- 1Menzies Centre for Health Policy, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. acap1921@uni.sydney.edu.au.
- 2Environmental Health Branch, Health Protection NSW, 73 Miller St, North Sydney, Sydney, Australia. acap1921@uni.sydney.edu.au.
- 3Menzies Centre for Health Policy, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. james.gillespie@sydney.edu.au.
- 4University Centre for Rural Health, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. margaret.rolfe@sydney.edu.au.
- 5Environmental Health Branch, Health Protection NSW, 73 Miller St, North Sydney, Sydney, Australia. wayne.smith@doh.health.nsw.gov.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Policy makers and regulators are constantly required to make decisions despite the existence of substantial uncertainty regarding the outcomes of their proposed decisions. Understanding stakeholder views is an essential part of addressing this uncertainty, which provides insight into the possible social reactions and tolerance of unpredictable risks. In the field of nanotechnology, large uncertainties exist regarding the real and perceived risks this technology may have on society. Better evidence is needed to confront this issue.
METHODS:
We undertook a computer assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) survey of the Australian public and a parallel survey of those involved in nanotechnology from the academic, business and government sectors. Analysis included comparisons of proportions and logistic regression techniques. We explored perceptions of nanotechnology risks both to health and in a range of products. We examined views on four trust actors.
RESULTS:
The general public's perception of risk was significantly higher than that expressed by other stakeholders. The public bestows less trust in certain trust actors than do academics or government officers, giving its greatest trust to scientists. Higher levels of public trust were generally associated with lower perceptions of risk. Nanotechnology in food and cosmetics/sunscreens were considered riskier applications irrespective of stakeholder, while familiarity with nanotechnology was associated with a reduced risk perception.
CONCLUSIONS:
Policy makers should consider the disparities in risk and trust perceptions between the public and influential stakeholders, placing greater emphasis on risk communication and the uncertainties of risk assessment in these areas of higher concern. Scientists being the highest trusted group are well placed to communicate the risks of nanotechnologies to the public.
No comments:
Post a Comment