Foresight Study on the Risk Governance of New Technologies: The Case of Nanotechnology

Abstract

Technology-led innovation represents an important driver of European economic and industrial competitiveness and offers solutions to societal challenges. In order to facilitate responsible innovation and public acceptance, a need exists to identify and implement oversight approaches focused on the effective risk governance of emerging technologies. This article describes a foresight study on the governance of new technologies, using nanotechnology as a case example. Following a mapping of the governance landscape, four plausible foresight scenarios were developed, capturing critical uncertainties for nanotechnology governance. Key governance elements were then stress tested within these scenarios to see how well they might perform in a range of possible futures and to inform identification of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for nanotechnology governance in Europe. Based on the study outcomes, recommendations are proposed regarding the development of governance associated with the responsible development of new technologies.

Recent Developments in the Application of Nanomaterials in Agroecosystems

“…As stated by the European Union regulation 1272/2008, nanomaterials regarded as dangerous must be categorized and labeled appropriately. Through the Cefic Long-Range Research Initiative project, Read et al charted the governance landscape for nanotechnology by taking into account the present supervisory frameworks, standardizations, schemes of reporting, and best practice regulation [224]. Additionally, the voluntary structures in European nations for submission of data on nanomaterials is serving to collect data concerning toxicity levels and awareness in manufacture and market distribution [225].…”

Applying Translational Science Approaches to Protect Workers Exposed to Nanomaterials

“…Translational research could include: synthesis of evidence for risk governance and risk management of fine dust and powders, in particular, as well as efforts to explore applicability of governance guidelines for specific situations. In general, evidence gathering on effectiveness and value of governance could also be accomplished by multi-stakeholder evaluation (73).…”

The Essential Elements of a Risk Governance Framework for Current and Future Nanotechnologies

“…The tools need to be built on existing achievements of ongoing or completed national or international projects, going beyond the state of the art by systematically diagnosing user needs and capacities, integrating likely behavior, dynamic links to developing knowledge about NM risks, integration of uncertainty into risk assessment. Importantly, to achieve this they need to undergo interactive testing in practice . Empirical studies will therefore be required to illustrate how the tools and guidance of the framework function in a comprehensive and relevant range of practice contexts, and to verify their reliability.…”

“…Importantly, to achieve this they need to undergo interactive testing in practice. (59) Empirical studies will therefore be required to illustrate how the tools and guidance of the framework function in a comprehensive and relevant range of practice contexts, and to verify their reliability. Case studies that do not focus on various NMs in isolation, but rather a range of NMs along their respective value chains and life-cycles, including interactions with people in different settings (e.g., in industries, as regulators, as researchers, as consumers, and in the environment), seem a promising way to gain these insights.…”