Metrology and Standards for Nanotechnology

Miles, John

doi:10.4337/9781847208729.00028

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Minogue's fourth mechanism is that of regulation by hybrid organisations. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) would appear to be a classic example here in relation to nanotechnologies, through the work of Technical Committee 229, which has been established to create standards for nanotechnologies [67].…”

Section: Three Regulatory Lensesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Big Regulatory Tool-Box for a Small Technology

Bowman

Hodge

2008

Nanoethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is little doubt that the development and commercialisation of nanotechnologies is challenging traditional state-based regulatory regimes. Yet governments currently appear to be taking a noninterventionist approach to directly regulating this emerging technology. This paper argues that a large regulatory toolbox is available for governing this small technology and that as nanotechnologies evolve, many regulatory advances are likely to occur outside of government. It notes the scientific uncertainties facing us as we contemplate nanotechnology regulatory matters and then examines the notion of regulation itself, suggesting new ways to frame our understanding of both regulation and the regulatory tools relevant to nanotechnologies. By drawing upon three different conceptual lenses of regulation, the paper articulates a wide range of potential regulatory tools at hand. It also focuses particularly on the ways various tools are currently being used or perhaps may be employed in the future. The strengths and weaknesses characterising these tools is examined as well as the different actors involved. The paper concludes that we will increasingly face debate over what is likely to work most effectively in regulating nano technologies, the legitimacy of these different potential approaches, and the speed at which these different regimes may be employed.

show abstract

Section: Three Regulatory Lensesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Big Regulatory Tool-Box for a Small Technology

Bowman

Hodge

2008

Nanoethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…EC, 2007a;EC, 2008a;EC, 2008c;EC, 2011) and scholarly debates (e.g. Abbott and Snidal, 2009;Abbott et al 2010;Bowman and Hodge, 2009;Bowman, 2014;Blind and Gauch, 2009;Falkner and Jaspers, 2012;Miles, 2007;Meili and Widmer, 2010;Marchant and Sylvester, 2006).…”

Section: Transnational Governance Arrangementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Abbot and Snidal, 2010;Barr and Miller, 2006;Dorbeck-Jung, 2008;Picciotto, 2011). EC, 2008b;EC, 2011;Breggin et al 2009;Forsberg, 2010Forsberg, & 2012Schepel, 2005;Murashov and Howard, 2011;Miles, 2007 (Picciotto, 2011). Both the TBT and SPS Agreements are aware of the differences between countries, and thus they encourage the promotion of international harmonization of trade through standards, as an opportunity to reduce the emergence of non-tariff barriers that may result by following various rules (Bell and Marrapese, 2011).…”

Section: The Issue Of Legitimacy and Transnational Governance Arrangementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the business plan of TC 229 it is clearly indicated that the Committee aims to set standards that would promote "good practice in the production, use and disposal of nanomaterials, nanotechnology products and nanotechnology enabled systems and products" (ISO, 2012: 5).With its standards, TC 229 provides terminology and nomenclature, measurement techniques, calibration procedures, reference materials, test methods to detect and identify nanoparticles, occupational health protocols relevant to nanotechnologies, as well as risk assessment tools (Forsberg, 2010;Mantovani et al 2009;Miles, 2007).…”

Section: Substantive Depth and Normative Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Abbott and Snidal, 2009;Bowman and Hodge, 2009;Bowman, 2014;Blind and Gauch, 2009;Breggin et al 2009;Falkner and Jaspers, 2012;Miles, 2007;Meili and Widmer, 2010;Marchant and Sylvester, 2006;Marchant et al 2012), little attention is paid to the issue of legitimacy (e.g. Abbott et al 2010Abbott et al & 2012Delemarle and Throne-Holst, 2012;Forsberg 2010Forsberg & 2012Thoreau, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The legitimacy of transnational private governance arrangements related to nanotechnologies: the case of international organization for standardization

Kica¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transnational Governance Arrangements: Legitimate Alternatives to Regulating Nanotechnologies?

Kica

Bowman

2013

Nanoethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, the development and the use of engineered nanomaterials have generated many debates on whether these materials should be part of the new or existing regulatory frameworks. The uncertainty, lack of scientific knowledge and rapid expansion of products containing nanomaterials have added even more to the regulatory dilemma with policy makers and public/private actors contenting periods of both under and over regulation. Responding to these regulatory challenges, as well as to the global reach of nanotechnology research and industrial needs, governance arrangements beyond the state have addressed the challenge head-on. This article focuses on the governance arrangements of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), which has led to the development of numerous "horizontal anticipatory standards" with an important role in setting the foundation for science, technology and market development. During the course of its operation ISO has broadened its scope to address not only technical issues related to the concept and the size of nanomaterials but also broader aspects of the technology, including health, environment and safety issues. The increasing relevance of the ISO to regulate economic relations and achieve certain public policy goals has given rise to many concerns about its legitimacy. The important questions are whether these governance arrangements may be deemed as being legitimate and where this legitimacy is derived from? What are the main sources of legitimacy at the transnational level and how we can apply them to analyse nanotechnology standardization? This article provides concise answers to these questions. It focuses at the normative concepts of democratic and scientific legitimacy and explores the institutional structures and processes by which nanotechnology standards are established.

show abstract

Metrology and Standards for Nanotechnology

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

A Big Regulatory Tool-Box for a Small Technology

A Big Regulatory Tool-Box for a Small Technology

The legitimacy of transnational private governance arrangements related to nanotechnologies: the case of international organization for standardization

Transnational Governance Arrangements: Legitimate Alternatives to Regulating Nanotechnologies?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About