Demand for command: Responding to technological risks and scientific uncertainties

Medical Law Review

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 11-38

  Stokes, Elen ^a  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Nanotechnology; New governance; New technologies; Regulation; Risk; Uncertainty.

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EUROPEAN UNION; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; MANAGEMENT; NANOTECHNOLOGY; UNCERTAINTY;

EUROPEAN UNION; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMANS; NANOTECHNOLOGY; POLICY MAKING; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 84882967817     PISSN: 09670742     EISSN: 14643790     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/medlaw/fws042     Document Type: Article

References (148)

1. S Jasanoff, The Fifth Branch: Science Advisors as Policymakers (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA 1994) 7
2. Typically the nanoscale is understood to range from 1 to 100 nanometres (with 1 nanometre measuring one billionth of a metre). For definitions, see British Standards Institute, Vocabulary - Nanoparticles, Publicly Available Specification 71 (British Standards Institute, London 2011).
3. For discussion, see Royal Society/Royal Academy of Engineering, Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties (The Royal Society, London 2004) ch 5; Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, Novel Materials in the Environment: The Case of Nanotechnology (Cm 7468, 2008), ch 3
4. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, above n 3, 66
5. C Ford, 'New Governance in the Teeth of Human Frailty: Lessons from Financial Regulation' (2010) 2 Wisconsin L Rev 441, 482
6. Better in at least two senses: more diversity and decentralisation
7. The research was undertaken in 2008-2009 for Defra by the ESRC BRASS Centre, CardiffUniversity. I am grateful to Chris Groves for making the interview data available for analysis. For full details
8. see C Groves and others, 'CSR in the UK Nanotechnology Industry: Attitudes and Prospects' (2010) The Centre for Business Relationships, Accountability, Sustainability and Society Working Paper No 57, available at, http://www.brass.cf.ac.uk/uploads/WP57_CSR_in_the_UK_Nanotechnology_Industry.pdf. last accessed September 2012
9. C Groves and others, 'Is There Room at the Bottom for CSR? Corporate Social Responsibility and Nanotechnology in the UK' (2011) 101 J Business Ethics 525. A series of fifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with private sector companies to examine attitudes towards corporate social responsibility activities relevant to a range of factors including environmental impacts, health and safety, stakeholder engagement, legal compliance and liability, and risk management. Interview data were coded and analysed using the factors listed. Although the focus of the study was on corporate social responsibility in the nanotechnology industry, it also generated insights into the regulation of associated products. Fifty companies were contacted initially, all of whom advertise their interest in nanotechnology and nanoscience via membership of industry associations or through their broader R&D programmes. There were some barriers to participation (26% of companies declined to participate, citing business confidentiality as the reason). However, the response rate (30%) still compares favourably with other studies in the field: see eg JA Conti and others, 'Health and Safety Practices in the Nanomaterials Workplace: Results from an International Survey' (2008) 42 Environ Sci Technol 3155, 3156, in that particular study regional response rates varied (eg 14% in North America, 16% in Europe, 41% in Asia) but the overall response rate was 23%.
10. see A Ogus, Indeed, it has been argued that regulation has changed out of all recognition in recent years, 'Regulation Revisited' (2009) 2 Public L 332, 334
11. see J Black, For discussion, 'Critical Reflections on Regulation' (2002) 27 Austral JL Philos 1
12. See, for example, J Jordana and D Levi-Faur. (eds), The Politics of Regulation: Institutions and Regulatory Reforms for the Age of Governance (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham 2004).
13. For an early example of this literature, see O Lobel, 'The Renew Deal: The Fall of Regulation and the Rise of Governance in Contemporary Legal Thought' (1994) 89 Minnesota LR 342
14. For discussion on adaptive enforcement, see R Baldwin and J Black, 'Really Responsive Regulation' (2008) 71 Mod LR 59
15. N Gunningham, 'Environmental Law, Regulation and Governance: Shifting Architectures' (2009) 21 J Environ L 179
16. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, From Red Tape to Smart Tape: Administrative Simplification in OECD Countries (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris 2003); also see Commission of the European Communities (hereafter 'European Commission'), Better Regulation - Simply Explained (European Commission, Brussels 2006)
17. HM Government, Reducing Regulation Made Simple: Less Regulation, Better Regulation and Regulation as a Last Resort (Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, London 2010)
18. Ogus described this as 'a paradox' of the deregulation debate in Ogus, above n 9, 335
19. see I Ayres and J Braithwaite, Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate (Oxford University Press, Oxford 1992), 11: 'There is a tendency to confuse privatization and deregulation as the same issue when indeed privatization is often accompanied by an increase in regulation'
20. G Majone, 'The Rise of the Regulatory State in Europe' (1994) 17 West Eur Polit 77
21. See, for example, G Majone, 'Paradoxes of Privatization and Deregulation' (1994) 1 J Eur Public Policy 53
22. See Cabinet Office, 'Red Tape Challenge: Environment',,http://www.redtapechallenge.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/themehome/environment-2/., last accessed March 2012.
23. HM Government, One-in, One-out: Third Statement of New Regulation (Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, London 2012)
24. See CM Radaelli, 'Whither Better Regulation for the Lisbon Agenda?' (2007) J Eur Public Policy 190
25. CM Radaelli and ACM Meuwese, 'Better Regulation in Europe: Between Public Management and Regulatory Reform' (2009) 87 Public Admin 639
26. European Commission, Implementing the Community Lisbon Programme: A Strategy for the Simplification of the Regulatory Environment, COM (2005) final
27. For detail, see European Commission, Impact Assessment Guidelines SEC (2009) 92
28. Mandelkern Group on Better Regulation, Final Report (European Commission, Brussels 2001)
29. S Borrá s and K Jacobsson, 'The Open Method of Co-ordination and New Governance Patterns in the EU' (2004) 11 J Eur Public Policy 185, especially the discussion at 186-87
30. European Commission, European Governance: AWhite Paper, COM (2001) final
31. European Commission, Communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Smart Regulation in the European Union, COM (2010) final, Section 4
32. See BM Hutter, The Role of Non-State Actors in Regulation (2006) London School of Economics Centre for Analysis of Risk and Regulation, Discussion Paper No 37, available at, http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/36118/1/Disspaper37.pdf. last accessed June 2012.
33. For discussion, see B Lange, 'Regulatory Spaces and Interactions: An Introduction' (2003) 12 Social Legal Stud 411
34. N Gunningham, 'The New Collaborative Environmental Governance: The Localization of Regulation' (2009) 36 J Law Soc 145
35. JS Mosher and DM Trubek, 'Alternative Approaches to Governance in the EU: EU Social Policy and the European Employment Strategy' (2003) 41 J Common Market Stud 63
36. S Strange, The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1996), 4
37. Rhodes, for example, identified the loss of functions once enjoyed by central and local government to other agencies, including EU institutions
38. see RAW Rhodes, 'The Hollowing Out of the State: The Changing Nature of the Public Service in Britain' (1994) 65 Polit Q 138
39. See eg post-structuralist accounts of regulation beyond the nation state such as B de Sousa Santos, Toward a New Legal Common Sense (2nd edn Butterworths LexisNexis, London 2002)
40. Z Bauman, Globalization: The Human Consequences (Polity Press, Cambridge 1998)
41. V Heyvaert, 'Globalizing Regulation: Reaching Beyond the Borders of Chemical Safety' (2009) 36 J Law Soc 110
42. Peck, for instance, argued that the image of the 'hollowed out' minimalist state does not depict a straightforward reduction in the size or capacities of the nation state, but instead involves the replacement of historically and jurisdictionally constituted versions of the state with a reorganised state framework
43. see J Peck, 'Neoliberalizing States: Thin Policies/Hard Outcomes' (2001) 25 Progress Hum Geogr 445
44. For discussion, see L Hancher and M Moran. (eds) Capitalism, Culture and Economic Regulation (Clarendon Press, Oxford 1989); M Moran, The British Regulatory State: High Modernism and Hyper-Innovation (Oxford University Press, Oxford 2007)
45. C Holley, N Gunningham and C Shearing, The New Environmental Governance (Routledge, Abingdon 2011)
46. For a good example, see Better Regulation Commission, Better Regulation Commission, Risk, Responsibility, Regulation: Whose Risk Is It Anyway? (Better Regulation Commission, London 2006)
47. For examples of the connection between complex problems and pluralist solutions, see Ford, above n 6
48. C Coglianese, 'Weak Democracy, Strong Information: The Role of Information Technology in the Rulemaking Process', in V Mayer-Schönberger and D Lazer (eds), Governance and Information Technology: from Electronic Government to Information Government (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 2007) ch 5, especially 116-19
49. N Gunningham and D Sinclair, 'Regulatory Pluralism: Designing Policy Mixes for Environmental Protection' (1999) 21 Law Policy 49
50. DM Trubek and LG Trubek, 'New Governance and Legal Regulation: Complementarity, Rivalry and Transformation' (2006) 13 Columbia J Eur L 1-26, 4
51. Ford, above n 6, 446
52. For discussion, see AD Maynard and DYH Pui, 'Nanotechnology and Occupational Health: New Technologies - New Challenges' (2007) 9 J Nanoparticle Res 1
53. K Donaldson and CA Poland, 'Nanotoxicology: New Insights into Nanotubes' (2009) 4 Nat Nanotechnol 708
54. K Donaldson and others, 'Review: Carbon Nanotubes: A Review of Their Properties in Relation to Pulmonary Toxicology and Workplace Safety' (2006) 92 Toxicol Sci 5
55. In the context of nano-enhanced foodstuffs, see House of Lords Science and Technology Committee, Nanotechnologies and Food (2010) HL Paper 22-I, ch 4
56. For discussion, see Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR), Modified Opinion on The Appropriateness of Existing Methodologies to Assess the Potential Risks Associated with Engineered and Adventitious Products of Nanotechnologies, adopted during the 10th plenary meeting of 10 March 2006 after public consultation, SCENIHR/002/05
57. P Macnaghten, MB Kearnes and B Wynne, 'Nanotechnology, Governance, and Public Deliberation: What Role for the Social Sciences?' (2005) 27 Sci Commun 268
58. On the problems of defining nanomaterials, see AD Maynard, 'Don't Define Nanomaterials' (2011) 475 Nature 31
59. B Wynne, 'Risk as Globalizing "Democratic" Discourse? Framing Subjects and Citizens' (2005) Sci Citizens 66
60. A Smith, 'The Alternative Technology Movement: An Analysis of its Framing and Negotiation of Technology Development' (2005) 12 Hum Ecol Rev 106
61. O Renn and MC Roco, 'Nanotechnology and the Need for Risk Governance' (2006) 8 J Nanoparticle Res 153, 154
62. See above n 8
63. Interview 2009a (on file with author)
64. For discussion, see ME Price, 'The Newness of New Technology' (2001) 22 Cardozo L Rev 1885
65. International Risk Governance Council, Policy Brief: Nanotechnology Risk Governance - Recommendations for a Global, Coordinated Approach to the Governance of Potential Risks (International Risk Governance Council, Geneva 2007), 15
66. DM Bowman and GA Hodge. 'Governing Nanotechnology without Government?' (2008) 35 Sci Public Policy 475
67. see C Abbot, 'Bridging the Gap - Non-state Actors and the Challenges of Regulating New Technology' (2012) 39 J Law Soc 329 for an excellent analysis of pluralist, decentred approaches to regulating nanotechnology and new technology more generally
68. FramingNano Project, FramingNano Report: A Multistakeholder Dialogue Platform Framing the Responsible Development of Nanosciences & Nanotechnologies (2009), available via, www.framingnano.eu. last accessed July 2012
69. JC Davies, Oversight of Next Generation Nanotechnology (2009) Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies Paper 18, available at, http://www.nanotechproject.org/publications/archive/pen18/. last accessed May 2012.
70. European Commission, Communication on Regulatory Aspects of Nanomaterials COM (2008) 366 final, 11
71. Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) [2006] OJ L396/1
72. For further discussion on the extrapolation of existing legal measures to nano-enhanced products, see E Stokes, 'Regulating Nanotechnologies: Sizing up the Options' (2009) 29 Legal Stud 281
73. Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community Code Relating to Medicinal Products for Human Use, as amended [2004] OJ L311/67; Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency [2004] OJ L136/1
74. European Medicines Agency, Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, Reflection Paper on Nanotechnology-Based Medicinal Products for Human Use (European Medicines Agency, London 2006) discusses the applicability of existing legislation to medicinal products containing nanoparticles
75. See discussion below at n 134
76. European Parliament, Resolution of 24 April 2009 on Regulatory Aspects of Nanomaterials P6_TA (2009) 0328
77. European Commission, above n 56
78. For a detailed examination of soft law and voluntary mechanisms, see GE Marchant and others, 'A New Soft Law Approach to Nanotechnology Oversight: AVoluntary Product Certification Scheme' (2010) 28 UCLA J Environ L Policy 123
79. Materials UK, Nanotechnology: a UK Industry View (2010), available via, www.matuk.co.uk., last accessed July 2012, 9
80. HM Government, Response to the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) Report 'NovelMaterials in the Environment - The Case of Nanotechnology' (HM Government, London 2009), 22
81. For discussion, see J Black, 'What is Regulatory Innovation?', in J Black, M Lodge and M Thatcher (eds), Regulatory Innovation: A Comparative Analysis (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2005) ch 1
82. For elaboration, see European Commission, Communication on Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation Union, COM (2010) 546 final. Chris Groves analyses the trade-offs between, on the one hand, fast and furious growth underpinned by fragile regulatory arrangements, and, on the other hand, slower growth under a more resilient, socially embedded regulatory framework
83. see C Groves, 'Four Scenarios for Nanotechnologies in the UK: 2011-2020' (2013) Technol Analysis Strategic Manage (forthcoming)
84. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK Voluntary Reporting Scheme for Engineered Nanoscale Materials (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London 2008), 5
85. For example, the Australian National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme,,http://www.nicnas.gov.au/., last accessed May 2012.
86. See US Environmental Protection Agency, http://epa.gov/oppt/nano/stewardship.htm., last accessed May 2012.
87. Interview 2009e (on file with author)
88. Interview 2009g (on file with author)
89. Interview 2009e (on file with author)
90. Interview 2009k (on file with author)
91. International Organization for Standardization, Technical Specification 13830: Guidance on the Labelling of Manufactured Nano-objects and Products Containing Manufactured Nano-objects (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva 2011); British Standards Institute, Publicly Available Specification 130: Guidance on the Labelling of Manufactured Nanoparticles and Products Containing Manufactured Nanoparticles, (British Standards Institute, London 2007)
92. Interview 2009c (on file with author)
93. Interview 2009f (on file with author)
94. European Parliament, Draft Legislative Resolution on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Novel Foods, 18 December 2008, A6-0512/2008, Amendment 59
95. Interview 2009k (on file with author)
96. International Organization for Standardization, Technical Specification 13830: Guidance on the Labelling of Manufactured Nano-objects and Products Containing Manufactured Nano-objects (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva 2011); British Standards Institute, Publicly Available Specification 130: Guidance on the Labelling of Manufactured Nanoparticles and Products Containing Manufactured Nanoparticles, (British Standards Institute, London 2007)
97. Interview 2009c (on file with author)
98. Interview 2009f (on file with author)
99. European Parliament, Draft Legislative Resolution on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Novel Foods, 18 December 2008, A6-0512/2008, Amendment 59
100. Responsible Nano Code, Information on the Responsible Nano Code Initiative (2008) available at, http://www.nanoandme.org/downloads/The%20Responsible%20Nano%20Code.pdf. last accessed May 2012.
101. As cited in NanoCode Project, Synthesis Report on Codes of Conduct, Voluntary Measures and Practices Towards a Responsible Development of N&N (NanoCode, Brussels 2010), 29
102. International Organization for Standardization, Technical Report 12885: Nanotechnologies - Health and Safety Practices in Occupational Settings Relevant to Nanotechnologies (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva 2008)
103. International Organization for Standardization, Technical Report 13121: Nanotechnologies - Nanomaterial Risk Evaluation (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva 2011)
104. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Current Developments/Activities on the Safety of Manufactured Nanomaterials (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, 2011)
105. BASF, Code of Conduct on Nanotechnology, available at, http://www.basf.com/group/corporate/en/function/conversions:/publish/content/sustainability/dialogue/in-dialogue-withpolitics/nanotechnology/images/BASF_Code_of_Conduct_Nanotechnology.pdf., last accessed June 2012.
106. Bayer Material Science AG, Code of Good Practice on the Production and On-Site Use of Nanomaterials (Bayer, Leverkusen 2007)
107. Interessengemeinschaft Detailhandel Schweiz, Code of Conduct: Nanotechnologies (Interessengemeinschaft Detailhandel Schweiz, Bern 2008)
108. Verbond van Nederlandse Ondernemingen-Nederlands Christelijk Werkgeversverbond, Guidance Working Safely with Nanomaterials and Nanoproducts: The Guide for Employers and Employees (2011) available at, http://www.industox.nl/Guidance%20on%20safe%20handling%20nanomats&products.pdf., last accessed September 2012.
109. Environmental Defense-Du Pont Nano Partnership, Nano Risk Framework (Du Pont, Wilmington, DE 2007)
110. DM Bowman and GA Hodge, 'Counting on Codes: An Examination of Transnational Codes as a Regulatory Governance Mechanism for Nanotechnologies' (2009) 3 Regul Governance 145, 159
111. KM Kulinowski, Executive Director of the Center for Biological& Environmental Nanotechnology, Rice University, as quoted in SR Morrissey, 'Understanding Nanotechnology: For Effective Rules and Regulations to be Set, Science Must Play a Key Role' (2007) 85 Chem Eng News 35
112. Similar findings have emerged in other contexts, see for example C Scott, 'Governing Without Law or Governing Without Government? New-ish Governance and the Legitimacy of the EU' (2009) 15 Eur L J 160
113. For further discussion, see J Black, 'Constructing and Contesting Legitimacy and Accountability in Polycentric Regulatory Regimes' (2008) 2 Regul Governance 137
114. D Curtin and L Senden, 'Public Accountability of Transnational Private Regulation: Chimera or Reality?' (2011) 38 J Law Soc 163
115. For discussion, see J Black, 'Legitimacy and the Competition for Regulatory Share' (2009) London School of Economics Working Paper 14, available at, http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/24559/1/WPS2009-14_Black.pdf., last accessed May 2012.
116. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Information Gathering Schemes on Nanomaterials: Lessons Learned and Reported Information, Series on the Safety of Manufactured Nanomaterials, Series on the Safety of Manufactured Nanomaterials No 31 (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris 2011), 16 and Annex I Table 6
117. Interview 2009l (on file with author)
118. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, above n 109
119. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, above n 70, 2
120. For instance, one interviewee explained that the company had not shared data under the voluntary reporting scheme because it 'believes that the scheme would require commercially sensitive data to be disclosed'. Interview 2009l (on file with author).
121. Interview 2009i (on file with author)
122. NanoCode Project, above n 94, 12
123. NanoCode Project, above n 94, 10-11 and 30-1
124. NanoCode Project, MasterPlan: Issues and Options on the Path Forward with the European Commission Code of Conduct on Responsible N&N Research (NanoCode Project, Brussels 2011), 27
125. Interview 2009g (on file with author)
126. NanoCode Project, above n 94, 11
127. HM Government, UK Nanotechnologies Strategy Small Technologies, Great Opportunities (HM Government, London 2010), 16
128. see generally G Lynch-Wood and D Williamson, On the differences between firms' responses to regulation, 'The Receptive Capacity of Firms - Why Differences Matter' (2011) 23 J Environ L 383
129. Professor Sir David King (then Chief Scientific Adviser to the UK Government), Oral Evidence taken before the Select Committee on Science and Technology on 10 November 2003, Examination of Witnesses Questions 20-39
130. Dr Andrew Murrison (then Member of Parliament for Westbury), House of Commons Debate 8 July 2003, Column 231WH. For discussion on lessons learned from the GM experience, see M Kearnes et al, 'From Bio to Nano: Learning Lessons from the UK Agricultural Biotechnology Controversy' (2006) 15 Sci Culture 291; C Groves, 'The Public Perception of Nanotechnology: Is it All About Risk?' (2010) 6 Nanotechnol Percept 85.
131. Interview 2009c (on file with author)
132. Interview 2009g (on file with author)
133. Interview 2009f (on file with author)
134. Interview 2009i (on file with author)
135. Interview 2009a (on file with author)
136. Royal Society/Royal Academy of Engineering, above n 3, ch 8
137. See discussion above at n 56
138. European Commission, above n 56
139. European Parliament, above n 64; for analysis, see E Stokes, 'Nanotechnology and the Products of Inherited Regulation' (2012) 39 J Law Soc 93
140. Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 on cosmetic products [2009] OJ L341/59
141. Reporting requirements have also been adopted for biocidal products, see Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 on biocidal products, [2012] OJ L167/1 Article 65(3)(d). Note however that this particular provision applies to Member States not private companies. For discussion on the adoption of mandatory reporting for food products, see HL Science and Technology Committee, above n 45.
142. Regulation on cosmetic products, above n 134, Article 16(3)
143. For instance, see International Organization for Standardization, Technical Standard 27687: Nanotechnologies - Terminology and Definitions for Nano-Objects - Nanoparticle, Nanofibre and Nanoplate (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva 2008)
144. European Commission, Recommendation on the Definition of Nanomaterial [2011] OJ L275/38, Recital 9
145. For discussion on the crystallizing of norms of private regulatory regimes, see D Casey and C Scott, 'The Crystallization of Regulatory Norms' (2011) 38 J Law Soc 76
146. HM Government, above n 67, 22
147. Bowman and Hodge, above n 104
148. See generally M Foucault (translated by C Gordon), Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977 (Harvester Press, Brighton 1980)