- News + Media
Filters: First Letter Of Last Name is H [Clear All Filters]
Globalization and De-globalization in Nanotechnology Research: The Role of China. Scientometrics (forthcoming). 1-20.(2012).
Debating Nanoethics: U.S. Public Perceptions of Nanotechnology Applications for Energy and the Environment. ( , Ed.).Debating Science: Deliberation, Values, and the Common Good. 227-249.(2012).
Governance implications of nanomaterials companies’ inconsistent risk perceptions and safety practices. Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 14, 1-12.(2012).
Risk perception, public participation, and sustainable global development of nanotechnologies. ( , Ed.).Can Emerging Technologies Make a Difference in Development?. 188-197.(2012).
Exploring Ambivalence: Techno-Enthusiasm and Skepticism in US Nanotech Deliberations. ( , Ed.).Quantum Engagements—Social Reflections of Nanoscience and Emerging Technologies.(2011).
Federal Policy and the Development of Semiconductors, Computer Hardware, and Computer software: A policy Model for Climate-Change R&D?. ( , Ed.).Accelerating Energy Innovation: Lesson from Multiple Sectors.(2011).
From Biotech to Nanotech: Public Debates about Technological Modification of Food. Environment and Society: Advances in Research. 2, 149-169.(2011).
Innovative and Responsible Governance of Nanotechnology for Societal Development. ( , Ed.).Nanotechnology Research Directions for Societal Needs in 2020. 561-618.(2011).
Innovative and responsible governance of nanotechnology for societal development. Journal of Nanoparticle Research . 13, 3557-3590.(2011).
Methodological Challenges Posed by Emergent Nanotechnologies and Cultural Values. ( , Ed.).The Handbook of Emergent Technologies and Social Research.(2011).
Nanotechnology Risk Perceptions and Communication: Emerging Technologies, Emerging Challenges. Risk Analysis (special issue). 31, 1694–1700.(2011).
Vulnerability and Social Justice as Factors in Emergent US Nanotechnology Risk Perceptions . Risk Analysis . 31, 1734–1748.(2011).
Public participation in nanotechnology – should we care? . 2020 Science .(2010).
Gender, Application Domain, and Ethical Dilemmas in Nano-Deliberation [White paper]. Nanotech Risk Perception Specialist Meeting.(2010).
Amplification of Risk. Encyclopedia of Nanotechnology. 669-670.(2010).
Attenuation of Risk. <i>Encyclopedia of Nanotechnology</i>. 671-672.(2010).
Gender and Nanotechnology. Encyclopedia of Nanotechnology. 269-271.(2010).
Nanotech: Good or Bad?. The Chemical Engineer. 37-39.(2010).
21st century STEM careers: Communication perspectives and research opportunities. ( , Ed.).Engaging communication theory, research and pedagogy to communicate for social impact.(2009).
Anticipating the Perceived Risk of Nanotechnologies: Will They Be Like Other Controversial Nanotechnologies. Nature Nanotechnology. 4, 752-758.(2009).
Deliberating the Risks of Nanotechnologies for Energy and Health Applications in the United States and United Kingdom. Nature Nanotechnology. 4, 95-98.(2009).
From the Ground Up: Developing an Interdisciplinary Course Focusing on Materials Science and Society in Green Technologies. Journal of Materials Education. 31, 251-264.(2009).
Gendered risk beliefs about emerging nanotechnologies in the US. University of Washington Center for Workforce Development.(2009).
Nanotoxicology: Characterizing the Scientific Literature: 2000-2007. Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 11, 251-257.(2009).
Reflections from Dr Barbara Herr Harhorn. A Beacon or Just a Landmark? Reflections on the 2004 Royal Society/Royal Academy of Engineering report: Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties. pg 43.(2009).