This is not an easy question to answer, because resistance to research takes several forms.
First, there is a general public distrust of advanced science and technology, which mostly shows up as less public funding for basic research than scientists would prefer. This is common in both developed and developing countries, although there are exceptions, such as Singapore, and perhaps India.
Second, this general distrust sometimes takes a more specific form as opposition to animal research or as organized resistance to perceived (and often real) ecological threats; this type of response is far more common in the developed world than in developing countries.
Third, in developing countries more than in the developed world, we see resistance to R&D based on concerns about growing economic disparity -- exacerbation of the North-South divide.
Attitudes toward the development of advanced nanotechnology probably will follow along these same lines. The question is, which type of resistance will prove strongest (or, conversely, which will be weakest), and therefore where will the most significant development occur?
It's too early to tell, but -- the transformative power of general-purpose molecular manufacturing makes this a vitally important question. If one nation (or bloc of nations) takes the lead, it could have a significant destabilizing effect on the geopolitical balance of power. That likely will not go smoothly, unless all parties can agree in advance on how to manage such an historic transition, which seems improbable.