Risk management principles for nanotechnology

NanoEthics

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 43-60

  Marchant, Gary E ^a   Sylvester, Douglas J ^a   Abbott, Kenneth W ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Heuristics; Nanotechnology; Regulation; Risk management; Risk perception; Voluntary programs

Indexed keywords

EID: 41149133222     PISSN: 18714757     EISSN: 18714765     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11569-008-0028-9     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Abbot KW, Marchard GE, Sylvester DJ (2006). A framework convention for nanotechnology? Environmental Law Reporter 36:10931-10942
2. Ackerman BA, Stewart RB (1985) Reforming environmental law. Stanford Law Rev 37:1333-1365
3. Austin C. Study shows Americans encouraged by prospects of nanotechnology (July 14, 2004). http://www.ncsu.edu/news/press_releases/ 04_07/211.htm. Cited May 4, 2007
4. Ayres I, Braithwaite J (1992) Responsive regulation: Transcending the deregulation debate. New York, Oxford University Press
5. Babich A (2003) Too much science in environmental law. Columbia J Environ Law 28:119-184
6. Baram MS (1984) Alternatives to regulation: Managing risks to health, safety, and the environment. Lexington Books, Lexington, MA
7. Breggin LK, Carothers L (2006) Governing uncertainty: The nanotechnology environmental, health, and safety challenge. Columbia J Environ Law 31:285-329
8. Bowman DM, Hodge GA (2007) A small matter of regulation: An international review of nanotechnology regulations. Columbia Science and Technology Law Review, 8:1-36
9. Bowman DM, Hodge GA (2006) Nanotechnology: Mapping the wild regulatory frontier. Futures 38:1060-1073
10. Braithwaite V, Levi M (eds) (1998) Trust and governance. New York: Russell Sage
11. Colvin VL (2003) The potential environmental impact of engineered nanomaterials. Nat Biotechnol 21:1166-1170
12. Cross FB (1996) Paradoxical perils of the precautionary principle. Wash Lee Law Rev 53:851-925
13. Drexler E (1986) Engines of creation. Anchor, New York
14. Driesen DD (2005) Distributing the costs of environmental, health, and safety protection: The feasibility principle, cost-benefit analysis, and regulatory reform. Environ Aff 32:1-95
15. Environmental Defense, American Chemistry Council (2005) Joint statement of principles. Available at www.environmentaldefense.org/documents/ 4857_ACC-ED_nanotech.pdf
16. Environmental Defense, DuPont (2007) Nano risk framework. Available at www.nanoriskframework.com
17. ETC Group (2003) The big down: Atomtech - technologies converging at the nano-scale. http://www.etcgroup.org/upload/publication/171/01/ thebigdown.pdf. Cited Sept. 29, 2007
18. Fiedler F, Reynolds G (1994) Legal problems of nanotechnology: An overview. S Cal Interdisc LJ 3:593-629
19. Florini K, Walsh S, Balbus JM, Denison R (2006) Nanotechnology: Getting it right the first time. Nanotechnol Law Bus 3:39-53
20. Forrest D (1989) Regulating nanotechnology development, Foresight Nanotech Institute, March 23, 1989. http://www.foresight.org/nano/ Forrest1989.html. Cited September 29, 2007
21. Friends of the Earth (Australia) (2007). Who's afraid of the precautionary principle? http://nano.foe.org.au/node/186. Cited Sept. 29, 2007
22. Greenwood M (2007) Thinking big about things small: Creating an effective oversight system for nanotechnology. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC
23. Gregory R, Flynn J, Slovic P (1995) Technological stigma. American Scientist 83:220-223
24. Gwinn MR, Vallyathan V (2006) Nanoparticles: Health effects - pros and cons. Environ Health Perspect 114:1818-1825
25. Holm S, Harris J (1999) Precautionary principle stifles discovery (letter). Nature 400:398
26. International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) (2006). White paper on nanotechnology risk governance (Geneva, IRGC). http://www.irgc.org/ irgc/_b/contentFiles/IRGC_white_paper_2_PDF_final_version.pdf. Cited September 29, 2007
27. International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA) et al. (2007) Principles for the oversight of nanotechnologies and nanomaterials. http://www.icta.org/doc/Principles%20for%20the%20Oversight%20of%20 Nanotechnologies%20and%20Nanomaterials_final.pdf. Cited Sept. 29, 2007
28. Johnson BB (1993) Advancing understanding of knowledge's role in lay risk perception. Risk Issues Health Saf 4:189-212
29. Joy B (2000) Why the future doesn't need us. Wired, August 4, 2000. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy_pr.html. Cited Sept. 29, 2007
30. Jukes TH (1986) Frost resistance and Pseudomonas. Nature 319:617
31. Kahan D, Slovic P, Braman D, Gastil J, Cohen GL (2007) Affect, values, and nanotechnology risk perceptions: An experimental investigation. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=968652. Cited May 3, 2007
32. Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (eds) (1985) Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
33. Kasperson JX et al (2003) The social amplification of risk: Fifteen years of research and theory. In: Pidgeon N, Kasperson RE, Slovic P (eds) The social amplification of risk. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
34. Kolata G (2001) Scientists debate what to do when findings aid an enemy. New York Times Sept. 25, 2001:D1
35. Kuran T, Sunstein CR (1999) Availability cascades and risk regulation. Stanford Law Rev 51:683-768
36. Kuzma J (2007) Moving forward responsibly: Oversight for the nanotechnology-biology interface. J Nanopart Res 9:165-182
37. Lin AC (2007) Size matters: Regulating nanotechnology. Harvard Environ Law Rev 31:349
38. Lin-Easton PC (2001) It's time for environmentalists to think small - real small: A call for the involvement of environmental lawyers in developing precautionary policies for molecular nanotechnology. Georget Int Environ Law Rev 14:106-134
39. Mandel G (2005) Technology wars: The failure of democratic discourse. Mich Telecommun Law Rev 11:117-190
40. Marchant GE (2003) From general policy to legal rule: The aspirations and limitations of the precautionary principle. Environ Health Perspect 111:1799-1803
41. Marchant GE, Mossman KL (2004) Arbitrary and capricious: The precautionary principle in the European Union courts. AEI, Washington, DC
42. Marchant GE, Sylvester D (2006) Transnational models for regulation of nanotechnology. J Law Med Ethics 34:714-725
43. Maynard AD (2006a) Nanotechnology: A research strategy for addressing risk. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC
44. Maynard AD (2006b) Safe handling of nanotechnology. Nature 444:267-269
45. McCubbin PR (2005) The risk in technology-based standards. Duke Environ Law Policy Forum 16:1-56
46. Morrissey SR (2007) Understanding nanotechnology. Chemical & Engineering News April 16, 2007:35-37
47. Nel A, Xia T, Maedler L, Li N (2006) Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel. Science 311:622-627
48. Oberdörster G et al (2005) Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: Elements of a screening strategy. Particle & Fibre Toxicology 2:8
49. Paddock L (2006) Keeping pace with nanotechnology: A proposal for a new approach to environmental accountability. Environ Law Report 36:10943-10952
50. Peter D. Hart Research Associates, Inc. (2006) Report findings. http://www.nanotechproject.org/file_download/98. Cited May 4, 2007
51. Phoenix C, Drexler E (2004) Safe exponential manufacturing. Nanotechnology 15:869-872
52. Pidgeon N, Kasperson RE, Slovic P (eds) (2003) The social amplification of risk. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
53. Posner R (2004) Catastrophe. Oxford, University Press
54. Rachlinski J (2003) The uncertain psychological case for paternalism. Northwest Univ Law Rev 97:1165-1225
55. Rajeski D (2004) The next small thing. The Environmental Forum, March/ April, pp. 42-49
56. Renn O, Roco MC (2006) Nanotechnology and the need for risk governance. J Nanopart Res 8:153-191
57. Reynolds GH (2003) Nanotechnology and regulatory policy: Three futures. Harv J Law Technol 17:179-209
58. Sandin P (1999) Dimensions of the precautionary principle. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 5:889-907
59. Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR), European Commission (2007) Opinion on the appropriateness of the risk assessment methodology in accordance with the technical guidance documents for new and existing substances for assessing the risks of nanomaterials. http://ec.europa.eu/health/phs_risk/committees/ 04_scenihr/docs/scenihr_o_004c.pdf. Cited Sept. 29, 2007
60. Segal S (2004) Environmental regulation of nanotechnology: Avoiding big mistakes for small machines. Nanotechnol Law Bus 1:290-303
61. Shapiro SA, McGarity TO (1991) Not so paradoxical: The rationale for technology-based regulation. Duke Law J 1991:729-752
62. Sheetz T et al (2005) Nanotechnology: Awareness and societal concerns. Technol Soc 27:329-345
63. Slovic P (2000) The perception of risk. London, Earthscan
64. Slovic P (2004) What's fear got to do with it? It's affect we need to worry about. Miss Law Rev 69:971-990
65. Slovic P, Peters E, Finucane ML, MacGregor DG (2005) Affect, risk, and decisionmaking. Health Psychol 24:S35-40
66. Sunstein CR (1991) Administrative substance. Duke Law J 1991:607-646
67. Sunstein CR (2002a) The laws of fear. Harvard Law Rev 115:1119-1168
68. Sunstein CR (2002b) Probability neglect: Emotions, worst-cases, and law. Yale Law J 112:61-108
69. Sunstein CR (2003a) Beyond the precautionary principle. Univ PA Law Rev 151:1003-1058
70. Sunstein CR (2003b) Hazardous heuristics. Univ Chicago Law Rev 70:751-781
71. Sunstein CR (2004) Precautions against what? The availability heuristic and cross-cultural risk perception. Alabama Law Rev 57:75-101
72. Sunstein CR (2006) Irreversible and catastrophic. Cornell Law Rev 91:841-897
73. Sweet L, Strohm B (2006) Nanotechnology - life-cycle risk management. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 12:528-551
74. Sylvester D, Lohr S (2005) Counting on confidentiality: Legal and statistical approaches to federal privacy law after the USA Patriot Act. Wisconsin Law Rev 2005:1036-1138
75. Thayer AM (2006) Chance of a lifetime. Chem Eng News 1:10-18
76. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. In Kahneman et al. (eds) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, pp 3-19
77. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2007) Science Policy Council, Nanotechnology White Paper, EPA 100/B-07/001. http://es.epa.gov/ ncer/nano/publications/whitepaper12022005.pdf. Cited Sept. 29, 2007
78. Wagner WE (2000) The triumph of technology-based standards. Univ Ill Law Rev 2000:83-113
79. Weckert J, Moor J (2006) The precautionary principle in nanotechnology. Int J Appl Philos 20:191-204
80. Wejnert J (2004) Regulatory mechanisms for molecular nanotechnology. Jurimetrics J 44:323-350
81. Wexler L (2006) Limiting the precautionary principle: Weapons regulation in the face of scientific uncertainty. U.C. Davis Law Rev 39:459-527
82. Wiedemann PM, Schutz H (2005) The precautionary principle and risk perception: Experimental studies in the EMF area. Environ Health Perspect 113:402-405
83. Wilson RF (2006) Nanotechnology: The challenge of regulating known unknowns. J Law Med Ethics 34:704-713