Australian attitudes to nanotech 2005-09

FINAL REPORT – KEY TRENDS

Department of Innovation,
Industry, Science and SHORT REPORT SHOWING KEY TRENDS:
Research (DIISR) –
Nanotechnology AUSTRALIAN COMMUNITY ATTITUDES HELD ABOUT
NANOTECHNOLOGY – TRENDS 2005 TO 2009
MARS J801 FINAL REPORT

Introduction

A series of national random telephone surveys of up to n=1,100 people aged 16 years and
over have been conducted to measure community awareness and attitudes towards
nanotechnology.

These large scale Australian community surveys have been conducted regularly during the
period 2005 to 2009 to assess changes in community awareness and attitudes towards
nanotechnology. In 2005 and 2007 the sample size each year was n=1,000 telephone
interviews conducted across Australia using statistically representative random sampling
techniques.

The 2008 and 2009 surveys reported in the following pages provide more recent measures
of community awareness and attitudes held towards nanotechnology covering n=1,100
randomly selected people in each year 2008 and 2009 with residents of households living
in metropolitan, regional, and rural areas of Australia conducted through telephone
interviews using representative random sampling techniques. In both 2008 and 2009 the
large scale surveys also included a series of “intensive qualitative interviews” conducted
with n=100 randomly selected respondents in each year to help support the large scale
surveys through gaining detailed “qualitative” insights about public opinion towards
nanotechnology.

In 2009 a series of indepth focus group discussions were also conducted with segments of
the Australian community living in Sydney and the regional city of Wagga Wagga, NSW.
The focus groups were conducted prior to the 2009 large scale community survey to help
review and set the 2009 survey questions.

The following focus group discussions were conducted during October 2009:
INITIAL FOCUS GROUPS:
• Session 1: mothers of children aged under 17 years (conducted in the southern
suburbs of Sydney); and
• Session 2: a general mix of employed people aged 25+ years (conducted in the
Sydney Central Business District).
FOLLOW-UP FOCUS GROUPS - SYDNEY
• Session 3: general sample of the population, male and female, aged 18-70
years (conducted in the southern suburbs of Sydney); and
• Session 4: people with a non-English speaking background (conducted in south
western suburbs of Sydney).
FOLLOW-UP FOCUS GROUP – WAGGA WAGGA NSW
• Session 5: general sample of a regional located population, male and female,
aged 18-70 years (conducted in the NSW regional city of Wagga Wagga).

Representatives from DIISR observed each focus group (with participants’ consent). In
total, 45 people drawn randomly from the Australian population participated in the focus
groups). The large scale random telephone survey which followed was conducted during
November 2009. Key trends which emerged for 2009 are shown below:
Note: A difference of plus or minus 3% or more (between 2005 to 2009) in the percentage
estimates shown suggest a “real” change in community awareness and attitudes towards
nanotechnology.
A summary of key trends 2005 to 2009 are shown overleaf.

KEY TRENDS – “NANOTECHNOLOGY” 2005 TO 2009
Awareness of “Nanotechnology”
A summary of key top-line trends for the period 2005 to 2009 relating to awareness and
attitudes* held about “nanotechnology” are shown below:
2005 2007 2008 2009
(1a) Person has heard of the term
51% 63% 69% 74%
“nanotechnology” (prompted question)
(1b) For people aware: Measures across total population
(i) have heard of nanotechnology
28% 34% 32% 29%
but don’t know what it means
(ii) know what nanotechnology
means but don’t know how it works 19% 22% 29% 33%
23% 28% 37% 45%
(iii) know in detail what
nanotechnology means and how it 4% 6% 8% 12%
works
*Source: large scale random telephone surveys 2005 to 2009

2005 2007 2008 2009
(2) Awareness of any products which include
na na 27% 32%
nanotechnology or are made with nanotechnology
Conclusion: Public awareness of nanotechnology is increasing.


Note: During unprompted questioning “nanotechnology” as a new science and technology
area was only mentioned by 2% of the Australian population in 2009.

Extent of Hearing About “Nanotechnology” Applications*
2009 only IF AWARE:
PROMPTED QUESTION
AWARE Positive Negative Neither Unsure
• the use of nanoparticles in sunscreens and
cosmetics............................................................... 36% 38% 33% 21% 8%
• using nanoparticles to change nutrients and
vitamins to improve nutritional qualities of food .... 17% 38% 23% 36% 4%
• new drug delivery systems in a hospital setting
through a patch on your skin ................................. 58% 77% 2% 19% 3%
• nanoparticles in food packaging to monitor food
quality and freshness............................................. 18% 57% 15% 20% 8%
• using nano silver which provides anti-bacterial
surfaces in consumer products such as fridges
and washing machines .......................................... 20% 64% 5% 24% 6%
• water filtration through nanosized filters using
nanosized engineering .......................................... 24% 76% 4% 16% 4%
• new solar panels using nanotechnology............... 28% 75% 2% 17% 6%
• or media reports about carbon nanotubes used
in the workplace..................................................... 15% 46% 12% 31% 11%

Conclusion: Generally, for people claiming awareness of specific applications of nanotechnology
the opinion held is positive except for uses associated with food or some skin applications.
Trends in people being excited, hopeful, concerned, or alarmed about nanotechnology are shown overleaf.

Level of Excitement or Hope for Nanotechnology or Concerns or Alarm: Trends
2005 to 2009*
2005 2007 2008 2009
% % % %
Excited ............................. 14 81% 18 23 21
83% 86% 81%
Hopeful............................. 67 65 63 60
Concerned ....................... 12 11 9 12
14% 13% 10% 14%
Alarmed............................ 2 2 1 2
None of these/Neutral ...... 5 3 3 5
Other ................................ - 1 1 1

Perceived Risks vs Benefits of nanotechnology: Trends 2005 to 2009*
2005 2007 2008 2009
% % % %
The risks of nanotechnology outweigh the benefits ...... 8 5 3 6
The risks of nanotechnology are equal to the benefits
....................................................................................... 35 28 18 28
The benefits of nanotechnology outweigh the risks ...... 39 52 53 46
Can’t say/Don’t know..................................................... 18 15 26 21

Conclusion: Overall, the vast majority of the Australian community after considering the
potential risks and benefits of nanotechnology express “excited” or “hopeful” views about
nanotechnology, and that nanotechnology benefits will exceed or equal the potential risks.


Examples of How People Talk About “Nanotechnology”: 2009
To give a context for the 2009 findings illustrative comments expressed during the focus
groups and indepth interviews about nanotechnology are shown below.
MOST PEOPLE MADE “POSITIVE” COMMENTS LIKE THESE BELOW (DESPITE A
LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT “NANOTECHNOLOGY”):

“Although risks can still exist, people are open minded about science and technology such
as nanotechnology if they can perceive benefits.”
(Female, young professional accountant – not aware of nanotechnology
participant in Sydney focus group)

“You get used to science and technology moving along in your life and it seems normal,
and so far it seems that nanotechnology benefits outweigh the risks.”
(Mother with young children – not aware of nanotechnology,

“Nanotechnology, I feel, gives real opportunity to improve lifestyles and economies, and in
this area Australia could lead the world.”
(Male, engineer – previously aware of nanotechnology,

“Nanotechnology sounds positive and amazing if it is beneficial.”
(Female, part-time employed, 42 years – not aware of nanotechnology

“Nanotechnology sounds positive to monitor and treat diabetes.”
(Female, 33 years, self employed dressmaker – not aware
of nanotechnology, participant in Sydney focus group)

“Food packaging that monitors environmental conditions to prevent food spoilage and
decay monitoring sounds positive. In fact, most medical and environmental applications of
nanotechnology sound useful.”
(Male, 38 years, major bank senior executive – not aware
of nanotechnology, participant in Sydney focus group)

“Now that I have had nanotechnology better explained I feel it sounds quite positive.”
(Female, 35 years, part-time employed – not aware of nanotechnology,
participant in Wagga Wagga focus group)

“It is a fact of life that risks can arise. All technology will have positives and negatives.
There will always be risks, but nanotechnology seems to give a lot of positives.”
(Female, 47 years, farmer – slightly aware of nanotechnology,
participant in Wagga Wagga focus group)

“I am not really aware of nanotechnology but I can recall now hearing about its use in
sunscreens and cosmetics. It all sounds very interesting and it seems to be a step in the
right direction as long as it is extensively researched. A lot of people won’t understand it,
but the public needs to be kept informed about nanotechnology in a positive way. I would
like to know more about it because it sounds interesting.”
(Male, 50-59 years, looking for work, Perth – “hopeful” about nanotechnology)

MINORITY “CONCERN” OR NEGATIVE COMMENTS EXPRESSED:

“Nanotechnology must be used appropriately and not be upsetting to nature, nor
controlling, nor overwhelming.”
(Comment expressed in Sydney focus group – this person (a female)
had little interest in science and technology and
was not aware of nanotechnology)

“Nanotechnology sounds positive and we cannot stop progress in society. But science
and technology will develop anyway and therefore controls are needed to stop dangerous
use and to ensure nanotechnology is under control.”
(Comment expressed “general community” focus group in Sydney)

“I have heard of nanotechnology particularly the use in creams and cosmetics, but I don’t
know how it works. Overall, I feel positive about nanotechnology because it seems like it
can help in a lot of areas, particularly in health. But I don’t want nanotechnology included
in food.”
(Female, 60+ years, retired, Gold Coast Qld – “hopeful” about nanotechnology)

“I am a little concerned because nanotechnology is complex and I don’t really understand
it. Nanotechnology sounds good but I think it needs to be shown that it is not harmful.”
(Female, 30-39 years, employed part-time, Darwin – “hopeful” about nanotechnology)

“I am excited about nanotechnology because it sounds like it is taking things further in
improvements. But it is always the case that regulations and safeguards do not keep up to
date. I am mildly concerned.”
(Female, 50-59 years, employed full-time, Brisbane – “excited” about nanotechnology)

Conclusion: Following time given to consider nanotechnology, most participants in the
Sydney and Wagga Wagga focus groups held in 2009 felt “excited” or “hopeful” about
nanotechnology. Very few participants expressed concern or alarm. Similar outcomes
also emerged during the intensive interviews conducted across Australia.

__________________________________

The most positive perceptions held about nanotechnology relate to nanotechnology use
and applications in health and medical technologies, environmental control and monitoring,
and protection of food and in protective clothing technologies for people working in
dangerous conditions.

After completing the intensive qualitative interviews discussing the issues relating to areas
of “risks” and “concerns” about nanotechnology most people actually strengthened their
positive opinion about nanotechnology. This occurred in both 2008 and 2009:

Intensive Interviews
After Intensive
“Excited” or “Hopeful” During Initial Qualitative
about Nanotechnology: Interview Followup Outcome
Increase in positive
• 2008 86% 90% views held about
nanotechnology
• 2009 occurred in both
84% 87%
2008 and 2009

“Despite considering possible risks and concerns around nanotechnology I remain excited
and very enthusiastic about its potential.”
(Male, 40-49 years, employed full-time, Townsville Qld – “excited” about nanotechnology)

“I still remain hopeful about nanotechnology despite the possible concerns and risks
because I feel that nanotechnology developments will make our lives better.”
(Female, 60 + years, retired, Gold Coast Qld – “hopeful” about nanotechnology)

The conclusion to draw from the intensive interviews is that after detailed consideration of
potential risks about nanotechnology public perception and expectations about
nanotechnology increases positively. During the 2009 community research to assess
awareness and attitudes towards “nanotechnology” there were news media reports
occurring about the negative impacts of nanotechnology. These negative news media
reports occurred during November 2009 during the conduct of the large scale community
survey and intensive interviews. Following pages present a more Detailed Overview of
Key Findings.

SUMMARY OF 2009 COMMUNITY RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

• “Pre-survey” qualitative research (October 2009):
o five (5) focus group discussions of 1½ hours were conducted with people recruited
from Sydney and Wagga Wagga NSW residential communities
o the purpose was to review and help “set” questions to be asked in the 2009
Australian community survey
• 2009 Australian Community (November 2009):
o n=1,000 telephone interviews of 15 minutes length were conducted across Australia
using random statistically valid and reliable telephone interviews (which cover 99%
of the Australian population, excluding remote indigenous communities)
• 2009 Indepth Intensive Qualitative Interviews (November 2009):
o n=100 intensive qualitative telephone interviews were conducted across Australia
o the purpose was to intensively explore in more detail the factors, issues, and
community expectations about “nanotechnology” identified in the large scale 2009
Australian community survey

MORE DETAILED OVERVIEW OF KEY FINDINGS

Interest in Science and Technology Developments

Key Finding 1: Most Australians (84%) feel positive that science and technology are
improving society, and such positive perceptions have been strongly held over
recent years.

In each of the surveys conducted 2005 to 2009 the survey introduction and the first few
questions asked focused on public awareness and attitudes towards science and
technology – the topic of “nanotechnology” at this stage of the survey was kept “blind”. In
2009 over eight in ten (84%) people in the Australian community felt positive about recent
developments in science and technology.

The following chart illustrates examples of these outcomes….

AUSTRALIAN COMMUNITY INTEREST AND POSITIVE FEELINGS
TOWARDS SCIENCE: 2005 and 2009

81%
2005
Feel positive about 88%
2007
science
developments 2008
89%
2009
84%

Many people could also nominate recent scientific and technological developments they
are aware of – in 2009, recent developments in swine flue vaccine, internet technology
developments, and developments in computer technology, cervical cancer vaccine and
cancer research and medical advances generally were often mentioned.

Key Finding 2: Awareness of nanotechnology is increasing, but detailed
understanding is still remaining relatively limited (although “detailed
understanding” is beginning to increase from the low levels achieved in 2005).

“Top-of-mind awareness” – that is awareness without being prompted – of
“nanotechnology” is very low, with only 2% of the Australian community recalling
nanotechnology as a recent scientific and technological development when an unprompted
question is asked. This low “top of mind” outcome emerged in each of the 2005, 2007,
2008 and 2009 community surveys.

When prompted, over seven in ten (74%) Australians claimed to have previously heard of
the term nanotechnology, up from 51% in 2005 and 63% in 2007. A summary of this trend
is shown overleaf.

During 2009, although most people (over seven in ten – 74%) claim awareness of the term
“nanotechnology”, most people still have a limited understanding of what nanotechnology
means or how it works (although increases are beginning to emerge compared to 2005).
Across the total sample of people interviewed in 2009:
(1) around three in ten people (28%) claimed to have “heard of the term but don’t
know what it means”;
(2) over three in ten (33%) “know what it means, but don’t know how nanotechnology
works” (rising from 19% in 2005); and
(3) 12% of people “know in detail what nanotechnology means and how it works”
(rising from 4% in 2005).
Note: over two in ten people (26%) in 2009 were not aware of the term “nanotechnology”.
Aspects of these findings are illustrated below….
AWARENESS AND DETAILED UNDERSTANDING OF
“NANOTECHNOLOGY”: 2005 TO 2009

51%
Aware of the term
63%
"nanotechnology"
69%
(when prompted) 2005
74%
2007
2008
Know in detail what 4%
2009
"nanotechnology" 6%
means and how it 8%
works 12%

Key Finding 3: Despite a lack of detailed knowledge of nanotechnology, most
people believe that the benefits of nanotechnology exceed the risks. Most people
also express “hopeful” or “excited” views about nanotechnology.

The Australian community are hopeful about nanotechnology, particularly for use in
medical applications. Each of the 2005 to 2009 national surveys found this outcome.
However, caution was often expressed about nanotechnology applications in food
products (and this “caution” was first mentioned in 2005 and has remained an area of
concern in 2008 and 2009).

Despite lacking concrete knowledge about nanotechnology, most Australians are
continuing to be cautiously optimistic about nanotechnology, with over eight in ten people
in 2005, 2007 and 2008 (81%, 83% and 86% respectively) being “hopeful” and “excited” by
the potential implications of nanotechnology. In 2009 81% of the Australian population felt
“excited” or “hopeful” about nanotechnology. Only around one in ten people were
concerned or alarmed by nanotechnology (14% in 2005 and 13% 2007). In 2008 this
concern or alarm declined to 9% but rose again (to 14%) in 2009. Consequently, the
conclusion to draw is that only around one in ten people are concerned or alarmed about
nanotechnology, and the vast majority of people are hopeful or excited.

More Australians (52% in 2007 and 53% in 2008) believe nanotechnology’s potential
benefits outweigh its perceived risks (this public assessment has increased significantly
since 2005 rising from 39%), but in 2009 the measure was 46% while only 3% to 6%
people (including 6% in 2009) believing nanotechnology risks outweigh the benefits. The
remainder in 2009 (28%) believe the benefits equal the risks or answered “don’t know”
(21%).
When asked to respond to a number of potential applications using nanotechnology,
medical health and environmental applications were the areas most strongly supported.
Miniature surveillance devices, changing nutrients and vitamins in foods, and integrating
computers into clothing or consumer goods were least supported….
PUBLIC OPINION ON POSITIVE USE OF NANOTECHNOLOGY: 2005 to 2009

Medical
Implants for diabetics that monitor sugar 93%
96%
96%
& deliver insulin 92%

Machines that exist in the blood stream to 90%
89%
clear arterial clots & cancer cells 95%
87%

Environment
Filters that control pollutants from 96%
95%
entering the environment 94%
89%

Technology that disassembles and breaks 91%
92%
94%
down waste and garbage 90%

Security 2005
Protective suits with sensor to detect 77% 2007
66%
79%
chemical and toxic dangerous situations 86% 2008

Miniaturized and undetectable 32% 2009
30%
surveillance devices 35%

Food
Food packaging that monitors 74%
environmental conditions to prevent food 74%
71%
70%
spoilage
49%
55%
Changing nutrients and vitamins in foods 34%
32%

Consumer Products
58%
48%
Stain-repellent fabrics and materials 57%
70%

Integrating computers into clothing or 31%
27%
35%
consumer goods

During the 2009 large scale community survey the following new issues were assessed:
2009 – NEW QUESTIONS TO ASSESS PUBLIC OPINION ON
POSITIVE USE OF NANOTECHNOLOGY

Sunscreen lotions using nanotechnology
to give lotion invisibility and higher sun 72%
protection

Socks impregnated with antibacterial nano
59% 2009
silver to make the socks smell less

Bandages impregnated with antibacterial
83%
nano silver to make them more sterile

Throughout 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2009 the strongest positive feelings about
nanotechnology were expressed for (based on 2009 priorities in public support):
(1) implants for diabetics that monitor sugar levels and deliver insulin as required –
92% in 2009;
(2) machines which exist in the blood stream to clear arterial clots and cancer cells –
87% in 2009;
(3) filters that can control pollutants from entering the environment – 89% in 2009; and
(4) technology that disassembles and breaks down urban waste and garbage – 90% in
2009.

More findings are shown overleaf.

Key Finding 4: Even when the Australian community were asked to consider
specific concerns raised about nanotechnology, most people remained quite
positive and hopeful about nanotechnology whilst recognising that concerns could
exist.

In the 2009 community survey a series of concerns which can be made about
nanotechnology were explicitly raised to allow respondents to consider possible negative
issues before making a judgement about nanotechnology. The following outcomes
emerged and the findings indicate that the more people consider nanotechnology most
people accept that risks relating to nanotechnology may be possible:

EXAMINATION OF ANY CONCERNS ABOUT NANOTECHNOLOGY: 2009

Not Only mildly Greatly
Reasons causing concern
concerned Unsure concerned concerned
• the complexity of The complexity of nanotechnology
nanotechnology makes it makes it difficult to keep up or can be
difficult to understand......... 34% 4% 39% 23% frightening
• because nanotechnology
is so new there might be Precautions/testing regulations are
problems for public safety expected
or worker safety ................. 17% 4% 45% 35%
• the general public is not Many views were expressed that
being kept well informed information about nanotechnology
about nanotechnology ....... 19% 3% 39% 38% should be readily available
• nanotechnology regulation
and safeguards are not Regulation was expected and that
keeping up with the precautions and testing should be in
development of place
nanotechnology ................. 20% 20% 34% 26%
Many comments were expressed about
“concern of the use of nanotechnology
• food labelling should in food” and expectations were that
provide information about information about nanotechnology
any nanotechnology used.. 17% 17% 23% 58% should be readily available

*Note: most of those people concerned expressed “mild concern” rather than “great concern” (except for the
issue of nanotechnology in food, if it occurred). A similar result emerged in 2008.

When people are prompted about any concerns relating to nanotechnology most concerns
expressed were:
• views that food labelling should provide information about any nanotechnology
used in food production processes; and
• warnings should occur or testing procedures or regulations should be in place to
address any possible problems for public safety and worker safety due to
nanotechnology.

However, despite the above issues, most people only express “mild concern” rather than
having a great concern or worry (except for the issue of nanotechnology in food, if it
occurs, where public concerns are much stronger).

Questioning next asked each person interviewed to give their overall assessment relevant
to the level of excitement, hope, or concern about nanotechnology. The following outcome
emerged…

OVERALL LEVEL OF EXCITEMENT OR HOPE FOR
NANOTECHNOLOGY: TRENDS 2005 to 2009

Q12. Which best describes how you feel about the potential implications of
nanotechnology?
2005 2007 2008 2009
% % % %
Excited ....................................... 14 81% 18 83% 23 86% 21 81%
Hopeful ...................................... 67 65 63 60
Concerned ................................. 12 11 9 10% 12 14%
14% 13%
Alarmed ..................................... 2 2 1 2
None of these/Neutral................ 5 3 3 5
Other .......................................... - 1 1 1

A new question asked in 2009 also explored where nanotechnology fits against other new
science and technology developments:

POSITIONING OF NANOTECHNOLOGY RELATIVE TO
OTHER NEW SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL
DEVELOPMENTS: 2009

Q21. We have been discussing nanotechnology but I would like to touch base with you on
whether or not you are excited, hopeful, concerned or alarmed about other science
and technology developments:
Neutral/ Don’t
Excited Hopeful Concerned Alarmed No concern know
% % % % % %
82% 14%
• Stem cell research ....................... 38 44 11 3 2 2

27% 68%
• Genetically modified GM foods .... 6 21 41 27 4 2

• Cloning (including therapeutic 31% 65%
cloning) ......................................... 10 21 39 26 3 2

• The role of science and
69% 25%
technology in addressing
climate change ............................. 20 49 19 6 5 2

81% 13%
• Nanotechnology ........................... 25 56 11 2 3 3

Nanotechnology and stem cell research each gain over eight in ten people feeling excited
or hopeful about the impacts of these new science and technology developments. By
comparison GM foods and cloning (including therapeutic cloning) gained much lower
public support.

The specific outcomes from additional more explicit questioning in 2008 and 2009
identified that concerns about nanotechnology exist in the following areas:
(1) mild concern that “because nanotechnology is so new there might be problems
for public safety or worker safety” and mild concern that “the general public is
not being kept well informed about nanotechnology”; and
(2) greater levels of concern that “food labelling should provide information about
any nanotechnology used in association with food”.

Overall, however, after considering possible concerns and risks about nanotechnology
over eight in ten people (86% in 2008 and 81% in 2009) in the Australian community
continue to feel “excited” or “hopeful” about the potential application of nanotechnology.
Many comments were expressed that “the potential for nanotechnology appears positive
particularly for medical, health, and environmental purposes”.

Key Finding 5: Most people in the Australian community feel that nanotechnology
will improve quality of life, and want to know more about nanotechnology and its
potential applications.

As indicated earlier, most people (81% in 2005, 83% in 2007, 86% in 2008, and 81% in
2009) are “excited” or “hopeful” about nanotechnology. Participants in the surveys were
asked to indicate how much they agreed or disagreed with specific statements about
nanotechnology.

Trends for 2009 continue indicate that the Australian community are interested in
nanotechnology and are positive about its potential. An interesting trend was a decline
and rise (from 72% belief in 2005 then declining to 65% in 2007 and 2008 and rising to
72% in 2009) in concerns about unknown and long term side effects of nanotechnology.
In other words, as people hear more about nanotechnology there is an increase in wanting
to hear about any possible risks, as well as the benefits.

Key specific trends for some of the statements asked are shown below:

TRENDS IN PUBLIC OPINION TOWARDS NANOTECHNOLOGY: 2005 to 2009

81%
Excited and hopeful about 83%
nanotechnology 86%
81%

77%
I believe nanotechnology will improve the 83%
future quality of life in Australia 79%
75%
2005
72% 2007
I am concerned about unknown risks 65%
involved in the use of nanotechnology 65%
72% 2008
Nanotechnology applications will have a 55% 2009
68%
positive influence on the economy and 63%
employment in Australia 63%

39%
The benefits of nanotechnology outweight 52%
the risks 53%
46%

In 2009 there continued strong perceptions (held since 2005) about the possible benefits
from nanotechnology in health and medical applications and environmental applications.

More detailed questioning also perceived benefits from nanotechnology in:
• food packaging to monitor food spoilage;
• protective suits with sensors to help protect personnel working in chemical or toxic
dangerous situations; and
• the use of nanotechnology in developing stain repellent clothing.

Overall, most people feel that nanotechnology will provide positive benefits for the
Australian economy and employment, and will improve the quality of life in Australia. Most
people also have a desire to learn more about nanotechnology and its applications.

However, balanced with these strongly positive views is a desire to be made aware of any
currently known risks involved in the use of nanotechnology, to help people understand
and consider risks vs benefits of nanotechnology.

Key Finding 6: Australians want to learn more about nanotechnology, especially
from scientists, via the Internet and mass media channels. Government agencies
and regulators were also expected to play a key role in providing information about
nanotechnology to the Australian community, and to regulate and monitor the
nanotechnology industry.

The Australian public (in 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2009) had a strong expectation and trust
that Government agencies and regulators will keep the public informed about issues in the
nanotechnology field (up to 94% public expectation), and that Government agencies and
regulators will monitor and regulate the nanotechnology industry (up to 88% expectation).

The importance of Government funding to public research institutions and universities to
undertake research in nanotechnology has also been highly supported in each survey.
However, support for the provision of government sector funding to private enterprises to
encourage development in nanotechnology has continued to be lower (this outcome
emerged in each of the community surveys in 2005 to 2009).

Australians placed the largest amount of trust in scientists (90% in 2009) to inform them of
the risks of nanotechnology, followed by government agencies and regulators (77%).
Non-government agencies (or NGO’s) also received a level of trust but at a lower level (at
62% expressed trust).

The Internet was also regarded as an important source of information regarding new
developments in science and technology – accounting for 39% media usage “first
mentions” when this issue was addressed in the survey (and most people advised that
they would do a “Google search”). Mass media was also strongly relied upon for
information in this area, with newspapers, television and radio media accounting in total for
26% of media sources “first mentioned” for science and technology information (including
information about nanotechnology).

More findings are shown overleaf.

Key Finding 7: More detailed intensive interviewing conducted in 2008 and 2009
confirmed Australian community support for nanotechnology, and feeling “excited”
or “hopeful” about nanotechnology, despite feeling concerned about some specific
nanotechnology issues.

At the conclusion of the interviews conducted in 2008 and 2009 a new intensive
investigation approach was adopted. A sub-sample of respondents were randomly
selected to undertake an intensive interview to further explore specific underlying concerns
or worries about nanotechnology which may exist in the Australian community. The
following outcomes emerged for 2009:

OUTCOMES FROM INTENSIVE INTERVIEWING: 2009

Adequacy of Safety and Testing of Consumer Products Using Nanotechnology
No concern expressed = 69% Concern = 31%
“No concerns! I assume safety and testing “I am very concerned because history has shown that
of nanotechnology is being done properly.” we are not good at ensuring safety and testing of
(Female, 50-59 years, employed full-time, consumer products, particularly in new unknown
Regional Tasmania – “excited” about areas. There is always a risk of long term effects.”
+
nanotechnology) (Female, 60 years, retired, Gold Coast Qld –
“hopeful” about nanotechnology)

Impact of Nanoparticles Entering the Environment
“I cannot see what harm it would do “There is always the risks of human error or lack of
because a lot of particles enter the concern about impacts. The lack of timely response
environment anyway.” to new risks is the concern I have.”
(Male, 50-59 years, looking for work, Perth (Male, 50-59 years, employed full-time, Canberra –
– “excited” about nanotechnology)
Nanotechnology Use is Largely Self Regulated
“I am not concerned. Overall, I feel “I am mildly concerned because science is often
regulations to protect public health in ahead of regulations and therefore understanding the
Australia are generally quite good.” limitations of nanotechnology is important.”
(Female, 50-59 years, employed part-time, (Female, 50-59 years, self employed,
Perth – Launceston Tasmania –
“hopeful” about nanotechnology) “hopeful” about nanotechnology)

Workers and Researchers Involved with Nanotechnology
Are Potentially Exposed To Nanoparticles
“Safety is pretty good today in workplaces “I am a little concerned mainly because I don’t know
and I am confident that protection would be much about it or what nanotechnology workers or
done properly.” researchers can do to protect themselves.”
(Female, 50-59 years, employed full-time, (Female, 30-39 years, employed part-time, Darwin –
regional Tasmania – “hopeful” about nanotechnology)
“excited” about nanotechnology)

More qualitative outcomes are shown overleaf.

Manufacturers Not Providing Nanotechnology Information
“I don’t have any concerns because I think “I am mildly concerned because manufacturers
that manufacturers would provide always have vested interests and we could get biased
information properly.” information which is not best serving the consumer
(Female, 50-59 years, employed full-time, products using nanotechnology.”
regional Tasmania – (Female, 50-59 years, employed full-time, Brisbane –
“excited” about nanotechnology) “excited” about nanotechnology)

STRATEGIC OUTCOME – At the completion of the above intensive qualitative interviews
for 2009 when a range of “concerns” or potential “risks” about nanotechnology were
considered respondents mostly retained their positive view of nanotechnology or
strengthened their positive view about nanotechnology. This outcome is shown below.

Following the above intensive interview questioning the person interviewed was asked
further final assessments:

Q36a. Finally, and again thank you for your thoughts, I just want to touch base with
you on your final thoughts about nanotechnology based on our discussion
today. Overall, what now best describes how you feel about the potential
implications of nanotechnology?

2009 – OVERALL PERCEPTIONS OF NANOTECHNOLOGY
Intensive Interviews
2009 2009
During Initial After Qualitative In 2009 “excited”
Interview Interview or “hopeful”
% % views about
nanotechnology
Excited .............................. 26 84% 25
87% increased
Hopeful ............................. 58 62 following
Concerned ........................ 4 6 consideration of
4% 6% possible risks or
Alarmed ............................ - - concerns about
None of these/Neutral....... 9 6 nanotechnology.
Other................................. 3 1

The conclusion to draw is that following the intensive interview most people strengthened
positive views held about nanotechnology even in a situation where they were encouraged
to consider and present their views on potential “risks” or negative issues relating to
“nanotechnology”. The same outcome occurred in 2008.

The following outcomes (shown overleaf) identified the final outcomes from people
randomly selected who participated in the intensive interview.

Q32. ASSESSMENT OF PERSON’S VIEW ABOUT NANOTECHNOLOGY AT THE
CONCLUSION OF THE INTERVIEW:
2009
Total
%
• Person retained positive views..................................................... 73
• Person strengthened positive views............................................. 7 87%
• Person changed from negative to positive views ......................... 7
• Person had limited knowledge about nanotechnology and did
not strengthen their opinion either way ........................................ 1
• Person remained neutral and unconcerned about 6%
nanotechnology ............................................................................ 5
• Person changed from positive to negative views ......................... 3
7%
• Person retained negative views ................................................... 4
• Person strengthened negative views ........................................... -

The general pattern of assessments following the intensive re-interviews show that most
people remained hopeful and excited about nanotechnology despite raising some
concerns during the intensive interview. In fact, most people strengthened their positive
views about nanotechnology, rather than become negative. In 2008 “intensive interviews”
identified a similar outcome.

To give a context for the 2009 findings final illustrative comments expressed at the
conclusion of the intensive interviewing are shown below.

MOST PEOPLE MADE POSITIVE COMMENTS LIKE THESE BELOW:
“I remain excited because nanotechnology is a new frontier and there will be great possible
benefits.”
(Female, 50-59 years, employed full-time, Brisbane – “excited” about nanotechnology)
“After this interview I am still hopeful about nanotechnology. It is an area where society
can improve certain aspects of life, particularly in human health, and if nanotechnology can
do it safely that will be great. Nanotechnology is an area being researched to a significant
level and maybe the time is right to let the public know a bit more about it.”
(Female, 50-59 years, self employed, Launceston Tasmania –
BUT A FEW PEOPLE MADE NEGATIVE COMMENTS:
“I had never heard of nanotechnology before this survey. Initially I was hopeful because it
sounds a good thing for health such as diabetes and high cholesterol, and the other uses
seem OK as long as we don’t get harassed by the technology and there are proper
regulations around it. But now at the end of the interview I have become concerned
because I don’t quite understand what nanotechnology is.”
(Female, 60+ years, employed full-time, Brisbane –
initially “hopeful” but changed to “concerned” about nanotechnology)

Conclusion: Overall, the Australian community express “excited” or “hopeful” views about
nanotechnology, and that nanotechnology benefits will exceed or equal the potential risks.
Being able to hear more about applications of nanotechnology, as well as risks and
benefits, was also expected.

Overall Conclusions
There is a high level of belief within the Australian community that nanotechnology will
provide long term benefits to the quality of life in Australia, and will help achieve economic
and employment benefits. But “nanotechnology” is not an issue that most people consider
or discuss.
Few risks, or concerns about nanotechnology are foreseen, although most people
recognise that risks could arise (and should then be addressed).
Despite a low level of knowledge the vast majority of the Australian community express
“excited” or “hopeful” views about nanotechnology, and that nanotechnology benefits will
exceed or equal the potential risks. In 2009 there has been a shift to the measurement
indicator – “nanotechnology risks and benefits are equal” – even though most people are
“hopeful” or “excited” about nanotechnology because of views held that all major scientific
and technology developments may often contain risks (which need to be managed).
The general pattern of assessments following the intensive re-interviews conducted also
confirmed a positive public opinion for “nanotechnology” even in a situation where a range
of negative issues and “risks” potentials for nanotechnology were discussed. At the end of
the intensive interviews most people remained hopeful and excited about nanotechnology
despite raising some concerns being raised during the intensive interview. In fact, most
people strengthened their positive views about nanotechnology, rather than become
negative. The 2008 “intensive interviews” identified a similar outcome.

Australian attitudes to nanotech 2005-09

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (12)

Ähnlich wie Australian attitudes to nanotech 2005-09

Ähnlich wie Australian attitudes to nanotech 2005-09 (20)

Mehr von Andy Dabydeen

Mehr von Andy Dabydeen (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Australian attitudes to nanotech 2005-09