Latest issue of ’Living Knowledge Newsletter’ (December 2011)
There is an archive of the Living Knowledge newsletters
Latest issue of ‘Living Knowledge Newsletter’ (December 2011)
Do you want to place a statement on this post or a comment to continue the conversation? to follow the conversation, you can subscribe to the feed and get the discussion delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Write Comment
What innovation is needed to guide research towards public concerns? How can civil society fully participate in the co-creation of knowledge? The 5th Living Knowledge Conference will focus on getting more insight into processes, and develop specific policy recommendations that resonate with public concerns and articulated research needs.
The PERARES online debate series starts with a pilot on nanotechnology: NGOs, industry and government previously have initiated discussions which now will be compared considering the possibilities of public influence on and participation in the development of a new technology area.
PERARES Online Debate
- Comment on Ambient Intelligence and Healthcare by dmstandley February 15, 2012A few years ago I was playing golf with a retired GP who claimed that diagnostic life would be so much easier if all babies were chipped. He was obviously anticipating devices like these. Then he added an interesting ethical question. Are the devices active or passive? Could they send diagnostic details? Could a doctorfind out that we were ill without us kno […]
- Comment on Food, nanotechnology and labelling by Dane Comerford February 10, 2012Some great points brought forward. There are various lessons connected to consumer goods packaging that we could try and digest. They range from tobacco and alcohol to shampoo and that infamous McDonald’s cup of coffee that wasn’t labelled as ‘hot’. Whereas we all acknowledge smoking is not a healthy activity, is still happens, and while coffee should be hot […]
- Comment on Introduction by graham February 10, 2012This is good development in public engagement. Route to registration could be signposted better. This would make it more likely that many people will participate. There is still a great need to allay public anxiety about nanotechnology. […]
- Comment on Food, nanotechnology and labelling by Rob Reid February 9, 2012I think the comments made by Jack and Sue are very important in this debate. Arguably there has been a lack of engagement between industry and consumers on what nanotechnologies are , what benefits they could bring and where there are uncertainties over their impact on health and the environment. As a result I believe that to begin labelling products without […]
- Comment on Food, nanotechnology and labelling by Sue Davies February 8, 2012The research that we have carried out at Which? around nanotechnologies and food is consistent with attitudes towards other novel food technologies: http://www.which.co.uk/about-which/what-we-do/which-policy/science-and-technology/nanotechnology/consumer-attitudes/. People expect to be able to make an informed choice about what they are eating. The requireme […]
- Comment on Food, nanotechnology and labelling by jackstilgoe February 8, 2012Labelling is a really interesting issue, from the perspective of someone interested in Responsible Innovation. On one hand, it would seem to be a democratic act, an admission of both uncertainty and humility. It should empower consumers to make decisions that regulators are unable to act upon. But is it an abdication of regulatory responsibility? As a consum […]
Supported by:
