Looking Back to the Future of Regulating New Technologies: The Cases of Nanotechnologies and Synthetic Biology

Stokes, Elen; Bowman, Diana M.

doi:10.1017/s1867299x00002105

Cited by 33 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such a mismatch will in turn likely result in deeply seated issues of ill-fitting regulatory orientations and foreclosed opportunities for deliberation.^While acknowledging that not all new and emerging technologies may warrant a novel regulatory regime, Stokes and Bowman [43] suggest that policymakers should take a proactive approach early in the development and commercialization cycle of new technologies (despite the inherent difficulties associated with doing so) rather than remain reliant on the existing regime. Maintaining the regulatory status quo is arguably the simplest approach to regulating new emerging technologies in the first instance.…”

Section: Regulatory Responses To Emerging and Future Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regulating Emerging and Future Technologies in the Present

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific knowledge and technological expertise continue to evolve rapidly. Such innovation gives rise to new benefits as well as risks, at an everincreasing pace. Within this context, regulatory regimes must function in order to address policymakers' objectives. Innovation, though, can challenge the functioning and effectiveness of regulatory regimes. Questions over fit, effectiveness, and capacity of these regimes to ensure the safe entry of such technologies, and their products, onto the market will be asked in parallel to their development. With this in mind, this article examines the strengths and weaknesses of current regulatory frameworks, including those designed for biotechnology, cosmetics, novel organisms, and foods, in order to inform and help shape Australia's regulatory landscape around innovation. By focusing on Australia, the article illustrates the need to assess future changes to regulatory frameworks using a careful balancing of key factors. These include, for example, horizon scanning and monitoring, availability of appropriate data, existing health, safety, environmental, ethical, and social risks and impacts, and regulatory capacity. The article argues that rather than using one of these factors in isolation, a careful assessment of where each factor stands can lead regulators to an approach that properly manages the potential risks of emerging technologies.

show abstract

Section: Regulatory Responses To Emerging and Future Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regulating Emerging and Future Technologies in the Present

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…47 This change of question has far reaching consequences. Instead of asking, as it is often the case in mainstream risk assessment "what is the level of harm that we can tolerate?," it asks "how much harm can we avoid?."…”

Section: How Much Harm Can We Avoid and What Values Are At Stake? (Drmentioning

confidence: 99%

The EU Regulation of Nanomaterials

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Under this approach, nanomaterials have "inherited" the scope and features of the previous analogous regulatory regime (Stokes and Bowman, 2012). This regulatory option may come about by active decision making on the part of the relevant actors or may occur simply by default (Hodge et al, 2007;Stokes, 2012).…”

Section: Cautionary Tales But Is Anyone Listening?mentioning

confidence: 99%