- Nanotechnology Risk Governance - Project Overview
- Policy Recommendations
This is a summary of the policy recommendations available in the White Paper and the Policy Brief published in 2006.
Improve the knowledge base
The scientific norms for conducting risk assessments and to commission research focused on risk assessment of nanotechnologies and nanomaterials are insufficiently developed.
Standardised nomenclature, measuring and handling systems: Neither formal nor voluntary regulatory frameworks for nanotechnology can be established without, first, developing a standard approach to defining, characterising, measuring, testing, and validating the products and processes emerging in this field.
Better understanding of risk: A significant proportion of both public and private research and development funding should be targeted at better understanding how to characterise, assess, and manage risk related to the production, application, exposure to and disposal of nanomaterials and products containing them.
Improved data sharing: In order to develop a common understanding among all relevant actors (private and public) of potential risks, the availability of risk-related research data should not be constrained by proprietary constraints. A common understanding of nanotechnology’s risks will allow them to be dealt with preventively rather than reactively.
Understand the full implications: Some nanotechnology applications which involve active nanostructures and nanodevices have significant, wider implications for society. These implications must be subject to specific research, including the development of scenarios, infrastructure models, and systems for early detection of major social or environmental change.
Strengthen risk management structures and processes
Identify gaps and remedies: Governments, industry and researchers need to assess the current strengths and weaknesses in their existing risk management and regulatory systems. They should also look at the potential contribution of regulatory frameworks from analogous fields to speed up implementation.
Voluntary systems: Industry, governments, and other stakeholders must collaborate to assess the potential for international voluntary agreements, to lay the foundation for later regulatory action. Voluntary risk governance systems should include:
Developing of standards and good practice guidelines in all areas, particularly giving priority to methods for assessing hazards and exposure.
Developing occupational safety guidelines and information disclosure
programmes for consumers.
Establishing transparent reporting schemes, especially of data and events that have a bearing on risk management. Such reporting schemes are controversial: when they are voluntary, it is difficult to assure adequate participation and transparency and thus the watchdog function can be diluted.
Above all, there is a need to consider anticipatory and coordinated measures for possible events where nanotechnology-based applications would produce irreversible and significant damage.
Promote stakeholder communication and participation
Soliciting and integrating the social concerns of all stakeholders, especially civil society, is central to the IRGC approach to risk governance and crucial for improving risk management and gaining public confidence.
Distinguish between passive and active nanomaterials and products: Communication about nanotechnology’s benefits and risks should reflect the distinction between passive and active nanomaterials and products, stressing that different approaches to managing risks are required for each. Care should also be taken to ensure that potential societal concerns about the possible impacts of Frame Two active nanomaterials do not have the effect of unnecessarily increasing anxiety regarding Frame One products using only passive nanostructures.
Improve communication strategies: All stakeholder groups should assess and improve their communication strategies within their own constituencies and amongst each other on a national, regional, and international level with the goal of sharing information and facilitating collaboration.
Engage the public and make participation count: Governments and stakeholder groups should use a wide variety of models to engage the public in debates and consultation about the implications of nanotechnology and how risk trade-offs are made. The challenge is how to make this participation ultimately meaningful – genuine engagement with the public will also require acceptance of and responsiveness to a variety of opinions.
Ensure broad social benefits and acceptance: As civil society learns more about the potential and risks associated with nanotechnology, the discussion must broaden to explore the social and moral implications of future innovations.
Stakeholder participation in setting priorities: All stakeholders should be involved in setting directions for research and product development that reflect social values and needs, including those of developing countries.
Funding for the public good: Governments should prioritise funding for research and development aimed at broader social applications and public good benefits.
Reduce barriers for developing countries: For the benefits of nanotechnology to be shared broadly across the world and by all of those to whom some applications will bring particular benefits (e.g. the millions needing clean drinking water in developing countries), new approaches to intellectual property rights are needed to make technology transfer affordable.
Economic planning to reduce adverse impacts: Developing countries, which are often dependent on manufacturing or export of raw materials, may be disadvantaged by a shift in the balance of trade if nanotechnology can result in high quality and more efficiently produced substitutes.
Collaboration between stakeholders and nations: As an emerging technology that is complex, fast-moving and unpredictable, nanotechnology requires an approach to risk governance that is collaborative and coordinated. Harmonisation between countries is essential as nanotechnology and its applications are already global phenomena.
Download:
Nanotechnology risk governance (Policy Brief), IRGC, 2007 [PDF]
Contact: