LamprouMemo40

Memo 40 Despite extensive investments in nanotechnology and the promising novel materials that it has produced, the field still lacks standards concerning a variety of issues, including nomenclature, materials properties, testing, measurement, and safety. Global scientific cooperation in the area of nanotechnology will require development of common standards. However, this may prove challenging, given significant differences in European and American styles of science and technology policymaking. Broadly speaking, the US approach is privatized and technocratic, while the process in the European Union has been more open to public participation. These differences are evident in their approaches to setting standards for nanotechnology. In the US, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), a non-profit private organization primarily supported by industry, is the official representative of the US in the International Standards Organization (ISO), while in the EU, nanotechnology policy is discussed by the European Commission, a democratic institution. Despite these differences, however, there are some signs of harmonization. Specifically, a preference for neoliberal deregulation strategies is evident in both cases, and, as a result, the shared standards that are beginning to emerge address the needs of industry and the market, at the expense of public welfare or the environment. This study will be based on data collected through the analysis of policy documents, semistructured interviews, and participant observation. Since my research is a comparative study, my field sites will be located in the US and Europe. More specifically, my main European site will be in Brussels where the European Commission meets and where the European Workshop takes place. In the US, my main field sites will be located in Washington DC where the standards organizations have their offices. By analyzing these two distinct policy settings, the proposed project contributes to three central debates in the field of science and technology studies (STS) and policy studies. Broadly, this research will contribute to the understanding of: This study will contribute to scholarly literatures on comparative studies in policymaking of different policy cultures, advance the conceptualization of technoscientific standards and their harmonization processes, and contribute to the literatures concerning public participation and expertise in policy making, with a focus on studies of the public sphere. The research will have policy implications for improving the understanding of cultural differences in technology harmonization policy and improving the potential for enhanced public participation in the studies. This research project will result in publications in major journals for the STS field, like //Science as Culture//, //Social Studies of Science//, and //Science, Technology, and Human Values//, and it will be of interest for scholars in the fields of STS, policy, and political science.
 * Abstract: **
 * Title: A Comparative Study of Nanotechnology Standards Development: Policy Making, Neoliberalism, Globalization, and the Public Sphere in the EU and the US. **
 * the structure and organization of different political cultures involved in technology policymaking, with a particular focus on nanotechnology harmonization policy;
 * conflicting approaches to regulations and standards, their relationship to neoliberalism, and the ways in which neoliberalism is both influential and contested in the transnational policy settings of nanotechnology policy;
 * political participation and deliberative institutions in global governance.