Nanotechnology (NT) is the production and use of materials at the smallest possible scale— 100 nanometers or less. One hundred nanometers is approximately 1/800th the width of a
human hair and 1/70th the diameter of a red blood cell. Materials at the nanoscale often exhibit very different physical, chemical, and biological properties than their normal size counterparts. While we know little about possible adverse effects of nanotechnology, we know enough to recognize that there needs to be some type of governmental oversight to ensure that public health and safety are not adversely affected.This paper reviews the options currently available to provide oversight, looking at the entire suite of federal government regulations, and concludes that:
Nanotechnology is difficult to address using existing regulations. There are a number of existing laws—notably the Toxic Substances Control Act; the Occupational Safety and
Health Act; the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act; and the major environmental laws (Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act)—that provide some legal basis for reviewing and regulating NT materials. However, all of these laws either suffer from major shortcomings of legal authority, or from a gross lack of resources, or both. They provide a very weak basis for identifying and protecting the public from potential risk,
especially as nanotechnologies become more complex in structure and function and the applications become more diverse.
A new law may be required to manage potential risks of nanotechnology. The law would require manufacturers to submit a sustainability plan which would show that the product will not present an unacceptable risk, a term that is further discussed in the paper. The political obstacles to passing new legislation are very large, though not impossible, and the drawbacks of trying to fit NT under existing laws make the attempt worthwhile.
New mechanisms and institutional capabilities are needed. The paper describes several mechanisms to encourage beneficial applications of NT. These include research, tax breaks, acquisition programs, and regulatory incentives. It then outlines institutional needs in four areas: international harmonization, foresight capability, research on adverse health and environmental effects, and public participation.
If nothing specific is done to manage nanotechnology’s possible adverse effects, a range of undesirable developments could emerge.The public potentially would be left unprotected, the government would struggle to apply existing laws to a technology for which they were not designed, and industry would be exposed to the possibility of public backlash, loss of markets, and potential financial liabilities.The challenges presented by nanotechnology are as
many and varied as the promises that NT holds for a better life. If nanotechnology is to fulfill its promise, society must openly face the issues of whether the technology has or could have adverse effects, what these effects are, and how to prevent them in the future. |