MORE news...

Brussels conference discusses governance platform

The FramingNano project partners and Advisory Board members gathered in Brussels on Monday, 14 December 2009, ahead of the FramingNano International Conference “A New Governance Framework for Nanotechnologies” on 15 December.

The programme for the one-day Conference included presentations by Peteris Zilgalvis, Head of Unit and Renè Von Schömberg of the European Commission's Governance and Ethics Unit, as well as contributions from industry, NGOs, governments and academia. The meeting was also attended by Dr. Philippe Martin, Principal Administrator with responsibilities for nanotechnology policy at Directorate-General Health and Consumer Protection (DG Sanco) of the European Commission.

The draft FramingNano Governance Platform, which was described for the first time at the Conference, will set out a proposal for the framing of policy on nanotechnology in Europe . It is the result of wide consultation process and dialogue with key stakeholders and subsequent deliberation process. It highlight s the major challenges to be overcome in order to successfully craft governance policies for nanotechnologies, and the communication issues that need to be addressed if Europe is to harness the full potential of this rapidly growing area of technology.

Risks and concerns arising from nanotechnologies will be addressed, with particular attention paid to those key environmental health and safety (EHS), and ethical, legal and societal issues (ELSI), that have to be understood and ‘framed'. However, the inclusion of benefits and opportunities is also considered as a necessary element in this debate. The ultimate aim is to design a balanced governance framework that takes into account the tradeoff between these two opposing factors.

The draft Governance Platform may be downloaded by registered users of the FramingNano website, www.framingnano.eu , and comments on it are welcomed by the FramingNano project team up to 8 January 2010.

Following the Brussels meeting and the preparation of the definitive version of the FramingNano Governance Platform , the project now moves to the next phase which focuses on dissemination of the Platform at national level. National conferences will take place in London , UK on 11 February; Prague , Czech Republic on 2 March; Amersfoort , Netherlands on 9 March; Bern , Switzerland on 18 March; Frankfurt , Germany on 24 March; and in Italy on a date in May to be announced shortly.

EU to review nanomaterials policies

The European Commission plans to review a number of EU policies and regulations covering health and environmental safety issues related to nanomaterials, The move comes in response to a call by the European Parliament to examine legislation in this area over the next two years.  

"The Commission will review all relevant legislation within two years to ensure safety for all applications of nanomaterials in products with potential health, environmental or safety impacts over their life cycle," said Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas.

MEPs had urged the Commission to act in April amid concerns that the pace of technological development has outpaced policymaking and regulation.

The Parliament argued that in the absence of any nano-specific provisions in Community law and given the lack of appropriate data and methods to assess risks related to nanomaterials, it is impossible to address their risks within the framework of current EU legislation.

It also called for amendments to the EU chemicals legislation REACH to simplify registration of nanomaterials.

There is believed to be internal disagreement within the Commission on the issue, with the environment officials favouring stronger legislation while enterprise officials are resisting placing too many restrictions on industry.

Green MEP Carl Schlyter, draftsman of the Parliament's non-binding resolution, stressed the need for "a compulsory register for nanomaterials, as experience shows that voluntary reporting by the industry does not function". 

Steffi Friedrichs, managing director of the Nanotechnology Industries Association (NIA), stressed that nanomaterials are fully covered by REACH. Even the information aspects of nanomaterials are already covered by the legislation, as a nanomaterial is distinct from the bulk form of a substance, she added.

Meanwhile, she said she could support a mandatory reporting scheme if a clear science-based definition was developed taking into account the specific characteristics of nanomaterials. 

Wolf-Michael Catenhusen, head of Germany's 'NanoKommission' and author of a report on the regulatory aspects of nanotech, recommended adjusting the REACH registration mechanisms to nanomaterials and introducing a legal framework that deals with the specific properties of these tiny materials. This could be done by adding a "nano chapter" to REACH, for example. 

Germany opposes 'nano' label for cosmetics

Efforts by European governments to force cosmetics manufacturers to inform consumers when products contain nanomaterials were resisted by Germany , it has emerged. The Germans felt adding a specific ‘nano' tag to consumer information could be viewed by consumers as a warning. 

In November, ministers from all EU member states adopted new rules on the marketing and safety of cosmetics by grouping the existing 55 directives into a single regulation. One of the key elements of the new streamlined laws is a clause requiring companies to print the word 'nano' in brackets after any ingredient which is smaller than 100 nanometres (100nm) in size. 

"All ingredients present in the form of nanomaterials shall be clearly indicated in the list of ingredients," according to the new legislation. 

However, German officials noted that cosmetic products that are for sale in the EU must already pass stringent safety tests, implying that the inclusion of nano-scale materials should not warrant additional scrutiny. 

Green MEPs and environmental lobby groups have been pushing for the application of the 'no data, no market' principle to nanotechnologies. Industry groups fear this would put the onus on them to prove nanomaterials do not carry any additional risk – a process that could lead to hundreds of products being taken off the market. 

Germany 's position is that information on nanoscale materials may be important for consumers where the particle size results in altered properties. This is closer to the industry's preference for defining nanotechnology based on function rather than size. 

The new regulation will apply in all 27 EU countries and harmonises a previously fragmented area of law. The changes should help reduce costs and streamline safety rules. 

The definition of nanomaterials, according to the law, is "an insoluble or biopersistant and intentionally manufactured material with one or more external dimensions, or an internal structure, on the scale from 1 to 100nm".

Australia worried about risk perception

A report by the Australia Institute calls for greater transparency and public engagement about the potential opportunities and risks posed by nanotechnology. Experts from the Institute say nanotech is already a reality in daily life, with more than 1,000 consumer products identified as containing nanomaterials.

Dr Fern Wickson, author of the report entitled “What you should know about nano”, recommends an 11-point plan of action for policymaking on nanoscale sciencies and technologies – which he refers to as nanoST.

The plan was presented at the Asia-Pacific Science, Technology and Society Network Conference in Brisbane and warns that Australia has much to do if it is to implement best practice in nanotechnology governance.

Wickson says there is no dispute that nanotechnolology offers exciting opportunities, but “there should also be no dispute that there are far too many unanswered questions for us to have blind faith in the new technology”.

“Worringly, early research has shown a similarity between the way the body responds to carbon nanotubes and asbestos. While there is still such a degree of uncertainty about potential risks, consumers are entitled to greater transparency about their exposure,” he said.

Wickson's report recommends mandatory reporting on all products containing nanotubes and other nanomaterials. He calls for a parliamentary inquiry into nanotechnology, and improved health surveillance and environmental monitoring.

Wickson advocates a precautionary approach to the commercialisation of nanotechnology in cases “where the potential for harm has been demonstrated, significant uncertainties remain and social benefits appear marginal”.

www.nanowerk.com/news/newsid=13702.php

NGO critical of plan to ‘nanoproof’ REACH

Europe 's largest federation of environmental citizens' organisations has launched a new report on the governance structures needed for the safe development and use of nanotechnologies.

The European Environmental Bureau (EEB), published its updated position in tandem with a stakeholder conference on nanomaterials organised by the Swedish Presidency of the EU.

The report reviews the current uncertainties arising from the governance of nanotechnologies where “development and commercialisation is outpacing government oversight, risk management and public debate”.

It examines regulatory initiatives, voluntary codes and practices, as well as progress on international cooperation in coordinating nanotechnology governance.

In line with its consistent public position on nanotechnologies, the EEB advocates the application of the precautionary principle and pre-market registration of materials.

“Efforts to ‘nano-proof' existing legislation such as REACH, Novel Foods and Cosmetics have led to fragmented and confusing approaches to nanotechnologies oversight,” said Dragomira Raeva , EEB Nanotechnology Policy Officer. “ Europe needs an overarching policy and regulatory framework which addresses the various applications of nanotechnologies coherently and comprehensively to ensure better environmental and human health protection in a growing area of innovation,” she said.

The EEB proposes that the safe and responsible development and application of nanotechnologies in the EU should be done through a dedicated nanotechnology-specific regulatory framework.

This, it says, should include pre-market registration and approval for nanomaterials designed to anticipate future applications before they are put on the market. Public consultation should be significantly enhanced and legislation must be revamped before further market penetration of nanomaterials occurs.

www.eeb.org/publication/2009/2009-NanoBrochureNo3-WEB.pdf

Consumers’ group publishes nano inventory

The European Consumers' Organisation (BEUC), together with its sister organisation ANEC, has published on its website an inventory of products claimed to contain nanomaterials and which are available on the EU market.

The group has so far identified 151 products over a period of two months and intends to update this inventory on a regular basis with the help of its members.

The inventory uses similar categories to those used by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Database, separating products into household appliances, automotive, cross-cutting, electronics, food, children's goods, health and fitness, and home and garden.

BEUC wants clear definitions of nanomaterials and nanotechnologies to guarantee legal certainties and allow the development of regulatory requirements. It wants to see the labeling of products containing nanomaterials, especially products with which consumers come in direct, close or frequent contact such as cosmetics, food products and clothing.

The report is available on www.beuc.eu under the “What's new?” section

Experts call for a more ‘democratic’ debate on nano

Decision-making on nanotechnology must become more democratic if Europe is to avoid repeating mistakes made in managing genetically modified foods, according to a new report on nanotechnology policy.

The DEEPEN project, which brings together findings from a three-year European research project involving ethicists, philosophers and the social and political sciences, says regulators and industry need to be more open with the public when crafting governance plans for new technologies. 

The report says current communication practices are “confused” and a greater effort needs to be made to make stakeholder groups and ordinary citizens feel like their voices are being heard.

The report says codes of conduct on nanotechnology can play an important role in clarifying ethical boundaries, although the public is consistently wary of self-regulation by industry. 

It also warns the public is "concerned about the motivations driving technology," and are suspicious that the risks will be spread across society while the benefits will not be distributed equally. 

Phil Macnaghten of Durham University in the UK said the public raises genuine concerns which must be addressed. He expressed scepticism about stakeholder dialogue exercises employed by the EU at present, claiming they can lead to “a cosy consensus” between Brussels-based lobbyists.

Another member of the group, Alfred Nordmann of   Darmstadt University , criticised the approach to handling public concerns on nanotechnology in Germany , where the nanotech sector is treated with kid gloves to ensure it develops into a strong new industry. 

As part of the project, João Nunes of   Coimbra University , Portugal , conducted focus groups with non-scientists and found "tension between hope and concerns arising from uncertainty". He said public engagement on science is not simply conversing about a new technology, it should lead to public input into decision-making.

The report, launched in Brussels on 29 September, urges policymakers "to develop a healthy scepticism about the rhetoric of the win-win situation characteristic of much discourse on nanotechnology". 

Thinking of technology solely as a source of progress without negative consequences will hinder the responsible development of nanotech, it concludes. 

www.euractiv.com/en/science/nanotech-risk-repeating-gm-food-fiasco/article-185862