Commercialization of nanotechnologies entails a regulatory requirement for understanding their environmental, health and safety (EHS) risks. Today we face challenges to assess these risks, which emerge from uncertainties around the interactions of manufactured nanomaterials (MNs) with humans and the environment. In order to reduce these uncertainties, it is necessary to generate sound scientific data on hazard and exposure by means of relevant frameworks and tools. The development of such approaches to facilitate the risk assessment (RA) of MNs has become a dynamic area of research. The aim of this paper was to review and critically analyse these approaches against a set of relevant criteria. The analysis concluded that none of the reviewed frameworks were able to fulfill all evaluation criteria. Many of the existing modelling tools are designed to provide screeninglevel assessments rather than to support regulatory RA and risk management. Nevertheless, there is a tendency towards developing more quantitative, higher-tier models, capable of incorporating uncertainty into their analyses. There is also a trend towards developing validated experimental protocols for material identification and hazard testing, reproducible across laboratories. These tools could enable a shift from a costly case-by-case RA of MNs towards a targeted, flexible and efficient process, based on grouping and read-across strategies and compliant with the 3R (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) principles. In order to facilitate this process, it is important to transform the current efforts on developing databases and computational models into creating an integrated data and tools infrastructure to support the risk assessment and management of MNs.

Abstract.Over the last few decades, Europe has suffered from a number of severe flood events and, as a result, there has been a growing interest in probing alternative approaches to managing flood risk via prevention measures. A literature review reveals that, although in the last decades risk evaluation has been recognized as key element of risk management, and risk assessment methodologies (including risk analysis and evaluation) have been improved by including social, economic, cultural, historical and political conditions, the theoretical schemes are not yet applied in practice. One main reason for this shortcoming is that risk perception literature is mainly of universal and theoretical nature and cannot provide the necessary details to implement a comprehensive risk evaluation. This paper therefore aims to explore a procedure that allows the inclusion of stakeholders' perceptions of prevention measures in risk assessment. It proposes to adopt methods of risk communication (both one-way and two-way communication) in risk assessment with the final aim of making flood risk management more effective. The proposed procedure not only focuses on the effect of discursive risk communication on risk perception, and on achieving a shared assessment of the prevention alternatives, but also considers the effects of the communication process on perceived uncertainties, accepted risk levels, and trust in the managing institutions.The effectiveness of this combined procedure has been studied and illustrated using the example of the participatory flood prevention assessment process on the Sihl River in Zurich, Switzerland. The main findings of the case study suggest that the proposed procedure performed well, but that it needs some adaptations for it to be applicable in different contexts and to allow a (semi-) quantitative estimation of risk perception to be used as an indicator of adaptive capacity.

No abstract

An engineered nanomaterial (ENM) may actually consist of a population of primary particles, aggregates and agglomerates of various sizes. Furthermore, their physico-chemical characteristics may change during the various life-cycle stages. It will probably not be feasible to test all varieties of all ENMs for possible health and environmental risks. There is therefore a need to further develop the approaches for risk assessment of ENMs. Within the EU FP7 project Managing Risks of Nanoparticles (MARINA) a two-phase risk assessment strategy has been developed. In Phase 1 (Problem framing) a base set of information is considered, relevant exposure scenarios (RESs) are identified and the scope for Phase 2 (Risk assessment) is established. The relevance of an RES is indicated by information on exposure, fate/kinetics and/or hazard; these three domains are included as separate pillars that contain specific tools. Phase 2 consists of an iterative process of risk characterization, identification of data needs and integrated collection and evaluation of data on the three domains, until sufficient information is obtained to conclude on possible risks in a RES. Only data are generated that are considered to be needed for the purpose of risk assessment. A fourth pillar, risk characterization, is defined and it contains risk assessment tools. This strategy describes a flexible and efficient approach for data collection and risk assessment which is essential to ensure safety of ENMs. Further developments are needed to provide guidance and make the MARINA Risk Assessment Strategy operational. Case studies will be needed to refine the strategy.

Nanotechnologies have been increasingly used in industrial applications and consumer products across several sectors, including construction, transportation, energy, and healthcare. The widespread application of these technologies has raised concerns regarding their environmental, health, societal, and economic impacts. This has led to the investment of enormous resources in Europe and beyond into the development of tools to facilitate the risk assessment and management of nanomaterials, and to inform more robust risk governance process. In this context, several risk governance frameworks have been developed. In our study, we present and review those, and identify a set of criteria and tools for risk evaluation, mitigation, and communication, the implementation of which can inform better risk management decision-making by various stakeholders from e.g., industry, regulators, and the civil society. Based on our analysis, we recommend specific methods from decision science and information technologies that can improve the existing risk governance tools so that they can communicate, evaluate, and mitigate risks more transparently, taking stakeholder perspectives and expert opinion into account, and considering all relevant criteria in establishing the risk-benefit balance of these emerging technologies to enable more robust decisions about the governance of their risks.

With the advance in material science and the need to diversify market applications, silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) are modified by different surface coatings. However, how these surface modifications influence the effects of AgNPs on human health is still largely unknown. We have evaluated the uptake, toxicity and pharmacokinetics of AgNPs coated with citrate, polyethylene glycol, polyvinyl pyrolidone and branched polyethyleneimine (Citrate AgNPs, PEG AgNPs, PVP AgNPs and BPEI AgNPs, respectively). Our results demonstrated that the toxicity of AgNPs depends on the intracellular localization that was highly dependent on the surface charge. BPEI AgNPs (ζ potential = +46.5 mV) induced the highest cytotoxicity and DNA fragmentation in Hepa1c1c7. In addition, it showed the highest damage to the nucleus of liver cells in the exposed mice, which is associated with a high accumulation in liver tissues. The PEG AgNPs (ζ potential = -16.2 mV) showed the cytotoxicity, a long blood circulation, as well as bioaccumulation in spleen (34.33 µg/g), which suggest better biocompatibility compared to the other chemically modified AgNPs. Moreover, the adsorption ability with bovine serum albumin revealed that the PEG surface of AgNPs has an optimal biological inertia and can effectively resist opsonization or non-specific binding to protein in mice. The overall results indicated that the biodistribution of AgNPs was significantly dependent on surface chemistry: BPEI AgNPs > Citrate AgNPs = PVP AgNPs > PEG AgNPs. This toxicological data could be useful in supporting the development of safe AgNPs for consumer products and drug delivery applications.

The significant uncertainties associated\ud with the (eco)toxicological risks of engineered nanomaterials\ud pose challenges to the development of nanoenabled\ud products toward greatest possible societal\ud benefit. This paper argues for the use of risk governance\ud approaches to manage nanotechnology risks and\ud sustainability, and considers the links between these\ud concepts. Further, seven risk assessment and management\ud criteria relevant to risk governance are defined:\ud (a) life cycle thinking, (b) triple bottom line, (c) inclusion\ud of stakeholders, (d) risk management, (e) benefit–\ud risk assessment, (f) consideration of uncertainty, and (g) adaptive response. These criteria are used to\ud compare five well-developed nanotechnology frameworks:\ud International Risk Governance Council framework,\ud Comprehensive Environmental Assessment,\ud Streaming Life Cycle Risk Assessment, Certifiable\ud Nanospecific Risk Management and Monitoring System\ud and LICARA NanoSCAN. A Sustainable Nanotechnology\ud Decision Support System (SUNDS) is\ud proposed to better address current nanotechnology risk\ud assessment and management needs, and makes.\ud Stakeholder needs were solicited for further SUNDS\ud enhancement through a stakeholder workshop that\ud included representatives from regulatory, industry and\ud insurance sectors. Workshop participants expressed\ud the need for the wider adoption of sustainability\ud assessment methods and tools for designing greener\ud nanomaterials

No abstract