Nanotechnology and consumer confidence

EU news & policy debates
- across languages -

Click here for EU news »

Saturday 16 February 2013

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

NEWS
'Frustrated' Füle cancels visit to Macedonia
The European Union's enlargement commissioner cancelled a visit to Macedonia next week over a political dispute that he warned could undermine the ex-Yugoslav republic's bid to start membership talks with the bloc.

News | EU gives 'untimely' OK to pork, poultry in fish feed
News | Bulgaria puts Hezbollah on EU Foreign Minister's menu
News | Nations seen going separate ways on carbon as EU efforts falter
News | EU budget summit aftermath: ‘Everyone’s a winner’
News | EU, US agree to fast-track bank rules, bonus cap
Hot topics
>> more
SPECIAL REPORTS
Special Reports
>> more
LINKSDOSSIERS

Euroscepticism: More than a British phenomenon
With Prime Minister David Cameron having vowed to hold a referendum on UK membership of the EU, Britain's penchant for EU bashing is well publicised. But there are political parties in other member states which are far from in love with the European project, and whose stance against integration has been fanned by the worsening of the economic crisis.

LinksDossier | Cloud computing: Leveraging the digital economy
LinksDossier | Cybersecurity: Protecting the digital economy
LinksDossier | Medical Devices: A new regulatory landscape
LinksDossier | Energy Efficiency Directive: Completing an energy policy puzzle
LinksDossier | Greening ICT
INTERVIEWS

Wealthy member states must cough up cash: Irish development minister
With the EU agreeing a near freeze in overseas development aid, persuading citizens to back further national contributions will be a tricky but necessary task, says Irish Trade and Development Minister Joe Costello.

Interview | Analyst: It’s good having the EU-Ukraine summit
Interview | Georgian minister: EU remains priority despite ‘Russian rapprochement’
Interview | WWF head: Sustainable energy could save $4 trillion by 2050
Interview | WTO candidate: Trade inclusiveness remains top priority
Interview | Grybauskaitė: EU leaders were quiet and calculating at summit
OPINIONS

Nature conservation ignored in EU move to green energy
When it comes to choosing sites for wind farms, nature conservation is always the last thing to be considered, falling behind the price of land, proximity to power lines and opposition from locals, writes Luke Dale-Harris.

Opinion | Energy markets and policymakers: In search of liquidity
Opinion | The economic crisis and the Franco-German alliance
Opinion | Greener CAP is a good deal for both farmers and the environment
Opinion | EU budget: Deal done, mission not accomplished
Opinion | The EU needs a better way to cope with risk
BLOGS

Thoughts on NATO’s future
While most conferences on NATO organized by organizations close to the alliance follow a somewhat predictable format, I had the privilege to participa..

Blog | EU and US jointly set their sights on new trade standards for global economies
Blog | Obama means business on Climate Change
Blog | Green investment and the circular economy
Blog | Question écrite du député des Français du Benelux à la ministre de la Culture à propos de Canal Académie
Blog | Droit d’asile : les associations dénoncent des entraves au droit d’asile en France inadmissibles
VIDEOS

^-A ⁺A

Published 10 June 2008, updated 28 May 2012

Summary

A nanometre is one billionth of a metre and around one-thousandth of a single human hair - nanotechnology represents manufacturing and engineering techniques applied on an atomic nanoscale.

Consumer trust and acceptance of technologies, in particular of emerging technologies such as nanotechnology, are essential for the development of consumer products and their market uptake. Other factors, such as the perception of risk-benefit ratios or communication of uncertainty also influence the consumer recognition of new technologies.

According to a recent Eurobarometer (June 2006), Europeans do not perceive nanotech as risky; rather, they support its development, perceive it as being useful to society and morally acceptable and have far greater confidence in regulation than for example their transatlantic counterparts in the US or Canada.

The political debate on regulating nanotechnologies is just beginning, whereas nanotech products are already being mass-produced.

Issues

Industry is increasingly using nanotechnology in sectors such as healthcare (medicine), consumer products (food, electronics, cosmetics), information technology and the environment. However, major gaps remain concerning the exposure risks associated with nanomaterials.

The potential risks of nanotechnology include the risk to health of nanoparticles and materials as the nanoparticles can be inhaled, swallowed, absorbed through skin or injected into the body whereas the behaviour of nanoparticles inside the body is not as yet known. As to environmental risks, the effects of free nanoparticles on the air or water are also unknown.

Everybody agrees that more research on the health and environmental risks posed by nanoparticles is needed to be sure that asbestos-type disasters will not come back to haunt nanotech companies in the future. In this respect, product stewardship, the process of making health, safety and environmental protection an integral part of designing, manufacturing, marketing, distributing, using, recycling and disposing of products, has become crucial in the development of nanotech products.

Consumer confidence and public trust in nanotech are also directly linked with access to understandable information on the technology. Such information will allow people to understand what nanotechnology is, how it will be applied and its implications for society. Involving citizens with science policymaking through an open debate and analysis of benefits and risks (both real and perceived) of nanotech have been highlighted as one way forward in regulating nanotech.

To date, no government has developed specific nanotech regulation. A recent United Nations' report on emerging challenges linked with nanotechnology and the environment, doubts the adequacy of current regulatory frameworks to deal with the special characteristics of nanotech and calls for industry, government, scientists and international organisations to co-operate on establishing scientifically and ethically sound risk-based standards for new nanotech products.

However, a report by the Royal Society (UK) points out that "proportionate regulation to protect the public and the environment is not possible in the absence of evidence of hazard or risk." Identifying hazards, risks and toxicity of nanomaterials is also a prerequisite for maximising market uptake and minimising the financial risk for investors and insurers.

In June 2008, the Commission published a Communication on regulatory aspects of nanomaterials, based on a regulatory review of legislation in relation to health, safety and environment aspects of nanomaterials. The review concludes that the current EU legislative framework "covers in principle the potential health, safety and environmental risks in relation to nanomaterials" but that current legislation "may have to be modified in the light of new information becoming available, for example as regards thresholds used in some legislation".

Positions

"A reliable and stable regulatory framework is essential for enabling the EU's industry to fully exploit the advances of nanotechnologies" and to boost innovation, growth and job creation, said EU Commissioner for Enterprise and Industry Günter Verheugen, presenting a Communication on regulatory aspects of nanomaterials.

Meanwhile, Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas highlighted the need to fully apply the precautionary principle with regard to nanomaterials as "the regulatory challenge is to ensure that society benefits from novel applications of nanotechnologies, while ensuring a high level of protection of health, safety and the environment".

The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) also argues that the precautionary principle must apply to nanotechnologies. "After the asbestos scandal, the ETUC finds it unacceptable that products should now be manufactured without their potential effects on human health and the environment being known unless a precautionary approach has been applied and made transparent to the workers," said ETUC Confederal Secretary Joël Decaillon.

"An early and open examination of the potential risks of a new product or technology is not just good common sense - it's good business strategy. With the right mix of voluntary corporate leadership, co-ordinated research, and informed regulation, we can reap the benefits of this promising technology while reducing the likelihood of unintended consequences," said DuPont Chairman & CEO Chad Holliday and Environmental Defense President Fred Krupp.

DuPont and Environmental Defense have agreed to collaborate on a framework for the responsible development, production, use and disposal of nanoscale materials. The intent of this framework is to define a systematic and disciplined process that can be used to identify, manage and reduce potential health, safety and environmental risks from nanoscale materials across all lifecycle stages. This framework will then be pilot-tested on specific nanoscale materials or applications of commercial interest to DuPont. The Framework was launched in June 2007.

European Chemicals Industry Council (CEFIC): "An essential part of the business-development process in industry is to assess both the benefits and risks of any new technology or product. The European chemical industry recognises that development and application of nanotechnology may raise new safety, societal, and regulatory questions and challenges." CEFIC believes that the existing risk-assessment methods "in principle" are a suitable framework for the assessment of nanomaterials, but still thinks that new approaches and methods may need to be developed to assess and control the potential risks of new emerging technologies. With this respect, the council recommends a collaborative effort in which "government-research focuses on method-development while industry-research focuses on testing their products".

"Emerging nanotechnologies are unlikely to succeed without appropriate research into understanding and managing potential risks to health, safety and the environment," said Andrew D. Maynard from Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Dr David Santillo, a senior scientist at Greenpeace Research Laboratories Department of Biological Sciences, University of Exeter, said that industry process and development of nanotech applications is proceeding much faster than the health- and safety-assessment process of these applications. "We are nowhere near enough to know the real benefits and risks of nanoparticles. A moratorium should be put in place on all new uses of nanotechnology until safety assessments have been conducted," said Santillo, adding that these assessments would take years before being conclusive.

"In addition, in parallel with the moratorium, one should have in-depth discussion on how to develop regulatory process for nanotech," he clarified. As to consumer confidence: "Before looking at this aspect, one should look at consumer awareness. We can't talk about confidence without awareness."

"Taking advantage of technological progress while avoiding adverse side-effects and a consumer backlash is a tricky path to tread," said Volker Türk, the Nanologue project co-ordinator at the Wuppertal Institute, Germany.

"As to consumer confidence in nanotech, the most obvious aspect is health issues. After health issues come aspects linked to the kind of applications we are talking about. A medical application, for example, a diagnosis device that quickly tells you from a drop of your blood the likelihood of developing a disease could perhaps speed up the diagnosis process, but would bring along a huge debate on privacy issues: Would your employer be entitled to ask for such test/records before hiring you or would a medical insurance company ask for it before insuring you? Thirdly, if these applications become mainstream, they could change our perception of health," added Türk.

A report published by Nanoforum, a pan-European nanotechnology network, highlights the importance of realistically taking into account the long-term visions and scenarios of proponents and opponents of nanotech, including science-fiction writers, as they influence public opinion.

A United Nations' recent report points to an imbalance common with new and evolving technologies: that which exists between investments in research on the potential benefits of nanotech (€7.7 billion) and research on the effects of nanoparticles on human health and the environment (€30 million) in the United States and the EU.

Markos Kyprianou, commissioner for health and consumer protection: "The competitiveness of a society depends greatly on how amenable it is to new developments and technologies. We must avoid a situation where the marketing of highly innovative nanotechnology products is obstructed by difficulties in providing consumers with the safety assurances they seek. Unquestionably, consumer safety remains the first and highest priority. That is why we are looking for the most appropriate way to carry out risk assessments that will assure the safety of Europeans and build confidence in nanotechnology."

The Council for the Ile-de-France region's Citizen' conference on nanosciences and nanotechnologies declared itself in favour of nanotechnologies, but emphasised that the economic benefits of nanotech could in no way be reached at the expense of ethics. The panel also recommends improving communication on nanotechnologies to the general public as it finds current information on the issue "elitist and reserved to specialists".

Timeline

A project on emerging nanotechnologies has developed an online inventory of nanotechnology-based consumer products.
A European project has developed NanoMeter, a web-based tool for researchers and product developers to carry out a brief societal assessment on topics critical to consumer and public acceptance of a nanotech application prior to its market release.
6 Sept. 2007: The Commission adopted its first implementation report on the EU nanosciences and nanotechnologies action plan 2005-2009.
7 Feb. 2008: The Commission adopted a recommendation on code of conduct for responsible nanotech R&D.
Feb. 2008: Commission's Scientific Committee on Consumer Products (SCCP) published its opinion on "Safety of nanomaterials in cosmetic products".
17 June 2008: The Commission published a Communication on regulatory aspects of nanomaterials. (See regulatory review of legislation in relation to health, safety and environment aspects of nanomaterials).
2008: The Commission and EU agencies will start to review existing documents that support implementation of the various directives with regard to their applicability and appropriateness to nanomaterials.
2008: Establishment of an observatory to carry out dynamic assessments of nanotechnology development, use and scientific market developments, providing an 'early warning' system for the EU institutions and member states.
2-3 Oct. 2008: EU Nanotechnology "Safety for Success" -conference.
14 Oct. 2008: The European Food Safety Authority published its draft scientific opinion on the potential risks of the use of nanotechnologies in the food sector.
2011: Commission will issue a progress report on the implementation of existing regulations on nanomaterials.