Nanotechnologies -mapping new modes of knowledge production

Most governments have identified Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies (N&N) as key technological areas for future economic growth. These emergent technologies are perceived as paradigmatic examples of new modes of knowledge production characterised by the growing importance of academia-industry linkages, interdisciplinarity and social accountability, among others.

We aim to map developments in N&N exploring the structure, knowledge links and flows in research networks, relying on both qualitative case studies and quantitative analyses based on bibliometric and patent data. In particular, we focus our attention on the shifting interfaces that are redrawing, blurring or erasing former disciplinary or organisational boundaries:

• University-Industry linkages in N&N
• Interdisciplinarity and technology convergence in N&N
• Public engagement practices for N&N

Review paper: Meyer, M. (2007) What do we know about innovation in nanotechnology? Some propositions about an emerging field between hype and path-dependency. Scientometrics 70(3), 779-810. Preprint.

Researchers: Martin Meyer, Ismael Rafols, Irene Makar, Go Yoshizawa, Soong Woong Hwang, Ema Arisa (University of Tokyo)

Main lines of research

1. University-Industry linkages in N&N

How strong are university-industry linkages in N&N? What is the relationship between basic research and technology? Is there a synergy or a trade-off between in engaging both academic and industrial research? We are looking into these issues through the analysis of publications, patents and their cross-linkages.

Main projects:

• Gatsby Tech Transfer Fellowship (M. Meyer, 2003-2007), a research programme on university-industry technology transfer and knowledge exchange.

• EuroNano (M. Meyer, 2007), Nanotechnology in Europe. Assessment of the Current State, Opportunities, Challenges and Socio-Economic Impact, for ETEPS, in collaboration with VDI (Germany) and Georgia Tech (US).

Selected publication: Meyer, M. 2006 Are co-active inventors on top of their class? An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology. Research Policy, 35(10), 1646-1662. Preprint.

2. Interdisciplinarity and technology convergence in N&N

What is the evidence of technological convergence or interdisciplinarity in N&N? How are different bodies of knowledge combined within labs or research centres? How do actors from different epistemic cultures interact in N&N research communities? Can we talk of nanotechnology as a coherent field? If so, what binds the various subfields? In order to address these questions we are carrying case studies in particular areas of bionanotechnology (e.g. biomolecular motors and lab-on-a-chip).

Main project: Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship (I. Rafols, 2006-2008) Interdisciplinary research in bionanotechnology.

Selected publication: Rafols, I. and Meyer, M. (2007) How cross-disciplinary is bionanotechnology? Explorations in the specialty of molecular motors. Scientometrics 70(3), 633-650. Preprint.

3. Public engagement practices in N&N

One of the apparent specificities of nanotechnologies is the key role for its emergence of policy processes regarding funding, re-organisation of the S&T systems and societal issues such as risk perception and social shaping of the new technologies. This has led many stakeholders to agree on the importance of public engagement exercises. What is the framing of N&N in these engagement practices? What is the role of the public(s)? How do these practices feed into policy? We are looking into these questions by comparing developments in the UK and Japan.

Researchers: Go Yoshizawa, Arisa Ema (Univ. Tokyo)

Main project: Daiwa Anglo-Japanese Foundation (I. Rafols, 2006-2007), in collaboration with the Graduate Research Institute of Policy Studies (GRIPS, Tokyo) and the University of Tokyo.