1

Unpacking the grand challenges of nanotechnology Harro van Lente and Colette Bos

1. Introduction In July 2009 the EU Lund declaration stated that “Europe must focus on the Grand Challenges of our time”. Since then, the notion of ‘grand challenge’ has pervaded science and innovation policy, both at EU and national levels. Also in nanotechnology grand challenges abound in policy documents and research programs. The notion of challenge is intriguing and continues to stress expectations of future contributions. Indeed, the rise of nanotechnology is surrounded by expectations that it will provide ‘solutions’ for societal problems. The idea is that nanotechnology, which draws from fields like physics, chemistry, optics, engineering and biology, has a large potential for possible applications, because of the unique properties of substances at this small scale. Yet, a ‘grand challenge’ is more than an expectation that solutions will be provided in due course, as a challenge also brings along notions of urgency, excitement and fulfillment. In this paper we investigate the question what does it mean to have grand challenges in a technological field? We thus will examine what constitutes a grand challenge and what its presence imply for the unfolding dynamics of the field. We will do so in two steps. First, we unpack of the notion of challenge, and study the archetypes of challenges. An important source is the classical study of Joseph Campbell, The Hero with a Thousand Faces (1949) in which he summarizes the archetypical structure of narratives about protagonist being tested by circumstances and by fate. We conclude that a challenge is constituted by (i) a problem, (ii) a solution and (iii) an urgency. Hence it requires a triple articulation to specify and legitimate a choice for a direction of research. The second step is to examine how the grand challenges appear in funding programs on nanotechnology and how the triple articulation of problems, solutions and urgency occurs; in particular we study the challenges of ‘sustainability’ and ‘healthy aging’ in the case of nanotechnology. In four EU reports and six national reports - concerning national nanotechnology initiatives in the UK (NNI), Norway (Nanomat) and the Netherlands (NanoNextNL) -we analyze the wording of sustainability and ageing, and how they are linked to research themes and projects. We study these reports along three questions: (i) how are ‘sustainability’ and ‘healthy ageing’ articulated, (ii) how are these notions linked to research themes and (iii) how are these notions linked to specific research projects? This allows us to trace and elaborate how grand challenges are divided into ‘small’ challenges. And how small challenges, in their turn, gain legitimacy when linked to grand challenges. Challenges, thus, get translated when moving from actor to actor, and from credibility cycle to credibility cycle. It appears that in the national programs the proclaimed problems are more specific, the urgency is less and the solutions are more prominent. We conclude that the ‘grand challenge’ is more than a fancy term: it offers a dramatic structure which frames decisions, agendas and coordination in nanotechnology.

2. Theory: the thousand faces of a challenge In general, the notion of challenge brings along a testing situation that requires a response. In the Merriam-Webster dictionary ‘challenge’ is defined as “a difficult task or problem, something that is hard to do; an action, statement, etc., that is against something; a refusal to accept something as true, correct, or legal; : an invitation to compete in a game, fight, etc.”. So, a challenge refers to a combination of protest, difficulties, and an invitation for action. According to anthropological and literary scholars, this situation is well-known in the repertoire of most cultures. In 1949, the famous study of Joseph Campbell, The Hero with a Thousand Faces,

2

compared and contrasted many mythical Western and Eastern narratives and characterized the basic pattern in which the protagonist is tested and invited to act. Initially, the hero is unwilling to confront the difficulties, but is called to his duties and responsibilities. Table 1 lists the 17 stages in the journey of the hero that Campbell distinguishes.

A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man. (Campbell 1949, 23)

His journey, in the end, is not a personal adventure only, but brings rescue to his community as well. The journey of the hero is also a psychological drama and stipulates what it is that makes a person ‘good’. Purportedly, this archetypical structure has inspired script writers in Hollywood. Film director George Lucas, for instance, has explicitly revealed Campbell’s study as an important source of inspiration for his very successful Star Wars trilogy. Table 1: The hero’s journey Stages

Departure • The Call to Adventure • Refusal of the Call • Supernatural Aid • The Crossing of the First Threshold • Belly of The Whale

Initiation • The Road of Trials • The Meeting With the Goddess • Woman as Temptress • Atonement with the Father • Apotheosis • The Ultimate Boon

Return • Refusal of the Return • The Magic Flight • Rescue from Without • The Crossing of the Return Threshold • Master of Two Worlds • Freedom to Live

source: Campbell (1949)

For the sake of this chapter, we summarize the constitution of a challenge with three elements: (i) a challenge states a problem in which the fate of the community is at stake, (ii) it points at demanding tasks which will test the protagonists and (iii) it introduces urgency - the problem requires action for the sake of the community and for the sake of being ‘good’.

Figure 1 The constitutive elements of a challenge

3

In each narrative, in each situation, the basic ingredients of a challenge will be specified and filled in differently. While the narratives listed in The Hero with a Thousand Faces follow a archetypical narrative structure, each has its own specific plot and details. Also the EU grand challenges have a thousand faces. The grand challenges of, say, sustainability and healthy aging, do not speak for themselves but need spokespersons to give the encompassing terms (or ‘umbrella terms’, Rip and Voss 2013) a specific meaning. Renewable energy, clean drinking water, or less CO2 emissions could all be fitted under the wide umbrella of sustainability. But even these statements are still quite broad and could be narrowed down: energy sources which counteract the greenhouse effect and thus do not emit CO2 are rendered sustainable. ‘Sustainability’, thus, may be specified as ‘supporting renewable energy’, which in its turn can be specified as ‘developing solar panels’. And, consequentially, working on one catalytic nanoscale particle that could make solar cells more efficient would count as working on sustainability as well. Such processes of filling in generic terms have been studied by Van Lente and Van Til (2008) in the case of how nanocoatings and sustainability. They argue that these articulation processes are a general phenomenon in science and technology, and increasingly so when the relevance of research is under dispute. Then, an account of value in broader terms is needed (Hessels et al. 2009). According to Van Lente & Van Til (2008) articulations of umbrella terms include two directions: specification and legitimacy. Specification is the move from general to specific; it occurs when broader aims are specified into more detailed activities, when, for instance, renewable energy is specified into solar panels. Legitimation is the move from specific to general; it occurs when specific (research) activities are justified by referring to a bigger goal. When a link is forged between a research project and a bigger goal, this adds to justification of the project. Specifications and legitimations are not just technological subdivisions, since choosing one direction implies that many other options are rejected and and this creates a need for justification. A specification may become a routine move (“solar panels are sustainable”), and this will help to justify future moves (Bos et al. 2013). The routinized support of sustainability will favour the funding of certain technological applications. Since this research looks into the grand challenges in the field of nanotechnology, it will have to consider the working of the science system (Rip 1994). In this system in Europe, the EU can set certain targets for research areas or strategies. These are usually taken up by national governments, which then transfer these to science funding agencies, which fund universities and research institutes. Within the universities also certain strategies or focus areas are articulated and communicated again to departments and research groups, which translate these into research projects. It is clear that in this system, many different actors are acting on different levels. All these actors interact and influence each other. The articulation of grand challenges goes through these cycles, where both ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ influences interact and constitute each other. Government and funding agencies influence research directions by funding - and research outcomes are translated back into societal attributes. This mutual influence can be summarised as the specification and legitimacy of articulations of grand challenges. When going down the societal hierarchy from one actor to the other, the articulations get specified. In the opposite direction, articulations are used for legitimacy when an actor interacts with a higher level actor.

3. Method: tracing articulations

When grand challenges are articulated, they are translated into other words and arrangements. Sustainability is translated into renewable energy and a research proposal is translated into money (Callon 1991, Latour and Woolgar 1986). Understanding processes of articulation, thus, is relevant

4

for both policymakers, who now proclaim ambitions in terms of grand challenges, and researchers, who have to accommodate the grand challenges to fit their research (Hessels et al. 2009, Rip 1994). We selected policy reports that address nanoscience and technology are clustered into two different groups: EU reports and national reports. We included four texts about research strategy and policy by the European Commission or Expert Groups from the European Research Area, and strategy documents for national research programmes on nanotechnology from the Netherlands, the UK and Norway, see Table 2.

Table 2 Analysed texts Document source Document title

European

EU1 Council of European Union (CEU), 2008. Conclusions on the definition of a "2020 Vision for the European Research Area”. Council meeting, Brussels, 1 and 2 December 2008.

EU2 European Commission (EC), 2010. Communication from the commission. Europe 2020. A European strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Brussels.

EU3 Expert Group Report (EGR), 2009a. ERA: indicators and monitoring. European Commission October 2009

EU4 Expert Group Report (EGR), 2009b. A Knowledge-intensive future for Europe. European Commission. October 2009

National

NL1 Netherlands Nano Initiative (NNI), 2008. Strategic Research Agenda Nanotechnology, 2010-2020

NL2 Topsector High Tech Systems and Materials (HTSM), 2011. Nanotechnology in the top sectors. Roadmap.

NO1 The Research Council of Norway (RCN), 2003. Nanotechnology and new materials – NANOMAT. Work Programme. Division of Strategic Priorities, Department for Future Technologies.

NO2 The Research Council of Norway (RCN), 2007. Nanotechnology and new materials, nanoscience and integration. Work programme 2007 – 2016, NANOMAT. Division for Strategic Priorities.

UK1 UK Advisory Group on Nanotechnology Applications, 2002. New Dimensions for Manufacturing. A UK Strategy for Nanotechnology. Report of the submitted to Lord Sainsbury, Minister for Science and Innovation by Dr John M Taylor, Chairman. June 2002

UK2 UK HM Government, 2010. UK Nanotechnologies Strategy. Small Technologies, Great Opportunities. March 2010

In the first cluster of texts, about the European Research Area and the European Commission reports, the term ‘grand challenge’ is used frequently. Grand challenges are presented as broad societal problems, in which the EU is tested en for which the whole European Union needs to unite to address them. The second cluster are documents from three different countries about the national research policy for nanotechnology. From each of the three countries – the UK, the Netherlands and Norway – two strategy reports on nanotechnology were selected. For all countries, one of the reports is recent, which means this policy is currently still running, while the other report is older and the policy has already been implemented. The first step of the analysis was searching for the word ‘challenge’. A division was made between grand challenges or more specific challenges, which relate to a more specific goal or problem. Examples of the latter are “The challenges in nanotechnology” [NL2] or “commercialisation challenges” [UK2]. These different specific challenges can be found in the full coding scheme in Appendix A. Secondly, the articulations of ‘sustainability’ and ‘ageing’ were looked at. Examples of keywords for sustainability were ‘climate change’, ‘energy efficiency’ or ‘green technologies’. For ageing, keywords were ‘demographic change’, ‘healthy ageing’ or ‘retirement’ (see Appendix A). Finally, all of the quotations containing challenges were looked at to identity whether and how they contained a problem, solution or urgency. A quotation count consequently led to an overview of the grand and/or specific challenges and the problems, solutions and urgency in the texts. Since the texts differ in length, a quotation index was created which corrected for the length of the text.

5

4. Results 4.1 Comparing EU and national grand challenges A first finding is that the articulations of sustainability and ageing are different for the two groups of texts. In the EU texts both sustainability and ageing are mainly related to economic issues – more specifically the competitive position of the EU. The main focus of sustainability here is “sustainable growth” which should contribute to sustainability and competitiveness simultaneously. This can be done by investing in “green solutions and technologies”, wherein Europe should maintain the lead and should not be overtaken by Asia or the US. [EU3] Most sustainability goals are coupled with economical goals: “Improving resource efficiency would help limit emissions, but will also save money and boost economic growth” and meeting the clean energy goals “could result in € 60 billion less in oil and gas imports” and “is essential for our energy security”. [EU2] Also the independence of Europe when it comes to energy or resources is stressed as highly important for the economic status of Europe. For ageing, the wording looks similar. Addressing the grand challenge of ageing is necessary because of the financial strain which an ageing population will put on pension funds, health care systems and consequently government spending. Furthermore, these financial strains are more difficult to cope with because of a smaller labour force. Thus, it is necessary to “boost employment through labour market reforms and embark on ambitious health care and pension reforms in order to keep public finances under control”. [EU4] For both sustainability and ageing, the emphasis is thus on the economic problems and not on the environmental or social issues which are involved. For the national reports, this is different. The word ‘challenge’ is frequently used, but not that often in relation to ‘grand’ challenges. Actually more specific challenges can be found. Wordings like “challenges in nanotechnology” [NL2], “scientific challenges” [NO2] and “technical challenges” [UK1] are prevalent in the texts. Much more of these specific challenges can be found in the national reports, although one of the UK texts also presents much referencing to grand challenges [UK2]. In contrast, one of the Norwegian texts [NO1} barely mentions challenges, with the word challenge occurring only once in this text. The articulation of sustainability has a clear focus in the texts, namely energy-related issues. Whether it’s about “new energy technologies” [NO1], “energy supplies and energy savings” [NL1], “solar and wind energy” [NL2], “energy efficiency” [NO2] or “meeting the future energy needs” [UK1], the potential of nanotechnology for addressing energy related issues is clearly stressed by the national governments. The articulations of ageing are mainly related to the solutions in health care which nanotechnology could provide. Not only does nanotechnology have a large potential in new drug development, also sensors for “personalised healthcare” and “in daily healthcare and health monitoring” are mentioned. [NL2]

Figure 2 – Grand and specific challenges

In the articulation of sustainability and ageing, the two groups of texts differ on two aspects. Firstly, the difference between the grand challenges of the EU texts and the more specific challenges of the

6

national reports is quite evident. The quotations indices which relate to grand challenges and specific challenges show this clearly. (Fig. 2) This specification of the challenges also shows in the way sustainability and ageing are articulated. Here, a second difference comes forward: the focus on economical issues on the one hand and social and environmental issues on the other. The EU texts relate both sustainability and ageing to mainly economical attributes, while the national reports relate more to environmental – for sustainability – and social attributes – for ageing. This could relate to the fact that the EU tries to find a common denominator for the grand challenges which are large and differentiated problems. This common denominator, which can be related to all the grand challenges and to all its elements of problem, solution and urgency, is apparently economic prosperity. Meanwhile, the environmental and social attributes relate more to the smaller solutions. 4.2 Problems, solutions and urgency The second step of the analysis was to examine the three constituents of grand challenges: problems, solutions and urgency. In the EU texts, the focus is on grand challenges as problems. In the introductions of the texts, the grand challenges are often divided into more specific challenges, such as energy issues or resources depletion. These statements can be said to contain both a relation to problems as to some reference to possible solutions. Further on in the texts, these examples and specifications are left out and the writing about the challenges changes. Challenges are then often presented as an existing ‘entity’ without any relation a possible specification or solution. Here it is not clear what the grand challenges exactly are, but they are presented as a problem, somehow, which needs to be solved. The national texts, on the other hand, are more focussed on the solutions of the grand challenges. Nanotechnology is portrayed as that it is supposed to find the solutions to the grand challenges. While in the EU texts, the relation to the more specific challenges was still present in the introduction, but got lost along the way, in the national texts this is completely reversed. The introductions of the texts address the grand challenges and how nanotechnology can address those. When the texts continue, the grand challenges which are to be ‘solved’ are not mentioned anymore, but instead only the – very specific – solutions get mentioned. The connection to solving the problems of the grand challenges is gone, since the focus is now on the more specific solutions. It must however be mentioned that the UK strategy report from 2010 [UK2] does still mention grand challenges frequently. This tendency is different from the other reports. Table 3 shows some typical examples of phrasing of problems and solutions and how urgency is included. Table 3 Problems and solutions of grand challenges Problem Solution

EU texts “In the face of challenges such as the economic crisis, global warming, depletion of resources, an ageing European population and competition in a multi-polar world…” [EU3] “In a global world, no single country can effectively address the challenges by acting alone.” [EU2] “Mobilising R&D to address Grand Societal Challenges” [EU3]

“In the face of challenges such as the economic crisis, global warming, depletion of resources, an ageing European population and competition in a multi-polar world…” [EU3]

National texts “Nanotechnologies could also help us address universal challenges such as global warming and food sustainability.” [UK2]

“Nanotechnology can help solve societal challenges such as the ageing population, climate change, food for a growing population and clean water.”

7

[NL2] “The main technology challenge can be formulated as follows: How can we understand and control the physics and chemistry of fabrication and inspection within the enabling equipment at atomic dimensions” [NL2] “Another knowledge-related challenge is to integrate new innovative nanoST solutions from academic into existing and new products.” [NO2]

The problem and solution ingredients of the grand challenges also clearly differ in the two sets of reports. The EU texts show mainly the large problem-side of the grand challenges, while not following up on the solutions. Sometimes the grand challenges appear as an isolated entity without any references to possible solutions. The national reports, however, mainly address the solution-side of the grand challenges, but sometimes lose sight of the overall problem (see Figure 3). This observation correlates to the specification of the grand challenges: it is too difficult to have a solution for problems as large as the grand challenges, so the grand challenge needs to be divided into increasingly smaller parts in order to address them with a more concrete solution.

Figure 3 – Grand challenges as problems and solutions The sense of urgency also differs in the two groups of texts. In the EU texts a much stronger sense of urgency can be found. This urgency is created by the emphasis on the problem-side of the challenges: when such large problems are mentioned frequently, it brings along that they ‘need to be solved’. It is also argued that the future of Europe is at stake. Also other conditions besides the challenges can add to the urgency of a challenge. The current economic crisis, in particular, is often portrayed in the EU texts as adding to the sense of urgency of the grand challenges:

“2010 must mark a new beginning. I want Europe to emerge stronger from the economic and financial crisis (…) How Europe responds will determine our future. (…) The crisis is a wake-up call (…) This is Europe's moment of truth.” [EU2]

8

The economic crisis thus adds a sense of urgency to also address the long-term problems: “Moving out of the crisis is the immediate challenge, but the biggest challenge is to escape the reflex to try to return to the pre-crisis situation.” [EU2] The urgency derived from economic issues shows a parallel with the tendency of the EU texts to relate sustainability and ageing to economic issues. Since the grand challenges are expressed in economical terms, an economic crisis certainly adds urgency to addressing these challenges. The urgency is less prominent in the national reports. When challenges are no longer related to large global issues but instead to technologic or scientific issues and solutions, the urgency tends to decline: “The challenge now is to further develop the collaboration within the universities and colleges and institute sector on the basis of quality and strategic priorities in order to develop robust groups with international quality” [NO2] In this quotation, a sense of urgency is present, but it is different from the urgency in the EU texts. Here the urgency which is included is that the national nanotechnology research field in Norway “has to be developed” to achieve the governmental strategy goals. This is an argument that stresses the promises and opportunity, but not the daunting world-wide problems of the EU texts.

5. To conclude In this paper we investigate the nature and prevalence of the ‘grand challenges’ that appear in policy reports on nanotechnology in Europe. A challenge, we argued, is not just a gripping problem or a fashionable solution; it is an archetypical narrative structure in which a hero is tested and called to action. Following the analysis of Joseph Campbell’s A Hero with a Thousand Faces (1949), we delineated three constitutive elements of a challenge: a problem, a solution and urgency. Grand challenges, then, are linked to support for specific lines of research. Here, two mechanisms of articulation are in play: the translation of grand challenges into smaller ones (specification) and the linking of particular research to encompassing goals (legitimation). We analysed and compared the appearance and articulation of grand challenges in two sets of policy reports on nanotechnology: EU and national. While in the EU texts broad and encompassing challenges are brought to the fore, in the national texts specific challenges figure, related to, for example, to nanotechnology or energy efficiency. Another telling difference is that in the EU texts most grand challenge are expressed as an economic problem, in terms of money or other related economic units. This is different in the national texts in which grand challenges also are related to social or environmental issues and solutions. Arguably, the two differences are connected: the unspecific EU grand challenges require a common abstract ‘unit’ (such as money) to be expressed, while the national reports with their more specific challenges are able to use less abstract units. The EU and national reports, thus, show a division of labour. The EU reports allow national governments to frame their plans as addressing well-known challenges, with their problem definitions, range of solutions and urgency. In their turn, when the national reports stress the opportunities of technological field like nanotechnology, they provide arguments for the declaration of grand challenges in EU reports. This points to a mutual benefit: the EU grand challenges gain plausibility by referring to specific national plans; national specific plans gain legitimation when seen as contributing to grand challenges. Thus, the rise of ‘grand challenges’ in Europe have not just given a mode of existence for umbrella terms like ‘sustainabiltiy’ or ‘healthy aging’. The notion of grand challenge also introduces a dramatic structure in which cultural lessons and myths resonate - and which frames decisions, agendas and coordination in nanotechnology. References

9

Bos, C., A. Peine, and H. van Lente. 2013. “Articulation of Sustainability in Nanotechnology : Funnels of Articulation.” in Shaping Emerging Technologies: Governance, Innovation, Discourse, edited by K. Konrad, C. Coenen, C., A. Dijkstra, C. Milburn, and H. van Lente, 231–241. Berlin: IOS Press / AKA. Callon M, 1991. Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In: A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination Ed. J Law (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London) pp 132 - 162 Campbell, J. (1949), The Hero with a Thousand Faces, Princeton: Bollingen Series. Hessels, L.K., van Lente, H., Smits, R., 2009. In search of relevance: the changing contract between science and society. Science and Public Policy, June 2009, 36(5), 387-401. Latour, B., Woolgar, S., 1986. Laboratory life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. London, Sage. Van Lente, H., Van Til, J.L., 2008. Articulation of sustainability the emerging field of nanocoatings. Journal of Cleaner Production 16, 967 – 976 Mulder, K., Ferrer, D., van Lente, H., 2011. What is Sustainable Technology? Perceptions, Paradoxes and Possibilities. Greenleaf Publishing Limited, Sheffield, UK. Rip, A., 1994. The republic of science in the 1990s. Higher education 28: 3-23 Rip, A., and J.-P. Voß. 2013. “Umbrella Terms as Mediators in the Governance of Emerging Science and Technology.” STI Studies 9(2): 40–59.

10

Appendix A Coding scheme Number of

quotations

Description / keywords for code

Challenges Challenges total 234 Supercode = Grand challenges + Specific challenges Specific challenges total 112 Supercode = sum off specific challenges Grand challenges 126 Grand (societal) challenges / Major (societal) challenges /

Challenges, such as…. (large sum) / Global challenges / Long-term challenges / Key challenges

Specific challenges Ageing challenges 8 Challenge(s)+ Ageing Climate challenges 9 Challenge(s) + Climate Economic challenges 5 Challenge(s) + economic, commercialization Energy challenges 11 Challenge(s) + energy Environment challenges 10 Challenge(s) + environment, water Eu area challenges 10 Challenge(s) + EU, our union, Europe(an) Globalization challenges 6 Challenge(s) + globalization Health challenges 13 Challenge(s) + health, public health, healthcare, medical Nano challenges 14 Challenge(s) + nano(technology, products) Research challenges 11 Challenge(s) + research, scientific, knowledge, R&D Resource challenges 5 Challenge(s) + resource(s) Technology challenges 28 Challenge(s) + technology, technological, *technological

descriptions* Other challenges 14 Challenge(s) + *everything that doesn’t fit other challenges*

Sustainability Sustainability total 656 Supercode = sum of all sustainability codes Climate 60 Climate (change) / global warming / greenhouse gas (emissions) Energy 322

Energy + renewable, efficiency, security, technology, environmentally related, sustainable, clean, use, wind, market, networks, smart grids, network, consumption, dependence, policy, bio-mass, demand, costs, storage, hydrogen, generation, solar, savings, issue, management, photovoltaic

Environment 141 Environment(al) + technologies, pressure on, respect for, concerns, attitude, development, protection, friendly, objectives, policies, responsible, effects, changes, stresses

Green 17 Green + technologies, economy, car, transport Resources 28 Resources + depletion of, pressure on, use of, competition for,

efficiency, dependence Sustainable development 100 Sustainable development / sustainable + growth, systems,

technologies, energy / sustainability

Ageing Ageing total 236 Supercode = Age + Health + Quality of life + Retirement Age 42 Ageing / ageing population / demographic changes / demographic

ageing / healthy and active ageing Health 174 Health / health + life, care, for older persons/ chronic and

degenerative diseases / Alzheimer and Parkinsons / age-related illnesses / public health

Quality of life 26 Quality of life / living in dignity / be active in society / Independence / smart homes

Retirement

10 Retired people / pension + spending, funding / retirement age