2013•Review of Policy ResearchRequires access

Improving Legitimacy in Nanotechnology Policy Development Through Stakeholder and Community Engagement: Forging New Pathways

A. Wendy Russell

Open publisher page 26 citations

Abstract

Abstract This paper reports on a multistakeholder engagement process conducted in an Australian policy setting that led to a new community engagement framework: Science and Technology Engagement Pathways (STEP). I describe the process in the context of a lack of awareness, experience, and culture of deliberative public engagement in Australia, particularly in relation to decision making concerning science, technology, and innovation. Increasing cautiousness in government and industry approaches to nanotechnology development, in Australia and elsewhere, creates an imperative and an opening for improved stakeholder and community engagement to improve the legitimacy and sustainability of decisions. In this context, STEP may stimulate movement toward deliberative engagement by raising awareness and commitment from diverse stakeholders and providing a structure for developments in engagement and public dialog. STEP potentially provides “rules of engagement” and “intervention pathways” for ongoing public engagement with science and technology developments and for critical “science in society” perspectives to inform policy.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract This paper reports on a multistakeholder engagement process conducted in an Australian policy setting that led to a new community engagement framework: Science and Technology Engagement Pathways (STEP). I describe the process in the context of a lack of awareness, experience, and culture of deliberative public engagement in Australia, particularly in relation to decision making concerning science, technology, and innovation. Increasing cautiousness in government and industry approaches to nanotechnology development, in Australia and elsewhere, creates an imperative and an opening for improved stakeholder and community engagement to improve the legitimacy and sustainability of decisions. In this context, STEP may stimulate movement toward deliberative engagement by raising awareness and commitment from diverse stakeholders and providing a structure for developments in engagement and public dialog. STEP potentially provides “rules of engagement” and “intervention pathways” for ongoing public engagement with science and technology developments and for critical “science in society” perspectives to inform policy.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 26 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract This paper reports on a multistakeholder engagement process conducted in an Australian policy setting that led to a new community engagement framework: Science and Technology Engagement Pathways (STEP). I describe the process in the context of a lack of awareness, experience, and culture of deliberative public engagement in Australia, particularly in relation to decision making concerning science, technology, and innovation. Increasing cautiousness in government and industry approaches to nanotechnology development, in Australia and elsewhere, creates an imperative and an opening for improved stakeholder and community engagement to improve the legitimacy and sustainability of decisions. In this context, STEP may stimulate movement toward deliberative engagement by raising awareness and commitment from diverse stakeholders and providing a structure for developments in engagement and public dialog. STEP potentially provides “rules of engagement” and “intervention pathways” for ongoing public engagement with science and technology developments and for critical “science in society” perspectives to inform policy.

Key concepts: Public engagement, Stakeholder engagement, Community engagement, Legitimacy, Context (archaeology), Public participation, Public relations, Stakeholder

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Improving Legitimacy in Nanotechnology Policy Development Through Stakeholder and Community Engagement: Forging New Pathways — Research Paper | ScholarLens