This project is to explore the risk perceptions of nanotechnology among different stackholders. The project include: (1) collect and review the risk perception research methods; (2) design a risk perception core questionnaire; (3) investigate and compare the risk, benefit, and trust perceptions among different stakeholders; (4) explore the policy implication of public concerns about nanotechnology. We reviewed and collected research methods and questionnaires on nanotechnology risk perception in many countries or international organizations. Based on the literature review and the suggestions from experts, we designed a core questionnaire concerning the perceptions of nanotechnology. By using this core questionnaire, we conducted a telephone interview survey (N=2,035) in general population, face-to-face (N=15) and paper-and-pencil (N=33) interviews with nano-industrial workers, and a web-based survey (N=52) with nanotechnology experts to collect the public perceptions on nanotechnology in Taiwan. Participants assessed both risks and benefits associated with nanotechnology. Trusts in the authorities, nanotechnology industries, and mass media were assessed as well. The differences in the perceptions of nanotechnology among the general population, workers, and experts were significant. More than ninety percent of experts (92.3%~98.1%) and more than eighty percent of the general population (82.2%~87.9%) agreed that nanotechnology has potential benefits for society. The percentage of experts that were “very worried” about the potential risks of inhalation exposures to nanoparticles was twice as high as that of the general population and workers. More than eighty percent of workers (81.1%) worried about the adverse health effects following dermal exposures to nanoparticles. Trusts in authority regulations, nanotechnology industries, and mass media were generally low. Among the respondents ever heard of government regulations, the general population expressed more trust in government (47.0%) while the experts’ opinions were diverse. One point worthy of notice was that the majority of respondents had not heard of the regulations regarding nanotechnology. The workers had more trust in product safety certification offered by nano-industries (33.3%), yet less than ten percent of experts (9.6%) said they trust the industies’ certification. About thirty percent of the general population (31.1%) trusted the media reports, but more than ninety percent of experts (90.4%) had lost trust in media. Although the scientific evidence of the health risk of nanotechnology is incomplete and uncertain, our study indicates that the perceptions of benefit, risk, and trust of nanotechnology among the general population, workers, and experts are significantly different. Government agencies should set precaution and support more risk perception and communication studies of different stakeholders to minimize the health risks of nanotechnology.

Nanotechnology, Risk Perception, Benefit, Trust