years on) there was an increasing emphasis on societal impact and embedment of nanotechnology applications.

Ideas of responsible development of nanotechnology have been in circulation for a while now, but by the end of 2007 they were solidifying into policy and regulation.

with the aim of bringing together actual and potential players involved in nanotechnology governance to share perspectives,

explore possibilities and draw out some recommendations to guide both the Nanotechnology R&d network (Frontiers) who initiated the project as others exploring potential governance approaches.

At the time of the workshop (December 2007) the situation in and around nanotechnology involved mostly the discussion of Environment, Health and Safety aspects (EHS/HES) and other nanotoxicity related discussions,

and workshops on the nano governance issue. 9 For example the nanoelectronics industry coordination efforts described in 34 which would lie in the coordinating bodies box of the IC+diagram.

R. Robinson/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1222-1239 It is not in the scope of this paper to detail the case history of the emergence of RRI for nanotechnology,

including codes of conduct for nanotechnology, some prepared by authorities like the European commission, others offered by one or another firm,

about pressures towards valorisation of research as well as lack of uptake in sectors that could profit from the possibilities offered by nanoscience and nanotechnology.

In the case of the Frontiers Noe for nanotechnology, the programme involved research and preparation of these scenarios an input to 1-day multi-stakeholder workshops

production and use of nanoparticles and the consideration of risks of nanotechnology. 10 Fig. 3 visualizes this (up to 2008.

but are unclear on how to target nano broadly beyond the current focus on nanoparticles. Firms are reluctant to start reporting the DEFRA voluntary reporting initiative was mentioned as having limitations

and new ways of managing them e g. the Risk Framework for Nanotechnology put forward by the unusual alliance of Dupont and Environmental Defence.

Ad hoc public engagement exercises act as a lubricant to continue nanotechnology developments across the board. However, one project in particular captures people's attention,

in general most public engagement activities initiated by R&d actors focused more on enlightening the general public on the potentials of nanotech R&d-engagement as a lubricant against public friction.

Drug delivery becomes a key driver in nanotechnology. Rapid developments in nano means the consequent burgeoning number of delivery methods leads to increasingly bewildering regulatory protocols.

concerned about 2nd generation effects of nanoparticles argued for a moratorium on nanoparticles for medical purposes until toxicity tests tailored for these particles would be done.

Lack of lifecycle thinking in nanoparticles and engineered tissue causes real concerns by both environmental agencies (the former) and clinicians (the latter.

Production, storage and distribution in both the manufacture of nanoparticle based therapeutics and use in the clinics is an ongoing concern,

as well as quality control of nanoparticles and bioaccumulation uncertainties (particularly in liver, spleen and bone marrow). Public funding agencies form a blanket ban on financing nanoparticulate delivery systems.

and links them up with overall strategies in motivations for engagement around nanotechnology. 12 The scenario focused on the engagement aspects of RRI, the roles of various actor groups, the strategies and how the interactions played out.

The scenario in Box 3 looks at a specific cluster of innovations in nanoparticle based drug delivery.

This approach to engagement stems from an anticipation by nanotech developers of public friction which leads to enlightenment and legitimisation strategies.

Finland begins to invest in nanotechnology for paper processing (a major contributor to the Finnish economy.

and communicate the benefits of nanotechnology. There is a proliferation of such projects across (and initiated by) the nano R&d domain focussing on enabling public acceptance.

Gaps in regulation widen as nanotechnologies become increasingly more complex existing laws which could be applied to products (medical devices) are equipped less to oversee products and processes such as active nanostructures

which cross many sectors and can be applied in many settings. The accident with the Finnish worker opens up nano governance once again and a number of lines of R&d grind to a halt pending further investigation.

Regulatory actions retroactively cover all Nanomaterials and products on the market become identified and recalled pending certification. 1233 D. K. R. Robinson/Technological forecasting

roles and responsibilities of researchers and the issues around risk of nanoparticles. The scenario in Box 4 will be shown in more detail in Section 5. 4. 2. The effect of these scenarios in the workshop The three scenarios together covered the various positions and expectations of those actors active in the debate around RRI.

The daylong workshop was comprised of a number nanotechnology researchers, a ministry of health representative, a large chemical company, a trade union representative, a nanotechnology industry association,

this is a stylised quote announced by a large pharmaceutical company in a meeting in November 2007 on Nanomedicine 38..

One example, Finland begins to invest in nanotechnology for paper processing (a major contributor to the Finnish economy) Anticipatory coordination and lock in:

and developments in nanotechnology for the paper sector Lock in as path enabling: other governments look on with envy at the focus of Finnish nanotechnology.

This is a mirror of anticipatory coordination in other geographical regions 39,40..Government official Nanotechnology promises to revolutionise all industry sectors, paper production could seriously be enhanced through nanotechnology and as a small country,

Finland should focus resources on what is most beneficial for us. Other national governments look with envy at the rapidity of developments of the targeted nano programmes of Finland.

and communicate the benefits of nanotechnology. There is a proliferation of such projects across (and initiated by) the nano R&d domain focussing on enabling public acceptance.

and processing of nanomaterials. He suggested that an industry association (such as his own) could play that role..

Emergence of platform technologies with applications in multiple sectors and comprising of ever increasing complexity of functional nano-elements (multifunctional tailored nanoparticles, highly integrated Lab on a chip, Moore than More integrating of semiconductors

This highlights another issue of where to locate responsibility for nanotechnology in applications, as nano is an enabling technology,

Regulators rely on current law (or modifications of them) for nanomaterials and applications. REACH13 is used but is identified as a blunt instrument by labour organisations as it fails to cover certain substances in very small quantities Differing positions between enactors and comparative selectors:

but the major emphasis lies on the fact that nano regulation is difficult due to increasing complexity law is equipped less to oversee products and processes such as active nanostructures

However, there is alignment in the complicated relationships between technology platforms (multi-functionalised nanoparticles, and other functional macromolecular systems) and the various applications/sectors (they have become embedded),

Further diagnostics reveal nanoparticulate aggregation directly linked with the Finnish paper mill (specificity of tailored nanoparticles enables the identification of source of particle) Trigger creating window of opportunity for repositioning and realignment of nanotechnology governance:

This element of the narrative was inspired by NIOSH 2004 which raised concerns around the manufacturing of nanoparticles.

This example is linked to a presentation given by manufacturing firm in the London meeting November 2007 on Nanomedicine.

Finnish economy begins to suffer due to the high sunk investments into nanotechnology based infrastructure. Public outcry as consumer organisations identify major issues in a number of sectors which could hold potential risk with no protection for the consumer (the house of cards collapses) Window of opportunity for selectors:

5. 4. Total recall By 2014 Nanotech employs approximately 2. 3 million workers globally. Nano has become a many headed hydra

while some nanomaterials will be produced below that level. 1236 D. K. R. Robinson/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1222-1239 standards causes complication:

Regulatory actions retroactively cover all nanomaterials and products on the market become identified and recalled pending certification.

Whilst for nanomedicine and bionanotechnology the clamour for tests and rapid certification hampers technological progress

other nano-promises as in Beyond Moore (nanoelectronics and nanophotonics) take the lead for the time being Winners

In this case they were used by participants as a resource for discussing the complexities of potential multi-actor multilevel de/re alignments and the effects on nanotechnology emergence.

of maintaining a patchwork of soft law options to facilitate nanotechnology innovation, positions taken on precaution,

the emergence of windows of opportunity for action (stemming from the Finnish worker case being part of the coevollutio of emerging nanotechnology options in paper production and risk and regulation landscape),

and overcome barriers to introduce their nanotechnology into society. The IC+framework provides a gameboard to bring together linear/concentric perspectives with complexity,

The Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society, Presenting Futures, vol. I, Springer, Berlin, 2008.4 F. W. Geels, Towards sociotechnical scenarios and reflexive anticipation:

Science and Citizens, Globalization and the Challenge of Engagement, Zed Books, London, 2003.32 B. Laurent, Engaging the public in nanotechnology?

Change 75 (3 march 2008) 312 333.35 A. Rip, M. van Amerom, Emerging de facto Agendas Around Nanotechnology:

Springer, 2009.36 M. Kearnes, A. Rip, The Emerging Governance landscape of Nanotechnology, in S. Gammel, A. Lösch, A. Nordmann (eds.

Akademische Verlagsanstalt, 2009.37 Mayer Brown, Minutes of Debate on Governance Initiatives for the European Nanotechnology Community in the Public and Private Sectors European commission, Brussels, December 5th 2007.38 Investing

Medical Nanotechnologies II, Royal College of Surgeons, London, UK, Nov 28 29 2007 (www. nano. org. uk). 39 A. Delemarle, D. K. R

and the emergence of clusters and networks in nanotechnology. Special issue on Nanoscale research, Res. Policy 36 (2007) 871 879.41 A. Nordmann, If and then:

a critique of speculative nanoethics, Nanoethics 1 (2007) 31 46. Douglas K. R. Robinson obtained his Undergraduate and Masters degree in Physics and Space science and Technology at the University of Leicester (UK), Universität Siegen (Germany) and International Space University in Strasbourg (France.

Alongside this, he is also a part-time Technical Analyst at the Institute of Nanotechnology (UK) focusing on nanotechnologies in the agrifood sector. 1239 D. K. R. Robinson/Technological forecasting & Social Change 76 (2009) 1222-1239

< Back - Next >

Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011