RTTA 3: Deliberation and Participation

Leaders: Patrick Hamlett, North Carolina State University, and Daniel Sarewitz, ASU

Goals

The central goals of RTTA 3 are to develop multiple, plausible visions of nanotechnology-enabled futures, elucidate public preferences for various alternatives and, using such preferences, further refine future visions and enhance contextual awareness. RTTA 3 consists of four tightly integrated themes that cover research, education and outreach:

• RTTA 3/1 Scenario Development (Cynthia Selin, ASU, leader) creates, vets and disseminates plausible nanotechnological "scenes" for further development and deliberation by a variety of publics.
• RTTA 3/2 InnovationSpace (Prasad Boradkar, ASU, leader) is a collaborative undergraduate design course including ASU's Schools of Design, Engineering, and Business in which transdisciplinary teams of students create product designs, marketing plans and engineering models of potential products within a framework of responsible innovation.
• RTTA 3/3 CriticalCorps (Renata Hejduk, ASU, leader) uses the methods of cultural studies and design to elaborate on the socio-cultural significance of the scenes developed and products imagined by the other RTTA 3 programs.
• RTTA 3/4 National Citizens' Technology Forum (Patrick Hamlett, North Carolina State University, leader) is the first of its kind, independent and joint deliberation of six groups of locally representative lay citizens from across the US on issues in human nanotechnologies and enhancement.

RTTA 3/1 Scenario Development

RTTA 3/1 constructed, vetted and disseminated original scenes of plausible nanotechnological futures to aid in deliberative activities. Oriented around technologies of human enhancement from TRC 2, these scenes were used by InnovationSpace, included in the background material provided to the participants of the National Citizens' Technology Forum (RTTA 3/4), and streamlined for use in the national survey. The scenes served as tools of inquiry housed on the NanoFutures interactive Web site (http://cns.asu.edu/nanofutures/) - designed with the assistance of the San Francisco Exploratorium. Developing the scenes has been described (Bennett 2008), the vetting procedures scrutinized (Selin 2010 forthcoming) and the data from the Web site analyzed (Selin and Hudson under review). In addition to innovation in scenario methodologies, the scenario activities identified and explored the importance of central theoretical plausibility in technology assessment, a discovery that serves as the basis for a planned November 2009 workshop.

The scenes have been distributed directly to a variety of colleagues, who have used them with great enthusiasm in commercial and educational settings, including museums. They also have been translated into Spanish for distribution to the Latin American Network for Nanotechnology and Society (ReLANS). RTTA 3/1 currently is working on the next iteration of NanoFutures, vetting additional scenes that identify the nexus of nanotechnology, energy and equity.

RTTA 3/2 InnovationSpace

RTTA 3/2 InnovationSpace has trained three cross-functional teams of undergraduates in the process of "integrated innovation" applied to nanotechnologies in each of the last three years. Each year, these teams produce nano-enabled products (see example) congruent with CNS's thematic clusters. In the process, InnovationSpace teams have generated nine invention disclosures and have provided the substance for 14 completed or soon-to-be completed undergraduate honors theses. An academic account of their work is under review (Selin, Boradkar and Fischer under review).

RTTA 3/3 CriticalCorps

RTTA 3/3 developed a "toolbox" for designers to use to improve the societal implications of their designs. This activity drew on RTTA 3/2 InnovationSpace designs from Year 2 of the project as case examples. It is presented in a master's thesis (Lidberg 2008).

RTTA 3/4 National Citizens' Technology Forum (NCTF)

RTTA 3/4 organized the nation's first large-scale public deliberative activity on a scientific topic - nanotechnology and human enhancement technologies. The NCTF involved the full participation of 74 lay citizens (paid volunteers) in six locales. The citizens completed a pre-test, received a vetted background document, engaged in face-to-face and internet-mediated deliberations, wrote reports from each local group, and took a post-test. Central findings include both those about the substance of the citizens' views of nanotechnologies and human enhancement and those about the nature and quality of the citizens' deliberations. The general portrait of attitudes toward nanotechnologies for human enhancement that emerged was one that strongly suggests that popular unease with enhancement technologies exists alongside hope for nano-enabled therapies. The general portrait of deliberation that emerged was one that strongly supports the contention that lay citizens are capable of deliberating in a thoughtful way that can contribute to public discourse and even to policy decisions - with a few caveats. Overall, participants gained significant mastery of the technical aspects of NBIC developments, and they engaged content experts in active, informed and critical questioning.

Numerous scholars are contributing to data analysis and publication. In addition to the summary report (Hamlett, Cobb and Guston 2008) and manuscripts in preparation by Hamlett and Cobb, one book chapter (Bal in preparation 2010), three journal manuscripts under review (Delborne et al., Kleinman et al., Philbrick and Barandiaran), and two working papers (Powell et al. 2009a, b) have been produced. Other scholars have sought NCTF data, and the NCTF was featured in presentations by Guston and Cobb at the March 9, 2009 briefing for the U.S. Congressional Nanotechnology Caucus.

RTTA 1: Research and Innovation System Analysis (RISA)
RTTA 2: Public Opinion and Values
RTTA 3: Deliberation and Participation
RTTA 4: Reflexivity, Assessment and Evaluation
TRC 1: Equity and Responsibility
TRC 2: Human Identity, Enhancement and Biology