Place and community responses to opportunity: a example from nanoscience innovation

References

• AAET (Alberta Advanced Education and Technology). 2007. ‘Alberta Nanotechnology Strategy: Unleashing Alberta’s Potential.’ Edmonton: Government of Alberta.
   Google Scholar
• Amin, Ash, and Nigel Thrift. 1995. “Institutional Issues for the European Regions: From Markets and Plans to Socioeconomics and Powers of Association.” Economy and Society 24 (1): 41–66. doi: 10.1080/03085149500000002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benneworth, Paul, and Nick Henry. 2004, May. “Where Is the Value Added in the Cluster Approach? Hermeneutic Theorising, Economic Geography and Clusters as a Multiperspectival Approach.” Urban Studies 41 (5-6): 1011–1023. doi:10.1080/00420980410001675869.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergold, Jarg, and Stefan Thomas. 2012. “Participatory Research Methods: A Methodological Approach in Motion.” Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research 13 (1), http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1801 Accessed 27 April 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Bijker, Wiebe E. 1995. Of Bicycles, Bakelites and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bourke, Alan. 2013. “Universities, Civil Society and the Global Agenda of Community-Engaged Research.” Globalisation, Societies and Education 11 (4): 498–519. doi: 10.1080/14767724.2013.834182
   Google Scholar
• Callon, Michel. 1986. “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay.” The Sociological Review 32 (1): 196–233.
   Google Scholar
• Callon, Michel, Pierre Lascoumes, and Yannick Barthe. 2009. Acting in an Uncertain World. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Castells, Manuel. 1996. The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. Volume I: The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Chazan, M. 2016. “Settler Solidarities as Praxis: Understanding ‘Granny Activism’ Beyond the Highly-Visible.” Social Movement Studies 15 (5): 457–470. doi: 10.1080/14742837.2016.1187594
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chesbrough, Henry, Wim Vanhaverbeke, and Joel West. 2006. Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chittenden, David. 2011. “Commentary: Roles, Opportunities, and Challenges—Science Museums Engaging the Public in Emerging Science and Technology.” Journal of Nanoparticle Research 13 (4): 1549–1556. doi:10.1007/s11051-011-0311-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarkson, Gavin, and David DeKorte. 2006. “The Problem of Patent Thickets in Convergent Technologies.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1093 (1): 180–200. doi: 10.1196/annals.1382.014
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Collier, Stephen, and Andrew Lakoff. 2008. “Distributed Preparedness: The Spatial Logic of Domestic Security in the United States.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 26 (1): 7–28. doi: 10.1068/d446t
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collinson, Simon, and Geoff Gregson. 2003. “Knowledge Networks for New Technology–Based Firms: An International Comparison of Local Entrepreneurship Promotion.” R&D Management 33 (2): 189–208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comaroff, Jean, and John Comaroff. 2001. “Millennial Capitalism: First Thoughts on a Second Coming.” In Millennial Capitalism and the Culture of Neoliberalism, edited by Jean Comaroff, and John Comaroff, 1–56. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, Philip, and Kevin Morgan. 1998. The Associational Economy: Firms, Regions, and Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crevoisier, Olivier, and Hugues Jeannerat. 2009. “Territorial Knowledge Dynamics: From the Proximity Paradigm to Multi-Location Milieus.” European Planning Studies 17 (8): 1223–1241. doi: 10.1080/09654310902978231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Degeling, Chris. 2019. “Deliberative Methods.” In SAGE Research Methods Foundations, edited by P. Atkinson, S. Delamont, A. Cernat, J. W. Sakshaug, and R. A. Williams. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://methods-sagepub-com/foundations/deliberative-methods.
   Google Scholar
• Durkheim, Emile. [1933] 1997. The Division of Labour in Society. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Etzkowitz, Henry, and Loet Leydesdorff. 2000. “The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and ‘Mode 2’ to a Triple Helix of University–Industry–Government Relations.” Research Policy 29 (2): 109–123. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, Michael S. 2009. “Defining the Public, Defining Sociology: Hybrid Science—Public Relations and Boundary-Work in Early American Sociology.” Public Understanding of Science 18 (1): 5–22. doi: 10.1177/0963662506071283
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foley, Rider, and Arnim Wiek. 2013. “Patterns of Nanotechnology Innovation and Governance Within a Metropolitan Area.” Technology in Society 35 (4): 233–247. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2013.10.004
   Google Scholar
• Global Biodefence. 2016. “Novel Material Aims to Protect Military from Biological and Chemical Agents.” Global Biodefence, August 11. Accessed 31January 2018. https://globalbiodefense.com/2016/08/11/novel-material-aims-protect-military-biological-chemical-agents/.
   Google Scholar
• Hesketh, Chris. 2013, July. “The Clash of Spatializations: Geopolitics and Class Struggles in Southern Mexico.” Latin American Perspectives 40 (4): 70–87. doi:10.1177/0094582X12469603.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Irwin, Alan. 1995. Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Joly, Pierre-Benoît, Arie Rip, and Michael Callon. 2010. “Re-inventing Innovation.” In Governance of Innovation: Firms, Clusters and Institutions in a Changing Setting, edited by Maarten Arentsen, Wouter van Rossum, and Bert Steenge, 19–32. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, Kevin E., M. Granzow, and R. Shields. 2019. “Urban Virtues and the Innovative City – An Experiment in Placing Innovation in Edmonton, Canada.” Urban Studies 56 (4): 705–721. doi: 10.1177/0042098017719191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, Kevin E., Nils Petersen, Yun-Csang Ghimn, Michael Granzow, Katie Herzog, and Iwona Fafarek. 2013. Edmonton’s Futurescape City Tours: A Descriptive Report. Edmonton: City-Region Studies Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, Oswald, and G. Stevens. 1999. “Evaluating Failure in the Innovation Process: The Micropolitics of New Product Development.” R&D Management 29 (2): 167–178.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jouvenet, Morgan. 2013. “Boundary Work Between Research Communities: Culture and Power in a French Nanosciences and Nanotechnology Hub.” Social Science Information 52 (1): 134–158. doi: 10.1177/0539018412466638
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamont, Michèle, and Virág Molnár. 2002. “The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences.” Annual Review of Sociology 28 (Aug. 2002): 167–195. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141107
   Google Scholar
• Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, Bruno. 1996. Aramis, or the Love of Technology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lindahl, K. 2008. “Frame Analysis, Place Perceptions and the Politics of Natural Resource Management Exploring a Forest Policy Controversy in Sweden.” Ph.D., Swedish Univeristy of Agricultural Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• MacLeod, G. 2011. “Urban Politics Reconsidered: Growth Machine to Post-democratic City?” doi:10.1177/0042098011415715.
   Google Scholar
• Makker, Amit. 2010. “Nanotechnology Patent Thicket and the Path to Commercialization.” Southern California Law Review 84 (5): 1163–1203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, Kevin. 1997. “The Learning Region: Institutions, Innovation and Regional Renewal.” Regional Studies 41 (Supplement 1): S147–S159.
   Google Scholar
• Niosi, Jorge. 2005. Canada’s Regional Innovation System: The Science-Based Industries. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• NNI. 2000. About the NNI National Nanotechnology Initiative. Accessed 31January 2018. http://nano.gov/about-nni.
   Google Scholar
• Norman, D. A. 2010. “Technology First, Needs Last: The Research-Product Gulf.” Interactions 17 (2): 38–42. doi: 10.1145/1699775.1699784
   Google Scholar
• Pearce, Joshua. 2013. “Open-Source Nanotechnology: Solutions to a Modern Intellectual Property Tragedy.” Nano Today 8 (4): 339–341. doi: 10.1016/j.nantod.2013.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, Paul E. 1981. City Limits. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pinch, T. J., and W. E. Bijker. 1984. “The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology might Benefit Each Other.” Social Studies of Science 14 (3): 399–441. doi: 10.1177/030631284014003004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, Michael. 2000. “Location, Competition, and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy.” Economic Development Quarterly 14 (1): 15–34. doi: 10.1177/089124240001400105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell, Walter, and Stine Grodal. 2005. “Networks of Innovators.” In The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, edited by Jan Fagerberg, David C. Mowery, and Richard R. Nelson, 56–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Powell, Walter, Douglas R. White, Kenneth W. Koput, and Jason Owen-Smith. 2005. “Network Dynamics and Field Evolution: The Growth of Interorganizational Collaboration in the Life Sciences.” American Journal of Sociology 110 (4): 1132–1205. doi: 10.1086/421508
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priest, Susanna, and Ted Greenhalgh. 2011. “Attitudinal Communities and the Interpretation of Nanotechnology News: Frames, Schemas, and Attitudes as Predictors of Reader Reactions.” In Quantum Engagements: Social Reflections of Nanoscience and Emerging Technologies, edited by Torben B. Zülsdorf, Christopher Coenen, Ulrich Fiedeler, Arianna Ferrari, Colin Milburn, and Matthias Wienroth, 23–42. Heidelberg: IOS Press / AKA. SNET. http://www.thesnet.net/yearbook/quantum-engagements-social-reflections-of-nanoscience-andemerging-technologies-2011.
   Google Scholar
• Selin, Cynthia. 2006. “Time Matters: Temporal Harmony and Dissonance in Nanotechnology Networks.” Time & Society 15 (1): 121–139. doi: 10.1177/0961463X06061786
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selin, Cynthia, and J. P. Banks. 2014. Futurescape City Tours: A Novel Method for Civic Engagement Report. Phoenix: Centre for Nanotechnology in Society, Arizona State University.
   Google Scholar
• Shields, Rob. 2006. “Virtualities.” Theory Culture & Society 23 (2–3): 284–286. doi: 10.1177/026327640602300239
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shields, Rob, Kevin Jones, Nils Petersen, Yun-Csang Ghimn, Michael Granzow, and Katie Herzog. 2013. “Nanotechnology and the community: Citizens Summit Citizens Panel Workbook and Process Summary.” Edmonton: City-Region Studies Centre. https://issuu.com/uaextension/docs/citizenssummitworkbook Accessed April 27 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Spinney, J. 2015. “Close Encounters? Mobile Methods, (Post)Phenomenology and Affect.” Cultural Geographies 22 (2): 231–246. doi: 10.1177/1474474014558988
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, J. 2007. “The (Co-)Production of Public Uncertainty: UK Scientific Advice on Mobile Phone Health Risks.” Public Understanding of Science 16 (1): 45–61. doi: 10.1177/0963662506059262
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, Jack, Richard Owen, and Phil Macnaghten. 2013. “Developing a Framework for Responsible Innovation.” Research Policy 42 (9): 1568–1580. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirling, Andy. 2015. “Towards Innovation Democracy? Participation, Responsibility and Precaution in the Politics of Science and Technology.” Working Paper 78. Brighton: STEPS Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Sweezy, Paul, and Harry Magdoff. 1972. The Dynamics of U.S. Capitalism. New York: Monthly Review Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thijssen, Peter. 2012, November. “From Mechanical to Organic Solidarity, and Back: With Honneth beyond Durkheim.” European Journal of Social Theory 15 (4): 454–470. doi:10.1177/1368431011423589.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiryakian, E. 2009. “Modernity and the Second Return of Mechanical Solidarity.” In Raymond Boudon. A Life in Sociology, edited by P. Hamilton, and M. Cherkaoui, 309–330. Oxford: Bardwell Press.
   Google Scholar
• Uyarra, Elvira. 2007. “Key Dilemmas of Regional Innovation Policies.” Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 20 (3): 243–261.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinck, Dominique. 2010. “The ‘Enterprise of Science’: Construction and Reconstruction of Social Capital Around Nano R&D.” International Journal of Nanotechnology 7 (2): 121–136. doi: 10.1504/IJNT.2010.031306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, David A., et al. 2009. 21st Century Cities in Canada: The Geography of Innovation: The 2009 CIBC Scholar-in-Residence Lecture. Ottawa: Conference Board of Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Wolfe, David A. 2015. “Resilience and Governance in City-Regions: Lessons From Waterloo Ontario.” In City-Regions in Prospect? Exploring Points Between Place and Prospect, edited by Kevin E. Jones, Alex Lord, and Rob Shields, 187–212. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wolfe, D. A., and A. Bramwell. 2008, October. “Innovation, Creativity and Governance: Social Dynamics of Economic Performance in City-Regions.” Innovation-Management Policy & Practice 10 (2–3): 170–182. doi: 10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.170
   Google Scholar
• Wolfe, David A., and Meric S. Gertler. 2004. “Clusters From the Inside and Out: Local Dynamics and Global Linkages.” Urban Studies 41 (5-6): 1071–1093. doi: 10.1080/00420980410001675832
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Youtie, J., and Philip Shapira. 2008. “Building an Innovation Hub: A Case Study of the Transformation of University Roles in Regional Technological and Economic Development.” Research Policy 37 (8): 1188–1204. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar