The use of nanotechnology and engineered nanomaterials in food and agriculture (nano-agrifood) sectors is intended to provide several potential benefits to consumers and society, such as the provision of more nutritious processed foods, edible food coatings to extend shelf lives of fresh cut produce, and more sustainable alternatives to traditional agrochemicals. The responsible innovation of nano-agrifoods may be particularly important to pursue given previous case studies involving other agrifood technologies that experienced significant public consternation. Here, we define responsible innovation following Stilgoej et al. (2013) that establishes processes to iteratively review and reflect upon one's innovation, engage stakeholders in dialogue, and to be open and transparent throughout innovation stages – processes that go beyond primary focuses of understanding environmental, health, and safety impacts of nano-enabled products and implementing safe-by-design principles. Despite calls for responsible nano-innovation across diverse sectors, it has not yet been clear what types of barriers are faced by nano-agrifood researchers and innovators in particular. This study therefore identifies and builds the first typology of barriers to responsible innovation as perceived by researchers and product developers working in nano-agrifood sectors in the United States. Our findings report 5 key barriers to responsible innovation of nano-agrifoods: Lack of Data (reported by 70% of all interview participants, and represented 34.6% of all barrier-related excerpts), Lack of Product Oversight (reported by 60% of participants, and represented 28.7% of excerpts), Need for Ensuring Marketability & Use (reported by 70% of participants, and represented 21.3% of all barrier-related excerpts), Need for Increased Collaboration (reported by 40% of participants, and represented 10.3% of excerpts), and finally Lack of Adequate Training & Workforce (reported by 30% of participants, and represented by 5.1% of excerpts). We also relate these key barriers across three main nano-innovation phases, including 1) Scientific and Technical R&D, 2) Product Oversight, and 3) Post-commercialization Marketability & Use, and discuss how these barriers may impact stakeholders as well as present opportunities to align with principles of responsible innovation. Overall, these findings may help illuminate challenges that researchers and innovators face in the pursuit of responsible innovation relevant for the field of nanotechnology with relevancy for other emerging food and agricultural technologies more broadly.

在食品和农业（纳米农业食品）领域使用纳米技术和工程纳米材料旨在为消费者和社会提供若干潜在利益，例如提供更有营养的加工食品、可食用食品涂层以延长鲜切农产品的保质期，以及更可持续的传统农用化学品替代品。鉴于之前的案例研究涉及其他农业食品技术，这些技术曾引起公众的极大恐慌，因此负责任的纳米农业食品创新可能尤为重要。在这里，我们根据 Stilgoej 等人定义负责任的创新。(2013) 建立了迭代审查和反思创新的流程，让利益相关者参与对话，并且在整个创新阶段保持公开和透明——这些过程超越了理解纳米产品对环境、健康和安全影响以及实施安全设计原则的主要关注点。尽管呼吁在不同领域进行负责任的纳米创新，但目前尚不清楚纳米农产品研究人员和创新者尤其面临哪些类型的障碍。因此，本研究确定并建立了美国纳米农业食品领域的研究人员和产品开发人员认为的负责任创新障碍的第一个类型。我们的研究结果报告了纳米农产品负责任创新的 5 个主要障碍：尽管呼吁在不同领域进行负责任的纳米创新，但目前尚不清楚纳米农产品研究人员和创新者尤其面临哪些类型的障碍。因此，本研究确定并建立了美国纳米农产品行业研究人员和产品开发人员认为的负责任创新障碍的第一个类型。我们的研究结果报告了纳米农产品负责任创新的 5 个主要障碍：尽管呼吁在不同领域进行负责任的纳米创新，但目前尚不清楚纳米农产品研究人员和创新者尤其面临哪些类型的障碍。因此，本研究确定并建立了美国纳米农产品行业研究人员和产品开发人员认为的负责任创新障碍的第一个类型。我们的研究结果报告了纳米农产品负责任创新的 5 个主要障碍：缺乏数据（70% 的受访者报告，占所有障碍相关摘录的 34.6%），缺乏产品监督（60% 的参与者报告，占摘录的 28.7%），确保市场性的需求和使用（70% 的参与者报告，占所有与障碍相关的节选的 21.3%），需要增加协作（40% 的参与者报告，占节选的 10.3%），最后是缺乏足够的培训和劳动力（由 30% 的参与者报告，并由 5.1% 的摘录代表）。我们还将这些关键障碍与三个主要纳米创新阶段联系起来，包括 1) 科学和技术研发、2) 产品监督和 3) 商业化后的市场化和使用，并讨论这些障碍如何影响利益相关者以及当前的机会与负责任的创新原则保持一致。总体而言，这些发现可能有助于阐明研究人员和创新者在追求与纳米技术领域相关的负责任创新以及更广泛地与其他新兴食品和农业技术相关的过程中所面临的挑战。