NEW YORK, Oct. 11, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Reportlinker.com announces that a new market research report is available in its catalogue:

Nanotechnology: A Realistic Market Assessment

http://www.reportlinker.com/p096617/Nanotechnology-A-Realistic-Market-Assessment.html#utm_source=prnewswire&utm_medium=pr&utm_campaign=Nanotechnology

However, while the hype may have slowed somewhat, there is still some out there. Growing public awareness combined with the complex, diverse nature of the technologies that are commonly grouped together under the heading of nanotechnology virtually invites misunderstanding, if not actual misrepresentation. For example, in 2010, a respected journalist wrote a series of stories for AOL News entitled "The Nanotech Gamble: Bold Science, Big Money, Growing Risks" that faulted the U.S. government's performance in identifying and protecting the public against alleged health hazards posed by nanotechnology. One interviewee asked rhetorically, "How long should the public have to wait before the government takes protective action? Must the bodies stack up first?"

So stinging was the piece to the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) and the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office (NNCO) that the director of the NNCO felt compelled to issue a formal rebuttal. According to the rebuttal, the author "takes an alarmist perspective," "uses irrelevant examples" and "fails to balance the risks against the benefits of nanotechnology." As some observers have noted, the debate over the AOL News article (which was still simmering when this report was written) is at best a distraction from the research that needs to be done.

Business, academia, the media, all have an incentive to attempt to cash in on nanotechnology. Various manufacturers have tacked "nano" onto their products and processes, whether or not they deal in nano-size elements, in an attempt to boost sales. Companies that have nothing to do with nanotechnology have "nano" in their names to make them sound more technologically advanced than the competition. Some academic researchers worry that the buzzword nano is being misused to bring in research dollars for dubious technologies and applications at the expense of legitimate research.

Hype inevitably carries with it the risk of a backlash because it can create unrealistic expectations for nanotechnology. Then, when expectations are not met, people tend to withdraw, or worse, turn oppositional. A blog entry on The Bespoke Investment Group's website observed that:

"Back in the 'good ol' days' of the mid-2000s, investors were riding a bull market wave and looking for 'the next big thing.' One of those 'next big things' was nanotechnology. Ever since the collapse began in 2007, however, the nanotech craze seems all but forgotten. We can't remember the last time we read or watched something about nanotech. Stocks and ETFs relating to nanotech have also lost investor interest."

As a result, legitimate nanotechnology products and applications are hurt along with the pseudos as funding and markets dry up. The dot.com boom and bust provides a cautionary example of the dangers of hype, but nanotechnology has a more tangible nature because it is a set of technologies. This report takes a realistic look at the nanotechnology field and offers a road map to the technologies and applications that are most likely to be commercialized in the next five years.

These differences reflect not only different analytical methods and assumptions, but also different definitions of the nanotechnology market (e.g., whether to include decades-old technologies such as carbon black rubber reinforcers and photographic silver, or whether to base the market value on nanotechnology inputs alone, as opposed to the total value of products that nanotechnology incorporates).

See the article here:

Nanotechnology: A Realistic Market Assessment