Liberal Arts Services

Interdisciplinary Research Models?

Beyond the potential promises and threats of nanotechnology and various technological practices, one of the most significant impacts the emerging field could have is on how science and technology are practiced. Since its emergence in the Enlightenment, science has become more and more specialized as researchers uncover more complex and detailed ways to examine the world. The result has been the formation of “silos of expertise” where scientists and engineers have become quite specialized, and it is often difficult to integrate findings into a “bigger picture” as well as to disseminate results in a generally understandable manner.

The emergence of nanotechnology has the potential to break down these barriers because of its interdisciplinary nature and emphasis not on scientific principles per se but rather on the nanoscale as a focus of study. The National Nanotechnology Initiative in the US is an example of how the practice will potentially integrate scientists and technologists to consider not only the smallness of nanotechnology but also the larger social impacts. The NNI funds a wide variety of different nanotechnology projects, some that are considered to be basic scientific research while others are aimed at creating marketable products.

The challenges of creating interdisciplinary scientific and technical teams to work on nanotechnology are significant. Scientists typically use different terminology to describe their work and their understanding of science is founded on different principles. This is particularly evident in the debates between K. Eric Drexler and Richard Smalley over the possibilities of molecular manufacturing. Drexler argues about the physical attributes of combining molecules and uses the principles of molecular manufacturing while Smalley employs principles of chemistry to refute Drexler’s theories. It can be a challenge for a biologist to talk with a systems engineer and a chemist about interactions at the nanoscale.

The emergence of nanotechnology as a federally funded project has called for the inclusion of social scientists. There is generally a strict boundary between the world of natural scientists and engineers and that of social scientists in academia. The former are focused on discovering how the natural world works and how scientific principles can be employed to benefit humans through the development of products and commercial processes. The latter focus on the implications of science and technology in terms of social, cultural and political perspectives.

The federal initiative to fund nanotechnology research in 2000 was paralleled by a call to include societal implications as a research goal. The US Congress passed legislation to include the pursuit of social impacts in 2003. Thus began an endeavor to include both the natural sciences and engineering with the social sciences through stimulation by Federal government funding. The inclusion of social sciences meant that the nanotechnology story would no longer be told exclusively by those involved in the mechanics of the discipline but also by those who monitor and think about its implications on society. Social scientists are seen as a valuable way to guide the technologies in directions that avoid unintended consequences and address issues such as social inequity, environmental implications, and cross cultural difference. In 2005, the National Science Foundation selected the University of California at Santa Barbara and Arizona State University to establish two new Centers for Nanotechnology in Society. The mission of these centers will be to support education and research on the social impacts of nanotechnology.

It remains to be seen if the pursuit of nanotechnology will result in new fundamental practices of science and technology. The NNI’s structural foundation that includes multiple federal agencies and their emphasis on including social scientists suggest that nanotechnology will develop in a very different fashion from previous forms of technology and science.