The deliberative turn in nanotechnology policy

Today, policies of technological innovation are accompanied by measures to foster public participation and deliberation, especially if they are believed to raise ethical problems or provoke public controversy. How has this deliberative turn in technology policy come to pass? How did it unfold over time and across countries? This study suggests a conceptual framework for the analysis of this process and subjects it to empirical examination in the field of nanotechnology policy in three countriesFrance, Germany and the UKover an observation period of 15 years. The nanotechnology policy field is especially suited for this purpose since national nanotech policies in all three countries, in spite of specificities, converge in extensive deliberative experimentation. The study rests on the assumption that a conceptually guided analysis of the deliberative turn as it unfolded in the nanotechnology field improves our understanding of the democratization of technology policy in general. The framework combines three aspectsa domestic perspective, transnational diffusion, and policy-oriented learning. Domestic contextual conditions account for the fact that deliberative processes in various countries manifest themselves in different, often characteristic ways. At the same time, the deliberative turn is a transnational phenomenon since experimentation with deliberative processes in technology policy has gained currency in a number of countries during the same period. This, in turn, can be explained through transnational diffusionthe transfer of policy models between states. Finally, the concept of policy-oriented learning describes the deliberative turn as a learning process from past collective experiences such as public controversies. Importantly, policy-oriented learning is not based on new, objective knowledge but rather consists in adopting a cognitive frame that makes sense of relevant events and issues and thus guides societal agenda building. The study draws on several concepts from the literature with the Advocacy Coalition approach (Sabatier / Jenkins) playing a key role. It explains the rise of deliberative practices in technology policy as a result of the interplay of two Advocacy Coalitionsheterogeneous groups of actors who are loosely interconnected by the a shared political objective, one of which is primarily interested in promoting technology while the other, far less influential, group promotes an ethical and deliberative agenda and figures as a driving force of the deliberative turn. It is further hypothesized that Advocacy Coalitions are mainly active on the national level but are also connected to trans- and supranational discourses and networks, especially through supranational institutions of the European Union which plays an important role in diffusion processes. Hypotheses make predictions about the strategies that are used to enforce the deliberative agenda, and about the opportunities for and constraints on policy-oriented learning that takes place between Advocacy Coalitions and provides the ground for policy agenda building and change.

The project deals with the question whether controversies about emerging technologies are primarily shaped by nation-state arenas or whether there is convergence across countries through processes of transnational diffusion and supranational integration. The technology fields under examination here are biotechnology and nanotechnology. As regards the former, comprehensive protest event analyses largely confirm the dominance and specificity of national arenas for the movement against genetic engineering. In the case of nanotechnology, by contrast, debates were largely confined to specialized policy-related spheres. What is striking about these in turn is the strong transnational diffusion of progressive political discourses in which the social sciences themselves play an important role. These discourses are also shaped by waves of often exaggerated expectations, also known as "hypes". For genetic engineering, extensive data sets obtained from previous projects could be analyzed. In the policy field of nanotechnology, new qualitative and quantitative data collections were carried out and collaborations initiated.