Governance and Ethics of Nanotechnology

Transcription

1 Governance and Ethics of Nanotechnology Brussels, 7-8 May 200 The project Elvio Mantovani AIRI/Nanotec IT

2 Project duration: May 2008 April 2010 Project number: The Framing Nano Project An International multi-stakeholder dialogue platform to regulate the development of Nanosciences and Nanotechnologies (NS&T) Call identifier: fp7-science in society (Support Action) AIRI/Nanotec IT (coordinator) The Innovation Society The Institute of Nanotechnology (IoN) National Institute for Public Health & the Environment (RIVM) Fondation EurActiv Technology Centre Italy Switzerland UK The Netherlands Belgium Czech Republic

3 Various surveys have shown that in Europe people has, in principle, a positive attitude toward nanotechnology, but an increasing awareness about this enabling technology with the arrival on the market of nano-related products and the lack of knowledge about the potential risks of these products in terms of human health, the environment, safety, and societal implications, this attitude is changing.

4 The cost for the future of nanotechnology, and for the industry dealing with it, could be huge if the public rejects nano-related products and applications because advantages and potential risks are not correctly addessed, and the matter is not adequately regulated

5 The challenges for the governance of nanotechnology (*): - Diversity of materials and applications; - Lack of data characterising nanomaterials; - Lack of standardasation in nomenclature, metrics, and materials; - Proprietary nature of information; - Difficulty of communicating among academics discilplines; - Limited resources; - Possibly inadequate statutory authority. (*) Report of the US Congressional Research Service (CRS)

6 The ultimate objective of is to come up with a proposal for a Governance Plan to regulate the development of nanotechnology assuring that this development takes place responsibly and to the benefit of the individuals and the society. This will be done establishing an open international multi-stakeholder dialogue to foster the development of a shared frame of knowledge, objectives, actions to define practicable regulatory solutions.

7 A risk-benefit assessment of nanotechnology must focus on both classical, actual, risks and concerns: Risks Environment, Health and Safety (EHS) hazards when: Manufacturing, handling, use or misuse, disposal of engineered nanomaterials and nanorelated products, devices, processes. Concerns Ethical, Legal, Social Issues (ELSI) with reference to: Public acceptance, access, security, privacy, employment, liability, economic/educational/regional divide, etc. The deliberative process must maximise benefits and foster risks/concerns reduction. All possible stakeholders must be involved in the dialogue.

8 Stakeholders contributing to define the governance plan Research Regulation & Control Gov. Policy makers Regulator and standards agencies Lawyers Academia Industry Government EHS & ELSI issues People Business Production Retail Insurance and finance Industrial/professional org. NGOs Consumer associations Social/ethical researchers Workers representatives

9 Multilevel structure of the governance of NS&T Technical and Organizational Prioritize actions and research needs in EHS and ELSI areas Identify roles and responsibilities of stakeholders Institutional Understand how to manage and sustain a responsible development of NS&T Identify roles and responsibilities of the EC and of European Agencies Providing recommendations and actions acting at different levels to produce the framework for the deliberative process Trans-boundary Identify tasks to be faced at international level Understand which organization can support such endeavour Communication Understand how to involve/inform the public and channel SH opinions and proposals

10 Bases on 4 Pillars Analysis Mapping and analysis of existing/on going regulatory processes, level of science-policy interface, research on risk assessment Consultative process Framing (the deliberative process) ) Assess SH attitudes, expectations and needs, provide a list of issues (pro and cons) to be transferred into the deliberative process (2 stages Delphi Panel) Development of a proposal for a Governance Plan at EU level Foster an international dialogue Communication Communicate and disseminate in a suitable form and to the widest possible audience project objectives, findings and outcomes. Establish an international multi-sh network on project themes

11 The Project Time Plan May 2008 Nov Jan May Sept Nov (MultiSH Workshop) (Experts WS) (Final Conference) Feb Mar 2010 (National WSs) Analysis (WP1) Assesment of regulation & governance Stakeholders identification Advisory Board set up Consultative Process (WP2) Questionnaire 2 Stages Delphi International MultiSH workshop Outcome of the Delphi panel Framing process (WP3) Experts workshop (on 1st Gov. Plan draft) Final International Conference (2nd Gov. Plan draft) Final Governance Plan International dialogue and dissemination (WP4) Website Newsletter Delphi Panel MultiSH workshop International Conference 5 National workshops to present the final Governance Plan M1 M6 M12 M23 M18

12 The Framing Nano Project: partners & activities AIRI/ Nanotec IT Innovation Society IoN RIVM EurActiv Technology Centre WP1 (Analysis and identification of SH) WP 2 (Consultative process) WP3 (Governance plan) WP4 (Dissemination/dialogue) WP 5 (Management)

13 THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION! Elvio Mantovani (AIRI/Nanotec IT)