5TH WORLD SOCIAL FORUM, PORTO ALEGRE, FROM JANUARY 26 TO 31, 2005
SEMINAR :
“NEW TECHNOLOGIES FOR A NEW POSSIBLE WORLD: IS
NANOTECHNOLOGY A NEW SOLUTION?”
Date: January 28, 2005
Place: Room A 101 – Caes do Porto (Port Dock)
Hour: from noon to 3.00 pm
From 3.30 to 6.30 pm
ORGANIZATION
Research Network in Nanotechnology, Society and the Environment
Faculty of Philosophy, Literature and Human Sciences of the University of São Paulo –
FFLCH/USP
Sociologists’ Union of the State of São Paulo – SINSESP
THE NECESSARY SOCIAL CONFRONTATION IN THE USE OF
NEW TECHNOLOGIES;
THE NEW POSSIBLE WORLD AND NANOTECHNOLOGY.
Paulo Roberto Martins (1)
_______________________________ 1 Sociologist, Master in Agricultural Development, Doctor in Social Sciences, Researcher of the Institute of
Technological Researches of the State of São Paulo – IPT, Coordinator of the Research Network in Nanotechnology,
Society and the Environment – RENANOSOMA http://renanosoma.iv.fapesp.br, President of the Sociologists´ Union of
the State of São Paulo – SINSESP, e-mail: marpaulo@ipt.br
1-
INTRODUCTION
I want to open this seminar reaffirming one of the principles of the cha rter of the World Social
Forum, which is thus explained:
“The World Social Forum will always have a space open for pluralism and to the of engagements
and actings” (point 9), the source of wealth and strength of the movement for another world. The
Forum will coexist with contradictions and will always be marked by the conflict of opinions,
among the entities and the movements which are placed on the boundaries of its Charter of
Principles”. (2)
Possibly today in this seminar we will experience conflictin g opinions. But I am positive that we
are all convinced that we have to contribute towards the construction of a new possible world, the
product of which will exactly be the confrontation of ideas.
As to the roads towards the construction of this new pos sible world, I believe we may use what
Antonio Machado, andalusian poet says:
CAMINANTE, SON TUS HUELLAS
EL CAMINO, Y NADA MAS:
CAMINANTE, NO HAY CAMINO,
SE HACE CAMINO AL ANDAR.
AL ANDAR SE HACE CAMINO,
Y AL VOLVER LA VISTA ATRÁZ,
SE VE LA SENDA QUE NUNC A
SE HÁ DE VOLVER A PISAR.
CAMINANTE, NO HAY CAMINO,
SINO ESTRELLAS EN LA MAR.
Antonio Machado, Andalusian Spanish poet
Provérbios y Cantares n. XXIX
Here we have many stars that think about nanotechnology, society and the environment. I wo uld
like to thank all the guests who are here today to honour us with their ideas and conceptions about
the relations between the new technologies and a new possible world. To all, my most sincere
thanks.
The public, present today is the main element of our activities. Therefore, half of the time will be
devoted to the questions from those present about the ideas and conceptions presented by our
lecturers.
2.
THE NECESSARY SOCIAL CONFRONTATION
It´s public knowledge the polemic created by the genetica lly modified foods. Although we are still
reflecting on this matter, a new controversy is approaching us. It is nanotechnology which now
holds the interest of all.
9 Captured on 17/01/05 on the URL; www.forumsocialkundial.org.br/main.php?id_menu=4_2&cd_language+1
Based on the ability to manipulate matter in a cellular and atomic scale, this new field of scientific
and technological development has been received wi th enthusiasm similar to that of biotechnology
and the internet in the early 90´s. Nanotechnology is considered by many as the bearer of a new
industrial revolution.
But, nanotechnology is not above criticism. Among the many uncertainties about this tec hnology
we may point out the toxicity of the nano particles and its need for a specific regulation. Even
though it may be seen as a new technology, its contains ethical questions which were already
observed in biotechnology. Or will nanotechnology inevit ably become a “GMO”? Will be able to
break the cycle of transgenics in terms of propaganda, secrecy (lack of transparency), fear and
conflict, taking into consideration the social and environmental concerns from the start?
One of the biggest lessons from biotechnology is that it isn´t only the risks attached to the new
technologies that give the population reasons to worry. Controversies grow when the public is not
allowed to participate in this process. The public is not given the opportunity to ask wh at is this
technology good for??? Who will be its owner or who will appropriate from it? Who will be
responsible if things don´t work out right? Who can we trust? Who will be the included and who
will be the excluded? At present it is already common to hear the expression “digital exclusion”
and government programs of “digital inclusion”. Will we in the near future hear about the
“nanoexcluded”?
Naturally all the questions pointed above must not be resolved exclusively by technicians, by those
who “understand the subject”, for they are not technical matters. In order to resolve them, the
public must be involved since the beginning. It is exactly while nanotechnology is giving its first
steps that the debate with the public must start, putting all th ese questions onto the table in a
transparent manner. That which serves to capture resource for research must also serve to indicate
the direction research must take in the country.
We must, therefore, overcome the idea that science and technology are pr oduced by scientists and
must be presented as a finished product to the public, not leaving them with another recourse than to
accept the fact. Science and Technology must walk together, side by side, to indicate the way that
technology must follow, in th at the decisions about researches must be open for appreciation and
debate, and that the presuppositions may be altered from the beginning of the research work. Only
in this manner will be able to count upon the engaging of the public and with this, the r esults of the
researches will not be the object of conflict within society.
This is a big challenge. But, in order not to say that I didn´t speak about flowers, I say that he who
knows, doesn´t wait but makes the hour happen!!! This is what the newly con stituted Brazilian
research network on nanotechnology, society and the environment wishes to do
(http://renanosome.iv.fapesp.br ). It is formed by researchers of the human area that have
nanotechnology as the ir object of study, and whose first activity was to organize this seminar,
making it clear that it is their understanding that science and technology must contribute towards a
permanent social confrontation of new technologies taking place as the central p art of the decision
process about the adoption or not of these technologies.
Although we are beginning these activities as a network of humanities scientists dedicated to the
study of nanotechnology, in Brazil we already have many people reflecting on tec hnology and
society and I would here like to point out the reflection of our great master, Henrique Rattner – who
is not present today due to health problems – in a recent work entitled “Nanotechnology. For better
or for worse”. For Rattner
“One does n ot wish to stop the scientific and technological process, but it is our duty to take care of
the risks to public health and of the threats to the unstable balance of the environment. For this, it
is necessary to displace discussion from abstract principl es, pro or against, to the analysis of the
social and economic actors, pledged institutionally to the legislation that demands the
environmental licensing (EIA/RIMA) for all the economic activities, subject to the analysis and
evaluation on the part of SIS NAMA – Environment National System.
Technological innovations must not only be technically possible, but also environmentally and
biologically safe, economically advantageous, socially beneficial and ethically acceptable. All this
legally regulated.
Therefore, the good norms of scientific research and its technological applications reject the
privilege of a few and do not admit juridical aberrations, envisaging the protection of the interests
of the economic or academic minorities from the obligations th at regulate the life of all the citizens.
(…)
Science and technology are not politically neutral: on the contrary, equipment and work processes
and the organization of these are inextricably connected to the social production relations.
In each historical, spatial and socially determined context, the concrete forms of technology
represent a determined combination of levels of economic and political powers centralized in the
hands of those who own the means of production and, on the other hand, the aspira tions to power of
the workers and their claims for better pay, more autonomy and self -management. For this, the
technological practices reflect the political contradictions between the dynamic of the economy
(accumulation and concentration of capital) and the opposite trends of the social and political
systems, towards democracy and self -management. This dialectic tension establishes the limits of
science and technology as instruments of social change. P&D and the incorporation of its results to
the productive system obey primarily to economic and political criteria. In the final analysis, the
hypothetical development of nanotechnology will depend not only on the volume of financial
resources at its disposal, but of who controls and uses them, with what objectives and principles.
Aside from imposing the obligation to study the impacts of nanotechnology on the society, it would
be the scientists´ duty to study the impacts of society on the technology and on the norms,
institutions, groups of “stake holder s” and its values, to define its course and limits, though our
experience with nuclear energy, genetic engineering and internet does not foresee promising results.
(3)
The questions which were presented here will serve to initiate our debate, which will n ow be
incremented with the contributions of our “nanopopstars”, present on this table. Thank you for
your attention.
3 Rattner, Henrique. Nanotechnology: For better of for worse. Paper presented on the 1 st International Seminar on
Nanotechnology, Society and the Environment. São Paulo, 18-19 October, 2004, Casa da Cultura Japonesa, Universidade
de São Paulo, p.9-10