INSN - International Nanotechnology and Society Network

Library

Our Library

Bennett, Ira

Bennett, I. & Sarewitz, D. (2006) Too Little, Too Late?: Research Policies on the Societal Implications of Nanotechnology in the United States, Science as Culture Vol. 15 no. 4, 309-325.

Coenen, Christopher

Coenen, Christopher. (2006). Der posthumanistische Technofuturismus in den Debatten über Nanotechnologie und Converging Technologies. In Nordmann, A., Schummer, J. & Schwarz, A. (Eds.), Nanotechnologien im Kontext: Philosophische, ethische und gesellschaftliche Perspektiven (pp. 195-222). Berlin, Germany: Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft.

Coenen, Christopher. (2006). Internationale Konferenz des, Forum on Sustainable Technological Development in a Globalising World (Budapest, Ungarn; Dezember 8-12, 2005): Converging Technologies - Promises and Challenges. Technikfolgenabschätzung - Theorie und Praxis, 1(15), 110-114.

Coenen, Christopher. (2005). NanoEthics Conference: Conference Report. Technikfolgenabschätzung - Theorie und Praxis, 2(14), 116-120.

Coenen, Christopher. (2004). Nanofuturismus: Anmerkungen zu seiner Relevanz, Analyse und Bewertung. Technikfolgenabschätzung - Theorie und Praxis, 2(13), 78-85.

Coenen, Chr., Rader, M. & Fleischer, T. (2004). Of visions, dreams and nightmares: The debate on converging technologies. Technikfolgenabschätzung - Theorie und Praxis, 13(3), 118-125.

Paschen, H., Coenen, Chr., Fleischer, T., Grünwald, R., Oertel, D., Revermann, Ch. (2004). Nanotechnologie. Forschung, Entwicklung, Anwendung. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer.

Coenen, Christopher. (2003). Utopien und Visionen zur Nanotechnologie. Tab Brief, 24, 5-8.

CSPO

CSPO. (2005). The NNI's commitment to societal dimensions: a primer.

Doubleday, Robert

The Nanotechnology Engagement Group: Policy Report 1. (2006, March). A Report by Involve.

Doubleday, R., Eames, M., Pidgeon, N., Scott, Faye & Wilson, R. (2005, July). The Nanotechnology Engagement Group: An Introduction. A report by Involve.

Fleischer, Torsten

Fleischer, T. & Grunwald, A. (2005). Innovation in neuen Technikfeldem - Die Nanotechnologie. WSI - Mitteilungen, 58(3), 137-143.

Fleischer, T., Decker, M. & Fiedeler, U. (2005). Assessing emerging technologies - Methodical challenges and the case of nanotechnologies. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 52, 1112-1121.

Fleischer, T., Hocke-Bergler, P. & Grunwald, A. (2005, April 11). Exploring potentials of nanotechnologies, avoiding pitfalls of ignored risk perception. International Congress of Nanotechnologies 2005, San Francisco, CA.

Fleischer, T. & Decker, M. (2004). Converging Technologies. Verbesserung menschlicher Fahigkeiten durch emergente Techniken? In Bora, A., Decker, M., Grunwald, A. & Renn, O. (Eds.), Technik in einer fragilen Welt. Proceedings zur ersten Konferenz des "Netzwerks TA" (NTA1). Berlin.

Fleischer, T. & Kastenholz, H. (2004). Nanotechnologie und ihre Folgen. Abshätzung von Chancen und Risiken. Soziale Technik, 14(3), 3-5.

Coenen, Chr., Rader, M. & Fleischer, T. (2004). Of visions, dreams and nightmares: The debate on converging technologies. Technikfolgenabschätzung - Theorie und Praxis, 13(3), 118-125.

Decker, M., Fiedeler, U. & Fleischer, T. (2004). Ich sehe was, was Du nicht siehst ...zur Definition von Nanotechnologie. Technikfolgenabschätzung - Theorie und Praxis, 13(2), 10-16.

Fiedeler, U., Fleischer, T. & Decker, M. (2004). Roadmapping als eine Erweiterung des "Methoden-Werkzeugkastens" der Technikfolgenabschätzung? Technikfolgenabschätzung - Theorie und Praxis, 13(2), 65-70.

Fleischer, T., Decker, M. & Fiedeler, U. (2004). Große Aufmerksamkeit für kleine Welten - Nanotechnologie und ihre Folgen - Einführung in den Schwerpunkt. Technikfolgenabschätzung - Theorie und Praxis, 13(2), 5-9.

Paschen, H., Coenen, Chr., Fleischer, T., Grünwald, R., Oertel, D., Revermann, Ch. (2004). Nanotechnologie. Forschung, Entwicklung, Anwendung. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer.

Foladori, Guillermo

Invernizzi, N., and Foladori, G. (2006). Nanomedicine, Poverty and Medicine Development, 00, (1-5)

Foladori, G. (2006, May 9-10). Nanotechnologies in Latin America. International Council on Nanotechnology (ICON) Meeting, Houston, TX.

Foladori, G. (2006). Nanotechnology in Latin America at the Crossroads. Nanotechnology Law & Business, 3(2).

Invernizzi, N., and Foladori, G. (2006). As nanotecnologias como solução à pobreza? Inclusão Social, 1(2), 66-72.

Foladori, G. & Invernizzi, N. (2005). Cuando los Gnomos vienen marchando. Implicaciones de la nanobiotecnología. Theomai, 12.

Foladori, G., & Invernizzi, N. (2005). Nanotecnologia: beneficio para todos o mayor desigualdad? (Spanish)

Foladori, G., & Invernizzi, N. (2005). Nanotechnology in its Socio-economic Context. Science Studies, 18(2), 67-73.

Invernizzi, N. & Foladori, G. (2005). ¿A nanotecnologia como solução aos problemas dos países em desenvolvimento? Resposta e moral da história? Midia Independente. (Portuguese)

Invernizzi, N. & Foladori, G. (2005). ¿La nanotecnología como solución a los problemas de los países en desarrollo? Euroresidentes. (Spanish)

Invernizzi, N. & Foladori, G. (2005). Nanotechnology and the Developing World: Will Nanotechnology Overcome Poverty or Widen Disparities? Nanotechnology Law & Business Journal, 2.3, 101-110.

Invernizzi, N. & Foladori, G. (2005). Nanotechnology as a solution to the problems of developing countries? Reply and moral of the story. (Draft)

Invernizzi, N., Foladori, G., & Guivant, J. (2005). Nanotecnologia e Sociedade. Retrieved from
http://www.jornaldaciencia.org.br/Detalhe.jsp?id=26952. (Portuguese)

Foladori, G. (2006). Die Einfluss des US-Millitarie auf die Nanotechnologieforschung in Lateinamerika. (German)

Invernizzi, N., Foladori, G., & Maclurcan, D. (2007). The Role of Nanotechnologies in Development and Poverty Alleviation: A Matter of Controversy. Retrieved from
http://www.azonano.com/Details.asp?ArticleID=2041.

Grunwald, Armin

Grunwald, A. (2005). Nanotechnik - eine Herausforderung für die Wissenschaftsethik? Information Philosophie, 33(1), 24-29.
Grunwald, A. (2005). Nanotechnology - A new field of ethical inquiry? Science and Engineering Ethics, 11(2), 187-201.
Fleischer, T. & Grunwald, A. (2005). Innovation in neuen Technikfeldem - Die Nanotechnologie. WSI - Mitteilungen, 58(3), 137-143.
Fleischer, T., Hocke-Bergler, P. & Grunwald, A. (2005, April 11). Exploring potentials of nanotechnologies, avoiding pitfalls of ignored risk perception. International Congress of Nanotechnologies 2005, San Francisco, CA.
Grunwald, A. (2004). The case of nanobiotechnology. Towards a prospective risk assessment. EMBO Reports, 2(10), 32-36.
Grunwald, A. (2004). Ethische Aspekte der Nanotechnologie. Eine Felderkundung. Technikfolgenabschätzung - Theorie und Praxis, 13(2), 71-78.
Grunwald, A. (2004). The normative basis of (health) technology assessment and the role of ethical expertise. Pojesis & Praxis, International Journal of Ethics of Science and TA, 2(2-3), 175-193.
Grunwald, A. (2004). Participation as a means of enhancing the legitimacy of decisions on technology? A skeptical analysis. Pojesis & Praxis, International Journal of Ethics of Science and TA, 3(1-2), 106-122.
Grunwald, A. (2004). Vision assessment as a new element of the FTA toolbox. In Scapolo, F. & Cahill, E. (Eds.), New horizons and challenges for future-oriented technology analysis (pp. 53-67). Proceedings of the EU-US scientific seminar: New technology foresight, forecasting & assessment methods, Seville, Spain.

Guston, David H.

Guston, D.H. Director's Blog. Center for Nanotechnology in Society.
Guston, D.H., (2006). A Still Small Voice [Review of the book Nanotalk: Conversations with Scientists and Engineers about Ethics, Meaning, and Belief in the Development of Nanotechnology]. Journal of Nanoparticle Research.
Guston, D.H. & Sarewitz, D. (2002). Real-Time Technology Assessment. Technology in Culture, 24, 93-109.

Heinze, Thomas

Heinze, T. (2006). Die Kopplung von Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft. Das Beispiel der Nanotechnologie. Frankfurt, Germany; New York City, New York: Campus.

Heinze, T. (2006, July). Emergence of Nano S&T in Germany. Network Formation and Company Performance. Fraunhofer ISI Discussion Paper.

Heinze, T. & Kuhlmann, S. (2006, June). Analysis of heterogeneous collaboration in the German research system with a focus on nanotechnology. Fraunhofer ISI Discussion Paper.

Heinze, T., Shapira, P., Senker, J. & Kuhlmann, S. (2006, August). Identifying Creative Research Accomplishments: Methodology and Results for Nanotechnology and Human Genetics. Fraunhofer ISI Discussion Paper and forthcoming in Scientometrics.

Heinze, T. (2004). Nanoscience and Nanotechnology in Europe: Analysis of Publications and Patent Applications including Comparisons with the United States. Nanotechnology Law & Business, 1(4), 427-445.

Kastenholz, Hans

Fleischer, T. & Kastenholz, H. (2004). Nanotechnologie und ihre Folgen. Abshätzung von Chancen und Risiken. Soziale Technik, 14(3), 3-5.

Helland, A., Kastenholz, H. (2008).Nanotechnology in Light of Sustainable Development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16, 8-9, 885-888.

Helland, A., Kastenholz, H. (eds.) (2008). Nanotechnology in Light of Sustainability.Special Issue of the Journal of Cleaner Production, 16, 8-9.

Helland, A., Kastenholz, H., Siegrist, M. (2008). Precaution in practice: Perceptions, procedures and performance in Nanotech Industry. Journal of Industrial Ecology, special Issue, "Nanotechnology and Industrial Ecology" (accepted).

Helland, A., Kastenholz, H. Thidell, A., Arnfalk, P., Deppert, K. (2006). Nanoparticulate materials and regulatory policy in europe: An analysis of stakeholder perspectives. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 8 (5) 709-719.

Helland, A., Scheringer, J., Siegrist, M., Kastenholz, Ho., Wiek, A., & Scholz, R. (2007). Risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials - A survey of industrial approaches. Environmental Science and Technology, 42, 2, 640-646.

Siegrist, M., Cousin, M.E., Kastenholz, H. & Wiek, A. (2007). Public acceptance of nanotechnology foods and food packaging: The influence of affect and trust. Appetite, 49, 459-466.

Siegrist, M., Keller, C., Kastenholz, H., Frey, S. & Wiek, A. (2007). Lay people's and experts' perception of nanotechnology hazards. Risk Analysis, 27, 1, 59-69.

Siegrist, M., Wiek, A., Helland, A., Kastenholz, H. (2007). Risks and nanotechnology: The public is more concerned than experts and industry. Nature Nanotechnology, 2, 67.

Siegrist, M., Staempfli, N., Kastenholz, Ho. (2008). Perceived risks and perceived benefits of different nanotechnology foods and nanotechnology food packaging. Appetite (accepted).

Turk, V., Knowls, H., Wallbaum, H., Kastenholz., H. (2007). The future of nanotechnology - we need to talk. Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy GmbH, Forum for the Future, triple innova. Empa (eds.). London: Beacon Press.

Kearnes, Matthew

Kearnes, Matthew. (2006). Chaos and Control: Nanotechnology and the Politics of Emergence. Paragraph, 29(2) forthcoming.

Kearnes, M., Macnaghten, P.& Wynne, B. (2005). Nanotechnology, governance and public deliberation: What role for the social sciences? Science Communication. (Submitted)
Grove-White, R., Kearnes, M., Miller, P., Macnaghten, P., Wilsdon, J. & Wynne, B. (2004). Bio – to – Nano? Learning the Lessons, Interrogating the Comparison. London: DEMOS. (Working Paper)

Kuhlmann, Stephen

Heinze, T. & Kuhlmann, S. (2006, June). Analysis of heterogeneous collaboration in the German research system with a focus on nanotechnology. Fraunhofer ISI Discussion Paper.

Heinze, T., Shapira, P., Senker, J. & Kuhlmann, S. (2006, August). Identifying Creative Research Accomplishments: Methodology and Results for Nanotechnology and Human Genetics. Fraunhofer ISI Discussion Paper and forthcoming in Scientometrics.

Invernizzi, Noela

Invernizzi, N., and Foladori, G. (2006). Nanomedicine, Poverty and Medicine Development, 00, (1-5)

Invernizzi, N., and Foladori, G. (2006). As nanotecnologias como solução à pobreza? Inclusão Social, 1(2), 66-72.

Foladori, G. & Invernizzi, N. (2005). Cuando los Gnomos vienen marchando. Implicaciones de la nanobiotecnología. Theomai, 12.

Foladori, G., & Invernizzi, N. (2005). Nanotecnologia: beneficio para todos o mayor desigualdad? (Spanish)

Foladori, G., & Invernizzi, N. (2005). Nanotechnology in its Socio-economic Context. Science Studies, 18(2), 67-73.

Invernizzi, N. & Foladori, G. (2005). ¿A nanotecnologia como solução aos problemas dos países em desenvolvimento? Resposta e moral da história? Midia Independente. (Portuguese)

Invernizzi, N. & Foladori, G. (2005). ¿La nanotecnología como solución a los problemas de los países en desarrollo? Euroresidentes. (Spanish)

Invernizzi, N. & Foladori, G. (2005). Nanotechnology and the Developing World: Will Nanotechnology Overcome Poverty or Widen Disparities? Nanotechnology Law & Business Journal, 2.3, 101-110.

Invernizzi, N. & Foladori, G. (2005). Nanotechnology as a solution to the problems of developing countries? Reply and moral of the story. (Draft)

Invernizzi, N., Foladori, G., & Guivant, J. (2005). Nanotecnologia e Sociedade. Retrieved from
http://www.jornaldaciencia.org.br/Detalhe.jsp?id=26952. (Portuguese)

Invernizzi, N., Foladori, G., & Maclurcan, D. (2007). The Role of Nanotechnologies in Development and Poverty Alleviation: A Matter of Controversy. Retrieved from
http://www.azonano.com/Details.asp?ArticleID=2041.

Maclurcan, Don

D. C. Maclurcan 2005, "Nanotechnology and Developing Countries - Part A: What Possibilities?" AzoNano Online Journal of Nanotechnology.
D. C. Maclurcan 2005, "Nanotechnology and Developing Countries - Part B: What Realities?" AzoNano Online Journal of Nanotechnology.

Invernizzi, N., Foladori, G., & Maclurcan, D. (2007). The Role of Nanotechnologies in Development and Poverty Alleviation: A Matter of Controversy. Retrieved from
http://www.azonano.com/Details.asp?ArticleID=2041.

Macnaghten, Phil

Kearnes, M., Macnaghten, P.,& Wynne, B. (2005). Nanotechnology, governance and public deliberation: What role for the social sciences? Science Communication. (Submitted)

Grove-White, R., Kearnes, M., Miller, P., Macnaghten, P., Wilsdon, J. & Wynne, B. (2004). Bio – to – Nano? Learning the Lessons, Interrogating the Comparison. London: DEMOS. (Working Paper)

Mehta, Michael

Mehta, M. (Forthcoming). Regulating biotechnology and nanotechnology in Canada: A post-normal science approach for inclusion of the fourth helix. International Journal of Contemporary Sociology, 42(1), 1-13.

Mehta, M. & Goldenberg, L. (Forthcoming). In search of nanoscale economics: Intellectual property and nano-mercantilism in the pre-assembler and assembler stages of nanotechnology. In E. Einsiedel & F. Timmermans (Eds.), Crossing Over: Genomics in the Public Arena, (pp. 31). Calgary: University of Calgary Press.

Mehta, M. (2004). From biotechnology to nanotechnology: What can we learn from earlier technologies? Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 24(1), 34-39.

Mehta, M. (2004). The future of nanomedicine looks promising, but only if we learn from the past. Health Law Review, 13(1), 16-18.

Mehta, M. (2004). Some thoughts on the economic impacts of assembler-era nanotechnology. Health Law Review, 12(3), 33-36.

Mehta, M. & Poudrier, J. (2004). Microfluidic platforms, genetic databases, and biosociality. In G. Arnason, S. Nordal & V. Arnason (Eds.), Blood and Data: Ethical, Legal and Social Aspects of Human Genetic Databases, (pp. 17-22). Reykjavik: University of Iceland Press.

Pilarski L., Mehta M., Caulfield T., Kaler K.V.I.S., & Backhouse C.J. (2004). Microsystems and nanoscience for biomedical applications: A view to the future. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 24(1), 40-45.

Mehta, M. (2003). Nano-hype. AgBiotech Bulletin, 11(6), 5-6.

Mehta, M. (2003). Nanotechnology and globalization. In J. Aart Scholte (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Globalization, (pp. 6). New York: Routledge.

Mehta, M. (2002). Nanoscience and nanotechnology: Assessing the nature of innovation in these fields. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 22(4), 269-273.

Mehta, M. (2002). Privacy vs. surveillance: How to avoid a nano-panoptic future. Canadian Chemical News, 54(10), 31-33.

Mehta, M. ( 19 April 2002). Regulating Biotechnology and Nanotechnology in Canada: A Post-Normal Science Approach for Inclusion of the Fourth Helix. Presented at the International Workshop on Science, Technology and Society: Lessons and Challenges, National University of Singapore.

Michelson, Evan

Maynard, A. & Michelson, E. (2006). The Nanotechnology Consumer Products Inventory. Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, D.C.

Nanotechnology Engagement Group (NEG)

The Nanotechnology Engagement Group: Policy Report 1. (2006, March). A Report by Involve.
Doubleday, R., Eames, M., Pidgeon, N., Scott, Faye & Wilson, R. (2005, July). The Nanotechnology Engagement Group: An Introduction. A report by Involve.

Nordmann, Alfred

Nordmann, A. (2006, March). Shifting Grounds: From Tomorrow’s People to Today’s Challenges. James Martin Institute First World Forum on Science and Civilization, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Nordmann, A., Schummer, J. & Schwarz, A. (Eds.). (2006). Nanotechnologien im Kontext: Philosophische, ethische und gesellschaftliche Perspektiven. Berlin, Germany: Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft.

Pidgeon, Nick

The Nanotechnology Engagement Group: Policy Report 1. (2006, March). A Report by Involve.
Rogers-Hayden, T. & Pidgeon, N. (2006). Reflecting upon the UK's Citizens'
Jury on Nanotechnologies: Nano Jury UK. Nanotechnology Law and Business, 2(3).
Doubleday, R., Eames, M., Pidgeon, N., Scott, Faye & Wilson, R. (2005, July). The Nanotechnology Engagement Group: An Introduction. A report by Involve.

Rayner, Steve

Rayner, S. (2004). The Novelty Trap: Why Does Institutional Learning About New Technologies Seem So Difficult? Industry and Higher Education, 18(5), 349-355.

Rejeski, David

Rejeski, D. (2006, April 27). Nanotech Safety 101 or How to Avoid the Next Little Accident. Workshop on Disaster Prevention. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Rejeski, D. (2006, May 4). Testimony given to the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, Subcommittee on Trade, Tourism and Economic Development for the hearing on 'Promoting Economic Development Opportunities Through Nano Commercialization.' Washington, DC.
Rajeski, D. (2005, November 17). Testimony given to the United States House of Representatives Committee on Science for the hearing on 'Environmental and Safety Impacts of Nanotechnology: What Research is Needed?' Washington, DC.
Wardak, A. & Rejeski, D. (2003). Nanotechnology & Regulation: A Case Study using the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA). Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC.

Rip, Arie

Rip, A. (2005, January 13-15). Technology Assessment as Part of the Co-Evolution of Nanotechnology and Society: the Thrust of the TA Program in NanoNed. Marburg, Germany: Paper presented at the conference on Nanotechnology in Science, Economy and Society.

Rogers-Hayden, Tee

Rogers-Hayden, T. & Pidgeon, N. (2006). Reflecting upon the UK's Citizens'
Jury on Nanotechnologies: Nano Jury UK. Nanotechnology Law and Business, 2(3).

Sarewitz, Daniel

Bennett, I. & Sarewitz, D. (2005). Too Little, Too Late?: Research Policies on the Societal Implications of Nanotechnology in the United States. (Draft)

Sarewitz, D. & Woodhouse, E. (2003). Small is Powerful. In A. Lightman, et al. (Eds.), Living With the Genie: Essays on Technology and the Quest for Human Mastery, (pp. 63-84). Washington D.C.: Island Press.

Guston, D.H. & Sarewitz, D. (2002). Real-Time Technology Assessment. Technology in Culture, 24, 93-109.

Crow, M. & Sarewitz, D. (2001). Nanotechnology and Societal Transformation. In M. Roco & W.S. Bainbridge (Eds.), Societal Implications of Nanotechnology (pp. 55-67). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Scheufele, Dietram

Scheufele, D. A. (2006). Five lessons in nano outreach. Materials Today, 9(5), 64.

Scheufele, D. A. (2005). The “scientific citizen” and nanotech: Chasing an unrealistic ideal? Small Times.

Scheufele, D. A. & Lewenstein, B. (2005). The public and nanotechnology: How citizens make sense of emerging technologies. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 7(6), 659-667.

Lee, C., Scheufele, D. A. & Lewenstein, B. V. (2005). Public attitudes toward emerging technologies: Examining the interactive effects of cognitions and affect on public support for nanotechnology. Science Communication, 27(2), 240-267.

Schwarz, Astrid

Nordmann, A., Schummer, J. & Schwarz, A. (Eds.). (2006). Nanotechnologien im Kontext: Philosophische, ethische und gesellschaftliche Perspektiven. Berlin, Germany: Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft.

Shapira, Philip

Heinze, T., Shapira, P., Senker, J. & Kuhlmann, S. (2006, August). Identifying Creative Research Accomplishments: Methodology and Results for Nanotechnology and Human Genetics. Fraunhofer ISI Discussion Paper and forthcoming in Scientometrics.

Sweeney, Aldrin

Sweeney, Aldrin E., Seal, S. & Vaidyanathan, P. (2003). The promises and perils of nanoscience and nanotechnology: Exploring emerging social and ethical issues. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 23(4),236-245

Sweeney, Aldrin E. (2006). Social and ethical dimensions of nanoscale science and engineering research. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12(3), 435-464.

Toumey, Chris

Toumey, C. (2006, Winter). Nano Science & Technology Research at the University of South Carolina. Society for Philosophy and Technology Newsletter, 30(1), 10-13.

Toumey, C. & Baird, D. (2006, June). Building Nanoliteracy in the University and Beyond. Nature Biotechnology, 24(6), 721-722.

Toumey, C. (2005, June). Apostolic Succession: Does Nanotechnology Descend from Richard Feynman’s 1959 Talk? Engineering & Science, 68(1), 16-23.

Toumey, C. (2004, December). Narratives for Nanotech. Techné, 8(2), 88-116.

Wilsdon, James

The Nanotechnology Engagement Group: Policy Report 1. (2006, March). A Report by Involve.

Grove-White, R., Kearnes, M., Miller, P., Macnaghten, P., Wilsdon, J. & Wynne, B. (2004). Bio – to – Nano? Learning the Lessons, Interrogating the Comparison. London: DEMOS. (Working Paper)

Wilsdon, J. & Willis, R. (2004). See-Through Science. London: Demos.

Wolbring, Gregor

Wolbring, G. (2006). The Enhancement Debate: Able-ism Leads to Transhumanism. James Martin Institute World Forum on Science and Civilization: "Tomorrow's People: The challenges of technologies for life extension and enhancement," University of Oxford.

Wolbring, G. (2006). The unenhanced underclass. In Miller, P. and Wilsdon, J. Building everyday democracy, 122-128. London: Demos.

Wolbring, G. (2005, December). The Triangle of Enhancement Medicine, Disabled People, and the Concept of Health: A New Challenge for HTA, Health Research, and Health Policy. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Initiaive #23. Edmonton, Alberta: Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research.

http://www.ahfmr.ab.ca/download.php/954da463c9a6c633bdafefd1aaf23844

Wolbring, G. (2004). Disabled people, science and technology and health research. In Matlin, S. (Ed.) Global Forum Update on Research for Health 2005 (pp. 138-141). London, England: Pro-Book.

Wolbring, G. (2004). Solutions follow perception: NBIC and the concept of health, medicine, disability and disease. Alberta Health Law Review, 12(3).

Theme C Panel. (2002). Improving Human Health and Physical Capabilities Theme C Summary. In Roco, M.C. and Bainbridge, W.S. Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science (pp. 179-

183). Arlington, Virginia: NSF/DOC - sponsored report.

Wolbring, G. (2002). Improving Quality of Life of Disabled People Using Converging Technologies. In Roco, M.C. and Bainbridge, W.S. Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science (pp. 270-

273). Arlington, Virginia: NSF/DOC - sponsored report.

Wolbring, G. (2002). Science and Technology and the Triple D (Disease, Disability, Defect). In Roco, M.C. and Bainbridge, W.S. Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science (pp. 232-

243). Arlington, Virginia: NSF/DOC - sponsored report.

Woodhouse, Edward J.

Sarewitz, D. & Woodhouse, E. (2003). Small is Powerful. In A. Lightman, et al. (Eds.), Living With the Genie: Essays on Technology and the Quest for Human Mastery, (pp. 63-84). Washington D.C.: Island Press.