MORE news...
FramingNano Project concludes with publication of proposed Governance Platform and national workshops
The FramingNano Project formally concluded its work at the end of March 2010 following publication of the FramingNano Governance Platform and Executive Summary and a series of national workshops (as reported in Newsletter No. 7) aimed at disseminating information about the outcomes of the project and discussing possible routes forward concerning principles and proposals outlined in the Governance Platform with key stakeholders at national level.
The final FramingNano Governance Platform is intended to provide an inclusive, continuous and adaptable framework to identify and assess challenges in the governance of nanotechnologies and to support decision-makers in their decision-making processes.
The proposed model has two key functional levels: a deliberative level and a decision-making level.
The deliberative level (or “deliberative panel”) is geared around three key elements which provide means of how to create a common understanding of the challenges induced by nanotechnologies:
- a procedure dedicated to establish common assessment methodologies ;
- an observatory function; and
- an advisory function.
The deliberative level could in principle incorporate many of the existing organisations and groups currently tackling regulatory issues surrounding the research, manufacture, and disposal of nanomaterials, but in a more coherent and coordinated manner. This level/panel would then make recommendations to be approved at the decision-making level, the constitution and implementation of which would need to be the subject of further political agreement.
A number of common themes, ideas and information on national developments emerged from the six national workshops.
There was a broad agreement that the proposed governance model provided a useful heuristic overview of the challenges facing societies in balancing the undoubted benefits of nanotechnology with the perceived but sometimes unquantifiable risks associated with increased use of manufactured nanomaterials in a globalised world. It was also acknowledged that different countries and regions would need to adapt the model to suit their own cultures and legal and regulatory circumstances and traditions. The governance model was thought, however, to prompt many of the right questions concerning definitions, standards, metrics, methodology, etc. to enable this to move forward.
The need for a continuous and adaptive model of governance, as described in the Platform, was particularly acknowledged. It was considered, however, that implementing the Platform might bring a number of important challenges including:
• a potentially complicated and lengthy process of implementation (many stakeholders affected)
• the need to achieve sufficient international political will and momentum to result in a ‘top-down' set of rules being developed in the short term
• avoiding unnecessary increases in bureaucracy
The Report and Executive Summary describing the FramingNano Governance Platform may be downloaded at:
www.framingnano.eu/index.php?
option=com_content&task=category§ionid=16&id=47&Itemid=84
NanoCode Project kicks off
The first meeting of the new NanoCode Project, supported under the programme Capacities, in the area Science in Society, within the 7th Framework Program (FP7) recently took place.
The objective of NanoCode is to define and develop a framework aimed at supporting the successful integration and implementation, at European level and beyond, of the Code of Conduct (CoC) for nanosciences and nanotechnologies (N&N) research as developed by the European Commission.
The CoC collects together most of the concepts and values that have emerged in recent years from the debate on the governance and ethics of nanotechnologies, and is an important reference point concerning the principles that should underpin research activities, the interaction amongst key stakeholders and, in general, "good governance" for the responsible development of nanotechnologies.
The NanoCode project will promote a multistakeholder dialogue on the CoC at European level and beyond aimed at improving and strengthening awareness of the CoC, promoting trust building among stakeholders and, as an ultimate goal, developing a framework to support the wider application of the CoC.
www.nanocode.eu
Existing registered users of the FramingNano website will be advised by email how they can automatically register as users of the NanoCode website, should they so wish, with a clickable link.
Based on the opinions of stakeholders and on experience with other codes, voluntary measures and practices set up by different organisations aimed at responsible development of N&N research, the NanoCode framework will:
- Identify those practices that support compliance with the principles and actions of the EC's CoC and help to underpin its implementation;
- Propose criteria and indicators to assess the level of application of the CoC;
- Suggest and evaluate a portfolio of incentives and disincentives;
- Propose possible future integration of and changes to the CoC
The development of a practical tool (the CodeMeter) will help stakeholders assess their performance in complying with the CoC's principles.
The project will also use a variety of national and international events, a dedicated website and a series of brief publications as tools to communicate project findings and provide a centralised and unique source of information on the CoC and its application in Europe and beyond.
NanoCode brings together experienced partners from 10 different countries ( Germany , UK , France , The Netherlands, Italy , Spain , Switzerland , the Czech Republic , South Africa and Argentina ). The project is led by AIRI/Nanotec IT ( Italy ).
More scrutiny for nanosilver pesticides in the US
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) is recommending more scrutiny for products containing the pesticide nanoscale silver, a move that has prompted concern from industry representatives.
The Panel recommended that the EPA treat nanosilver differently from conventional silver, a change that would require extensive additional data, and recommended revising exposure models to better predict human and environmental exposures from nanosilver.
The SAP urged the EPA to evaluate pesticide registration applications on a case-by-case basis, saying that some forms or uses of nanosilver may have differing toxicity.
http://www.merid.org/NDN/more.php?id=2420
Academic: nanosilver governed by 'irrational fear'
Nanosilver is the victim of 'irrational and vague fear', according to University of Oregon Professor, David Tyler.
Tyler says antimicrobial silver has quietly become the a victim of overzealous regulators, "with the tragic consequence that new US innovators are shut out of the market by the EPA while previously certified foreign suppliers continue to ship without interference".
He says application of the precautionary principle has stifled developments and he criticised those who view nanotechnology as dramatically different from traditional chemicals – a phenomenon Tyler attributes, in part, to "nano enthusiasts".
"For a variety of reasons, almost no other technology (short of nuclear) I can think of has ever been targeted for the level of 'governance' (regulation) that is currently aimed at nanomaterials," Tyler writes.
http://www.nanotech-now.com/columns/?article=424
US researchers want debate on "nanorevolution"
The rapid pace of progress in the fields of nanotechnology demands an urgent consideration of the social implications of scientific advances, according to academics at the Arizona State University .
Nanotechnology is primarily funded from US federal budgets through agencies such as the National Science Foundation (NSF), but more consideration should be given to ethical, health and environmental aspects, according to Jonathan Posner, an assistant professor of mechanical and chemical engineering.
Posner is working with social scientists to take a more holistic view of developments in the field of nano research.
"This is about going beyond the merely technological challenges and getting students to think about what difference – good, bad or neutral – that they'll make in the world by pursuing this work in their careers," Posner says.
http://www.nanowerk.com/news/newsid=15076.php
