Hybrid minipublic + e-participation as promotion model to debate on nanotechnology risks in Brazil
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Nanotechnology (NT) is an innovative technology platform of transversal character able to interfere in almost all economic sectors due to the great potential to create new products and be incorporated into the existing manufactured. Knowledge gaps about risks to health, environment and safety and the lack of a social debate on these issues in Brazil emerge in this context. The article presents a minipublic hybrid model institution with e-participation as a proposal of communication model to democratize the issues. It seeks to address the asymmetries of knowledge between citizens and science. The methodology consists of literature on risk issues in NT and institutional design theories in the interface with open government and e-participation. The proposed model suggests being effective to promote a debate with greater permeability into knowledge and public opinion, contributing as a transparency and participation tool.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal accept the following terms of the copyright policy:
- Authors shall retain their copyright (including copyrights) and shall grant to the journal the right of first publication of their work, which shall simultaneously be subject to the Creative Commons Recognition License: No commercial use of the original work or any derivative works is permitted, distribution of which must be made under a license equal to that which governs the original work.
- Authors may adopt other non-exclusive license agreements for the distribution of the version of the published work (e.g., placing it in an institutional repository or publishing it in a book) provided that the initial publication in this journal is indicated.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to disseminate their work through the Internet (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after the publication process, which may lead to interesting exchanges and increased citations of the published work. (See The Effect of Open Access).
References
ABDI. Agência Brasileira de Desenvolvimento Industrial. Panorama Nanotecnologia. Série Cadernos da Indústria ABDI XIX, Brasília: ABDI. 2010.
ÅSTRÖM, Karl J.; GRÖNLUND, Åke. In: Coleman, Stephen; Shane, Peter M. (Orgs.). Connecting Democracy: Online Consultation and the Flow of Political Communication. Massachusetts: The MIT Press, p.75-96. 2012.
AZOULAY, David. Managing the unseen: opportunities and challenges with nanotechnology. Stockholm: Swedish Society for Nature Conservation Report. 2014.
CADDY, Joanne; VERGEZ, Christian. Citizens as partners: Information. Consultation and Public Participation in Policy Making. Report prepared for (OECD). 2001. Paris: OECD. 2001.
CARVALHO, António; NUNES, João Arriscado. Intervenção e partIcIpação públIca em cIêncIa e tecnologIa: o caso das nanotecnologias. Estud. sociol. Araraquara v.19 n.37 p.431-449 jul.-dez. 2014.
COLEMAN, Stephen. Parliamentary communication in an age of digital interactivity, Aslib Proceedings, v.58, n.5, p.371–388. 2006. doi: 10.1108/00012530610692339.
COLEMAN, Stephen; BLUMLER, Jay G. The Internet and Democratic Citizenship: Theory, Practice, Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2009.
DUARTE, Leandro. Brasil pode tornar-se líder de mercado em nanotecnologia. Disponível em: http://www.agenciacti.com.br/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8094:brasil-pode- tornar-se-lider-de-mercado-em-nanotecnologia&catid=160:economia &Itemid=225. Acesso em 14 jun. 2016. 14 out. 2015.
ELSTER, Jon. Deliberation and Constitution Making, in Jon Elster (ed.) Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge University Press, p.97–122. 1998.
ENGELMANN, Wilson; ALDROVANDI, Andrea; BERGER FILHO, Airton G. Perspectivas para a regulação das nanotecnologias aplicadas a alimentos e biocombustíveis. Vigilância Sanitária em Debate. Sociedade, Ciência e tecnologia, v.1, n.4, p.115-127. 2013.
FALKNER, Robert; JASPER, Nico. Regulating Nanotechnologies: Risk, Uncertainty and the Global Governance Gap. Global Environmental Politics, v.12, n.1, p.30-55. 2012.
FISHKIN, James S. The Voice of the People. Durham: Duke University Press. 1997.
FISHKIN, James S. Quando o povo fala: democracia deliberativa e consulta pública.. Curitiba: Instituto Atuação.1a edição. 2015.
FOLADORI, Guillermo; INVERNIZZI Noela. La regulación de las nanotecnologías: una mirada desde las diferencias EUA-UE. Visa em Debate, v.4, n.2, p.8-20. 2016.
FOLADORI, Guillermo; INVERNIZZI Noela. Os trabalhadores da alimentação e da agricultura questionam as nanotecnologias. São Paulo. Disponível em: http://www6.rel- uita.org/nanotecnologia/trabajadores_cuestionan_nano-full-por.htm. Acesso em: 2 de abr. de 2016. mai. 2007.
FORNASIER, Mateus de O. Princípio da Precaução e regulação do risco nanotecnológico: consequências econômicas. EARL, v.5, n.2, p.296-314. 2014.
FUNDACENTRO Fundacentro realiza ciclo de palestras sobre nanotecnologia. Notícia no site. Fundação Jorge Duprat Figueiredo de Segurança e Medicina do Trabalho - Fundacentro. Governo Federal, Brasília. Disponível em https://www.gov.br/fundacentro/pt- br/assuntos/noticias/noticias/2021/abril/fundacentro-realiza-ciclo-de-palestras-sobre- nanotecnologia. Acesso em 20.jun. 2021.
FUNG, Archon. Receitas para esferas públicas: Oito desenhos institucionais e suas consequências. In: Coelho, Vera S.; Nobre, Marcos (orgs.). Participação e Deliberação. São Paulo: Editora 34. 2004.
GOMES, Wilson. Participação Política Online: Questões e hipóteses de trabalho. In: Maia, Rousiley C. M.; Gomes, Wilson; Marques, Francisco P. J. A. Internet e Participação política no Brasil. Porto Alegre: Sulina, p.19-45. 2011.
GOODIN, Robert E.; DRYZEK, John S.Deliberative Impacts: The Macro-Political. Uptake of Mini- Publics’, Politics & Society, v.34, n.2, p.219-244. 2006.
HABERMAS, Jurgen. Três modelos normativos de democracia. São Paulo: Lua Nova, n. 36, p.39-53. 1995.
HABERMAS, Jurgen. Teoria de la acción comunicativa I - Racionalidad de la acción y racionalización social. Madri: Taurus. 1987.
HEGGENLUN, Laura; FOSS HANSEN, Steffen; ASTRUP, Thomas F.; BOLDRIN, Alessio. Semi-quantitative analysis of solid waste flows from nano-enabled consumer products in Europe, Denmark and the United Kingdom – Abundance, distribution and management. Waste Management, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
HESS, David J. The Environmental, Health, and Safety Implications of Nanotechnology: Environmental Organizations and Undone Science in the United States. Exploring the Environmental, Health, and Safety implications of Nanotechnology. Science as Culture, v.19, n.2, p.181-214. 2010.
INVERNIZZI, Noela; FOLADORI, Guillermo. Posições de Sindicatos e ONGs sobre os riscos e a regulação da nanotecnologia. Vigilância Sanitária em Debate: Sociedade, Ciência & Tecnologia, v. 1, p.72-84. 2013.
INVERNIZZI, Noela. Implications of Nanotechnology for Labor and Employment. In: Parker, Rachel A.; Appelbaum, Richard P.(eds.). (Org.). Can Emerging Technologies Make a Difference in Development?. New York: Routledge, p.140-153. 2012.
JORDAN, Carey C.; KAISER, Iona N.; MOORE, Valerie C. Nanotechnology Patent Survey: Who Will be the Leaders in the Fifth Technology Revolution. Nanotechnology, Law & Business, v.9, n.2. 2013.
KRIEBEL, David. How much evidence is enough? Conventions of causal inference. Law and Contemporary Problems, v.72, n.1, p.121-136. 2009.
LACOUR, Stéphanie; VINCK, Dominique. Nanoparticles, nanomaterials, what are we talking about? Socio-Legal views on constructing the object of regulation in the field of “nano” risks. Paris: INRS Occupational Health Research Conference. 2011.
LEINONEN, Anna; KIVISAARI, Sirkku. Nanotechnology perceptions: Literature review on media coverage, public opinion and NGO perspectives. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Research Notes 2559. 2010.
LUX Lux Research Inc. Nanotechnology Update: Corporations Up Their Spending as Revenues for Nano-enabled Products Increase. State of the Market Report. Boston: Lux Research Inc. 2014.
MACINTOSH, Ann; COLEMAN, Stepehn; SCHNEEBERGER, Agnes. eParticipation: The research gaps. In: Electronic participation. Linz: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. p.1-11. 2009.
MAIA, Rousiley. Representações políticas de atores cívicos: entre a imediaticidade da experiência e discursos de justificação. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, v.27, n.78, p.97-112. 2012.
MARCHANT, Gary E.; SYLVESTER, Douglas J.; ABBOTT, Kenneth W. What does the history of technology regulation teach us about nano oversight? The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, v.37, n.4, p.724-731. 2009.
MCT. Relatório sobre a Consulta Pública ao Documento Elaborado pelo GT de Nanotecnologia. Ministério de Ciência e Tecnologia, Brasília, janeiro de 2004.
MILLSTONE, Erik. Science, risk and governance: Radical rhetorics and the realities of reform in food safety governance. Research Policy, v.38, n.4, p.624-636. 2009.
NNI. Frequently Asked Questions. Nano 101. National Nanotechnology Initiative: Nano.gov. National Nanotechnology Initiative, Washington, D.C., 2021. Disponível em https://www.nano.gov/nanotechnology-facts. Acesso em 19 de maio de 2021.
OECD. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Nanomaterials in Waste Streams: Current Knowledge on Risks and Impacts. Paris: OCDE Publishing. 2016. Available online, accessed 8.12.2016 http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/nanomaterials-in-waste- streams_9789264249752-en>.
OMORI, Satoshi. et al. Tim4 recognizes carbon nanotubes and mediates phagocytosis leading to granuloma formation. Cell Reports 34.6:108734, 2021.
QUEVEDO, Josemari. A retórica da política pública de nanotecnologia do Brasil sobre inovação, impactos, regulação e riscos [tese de doutorado, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Políticas Públicas da Universidade Federal do Paraná], 2019.
RENANOSOMA Rede de pesquisa em nanotecnologia, sociedade e meio ambiente. Site. São Paulo: Rede de pesquisa em nanotecnologia, sociedade e meio ambiente, 2021. Disponível em https://www.nanotecnologiadoavesso.org. Acesso em 19. jun. 2021.
RENTON, Alastair; MACINTOSH, Ann. Computer Supported Argument Maps as a Policy Memory. Information Society Journal, v.23, n.2, p.125-133. 2007.
RS&RAE. Royal Society and The Royal Academy of Engineering. Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties. London: The Royal Society & The Royal Academy of Engineering. 2004.
SAMPAIO, Rafael C.; PEIXOTO, Tiago. Electronic Participatory Budgeting: false dilemmas and true complexities. In: Hope for Democracy: 25 years of Participatory Budgeting worldwide. São Brás de Alportel: In Loco Association, p.413-426. 2014. Disponível em: http://www.buergerhaushalt.org/ sites/default/files/downloads_Studie_Hope_for_democracy_-25_years_of_participatory _budgeting_worldwide.pdf.
SILVA, Francine B. (Ed.). Iniciativa Brasileira de Nanotecnologia. Brasília: Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação. 2012.
SCHULZ, Peter. A encruzilhada da nanotecnologia: inovação, tecnologias e riscos. Rio de Janeiro: Vieira & Lent. 2009.
SISNANO Sisnano: Desenvolvimento da Nanociência e Nanotecnologia. Disponível em: http://www.mct.gov.br/index.php/content/view/27136.html. Acesso em: 14 jun. 2016. 19 ago. 2013.
SMITH, Graham. Democratic Innovations: desingning institutions for citizen participation. UK: Cambridge University Press. 2009.
STREET, John. Remote Control? Politics, Technology and 'Electronic Democracy’. European Journal of Communication, v.12, n.1, p.27-42. 1997.
WARHEIT, David B. et al. Health effects related to nanoparticle exposures: environmental, health and safety considerations for assessing hazards and risks. Pharmacology & Therapeutics, v.120, n.1, p.35-42. 2008.
WRIGHT, Scott. Politics as usual? Revolution, normalization and a new agenda for online deliberation. New Media Society, v.14, n.2, p.244–261. 2012.