Emerging technologies in India: Developments, debates and silences about nanotechnology

Beumer, Koen; Bhattacharya, Sujit

doi:10.1093/scipol/sct016

Cited by 28 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Especially emerging economies like China, India, Brazil and South Africa are increasingly active at the technological frontier, not only as producers providing labor, but increasingly also as consumers and developers. South Africa was one of the first countries in the world to publish a national nanotechnology strategy and India has even been categorized as a front-runner in nanotechnology worldwide (Court et al 2004), ranking sixth worldwide in terms of the number of publications, ahead of countries like France and the Netherlands (Beumer and Bhattacharya 2013).…”

Section: Nanotechnology Risksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Travelling risks: How did nanotechnology become a risk in India and South Africa?

Beumer

2017

Journal of Risk Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

India and South Africa have invested in nanotechnology since the early 2000s and have identified risks to human health and the environment as an important issue for governance. This is exemplary for a wider trend in which 'developing countries' play an increasingly prominent role in the development, production and use of emerging technologies. This validates the claim of the world risk society thesis that countries around the world are now confronted with the risks of emerging technologies. Little is known, however, about the way developing countries deal with the potential risks of emerging technologies. Starting from the observation that the risk colonization of nanotechnology in developing countries cannot be taken for granted, this article draws upon the relational theory of risk in order to investigate how nanotechnology became understood as an object of risk in South Africa and India. The article shows that nanotechnology was constituted as an object of risk in rather different ways in India and South Africa, demonstrating that the spread of risk discourses -and the emergence of a world risk society -cannot be understood without attending to the local context. The article shows that way risk is understood and dealt with changes as risk discourses travel around the world, giving many different faces to the world risk society.

show abstract

Section: Nanotechnology Risksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Travelling risks: How did nanotechnology become a risk in India and South Africa?

Beumer

2017

Journal of Risk Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The power and control discourse in India comes down to 'innovate first, regulate later'. Hardly any attention is being paid to the role of the public in the nanotechnology discourse and little is being done to address ethical challenges such as that of the distribution of benefits (Beumer and Bhattacharya 2013).…”

Section: Nanotechnology In the Three Regionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Framework for Studying Global Ethics in Science and Technology

Stemerding

Rerimassie

Est

et al. 2015

Science and Technology Governance and Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…1 The combination of size, structure and physical/chemical properties of nanomaterials (NMs) offer remarkable technological advances and innovations but may also entail new risks for human health and the environment. [2][3][4] Thus, an appropriate management of nano-related risks have been identified by the EU Commission as a vital empowering issue for the success of NMs and nanotechnologies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…16 The best available guidance for exposure measurement suggests that in addition to an appropriate characterisation of particle size distribution, measurements should at least encompass an assessment of mass, but where possible also include number and/or surface area concentration. 17,18 Confronted with these limitations, it was decided that the most sensible course of action is to focus on (i) qualitative risk assessment covering all 1 In addition, input from (i) experts in the NanoSafety Cluster (NSC) community, (ii) EU institutions (e.g., ECHA), (iii) international organisations (e.g., OECD 27 ), (iv) industry initiatives (e.g., ECETOC 28,29 ), (v) European Center for Nanotoxicology (EURO-NanoTox), 54 and (vi) peerreviewed scientific literature, have been considered to ensure consistency at EU level and alignment to the stateof-the-art.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A methodology on how to create a real-life relevant risk profile for a given nanomaterial

Schimpel¹,

Resch²,

Flament³

et al. 2018

J. Chem. Health Saf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Please cite this article in press as: Schimpel, C. et al1., A methodology on how to create a real-life relevant risk profile for a given nanomaterial. J. Chem. Health Safety (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jchas.2017.06.002 RESEARCH ARTICLEA methodology on how to create a real-life relevant risk profile for a given nanomaterial With large amounts of nanotoxicology studies delivering contradicting results and a complex, moving regulatory framework, potential risks surrounding nanotechnology appear complex and confusing. Many researchers and workers in different sectors are dealing with nanomaterials on a day-to-day basis, and have a requirement to define their assessment/management needs. This paper describes an industry-tailored strategy for risk assessment of nanomaterials and nano-enabled products, which builds on recent research outcomes. The approach focuses on the creation of a risk profile for a given nanomaterial (e.g., determine which materials and/or process operation pose greater risk, where these risks occur in the lifecycle, and the impact of these risks on society), using state-of-the-art safety assessment approaches/tools (ECETOC TRA, Stoffenmanager Nano and ISO/TS 12901-2:2014). The developed nanosafety strategy takes into account cross-sectoral industrial needs and includes (i) Information Gathering: Identification of nanomaterials and hazards by a demand-driven questionnaire and on-site company visits in the context of human and ecosystem exposures, considering all companies/parties/downstream users involved along the value chain; (ii) Hazard Assessment: Collection of all relevant and available information on the intrinsic properties of the substance (e.g., peer reviewed (eco)toxicological data, material safety data sheets), as well as identification of actual recommendations and benchmark limits for the different nano-objects in the scope of this projects; (iii) Exposure Assessment: Definition of industry-specific and application-specific exposure scenarios taking into account operational conditions and risk management measures; (iv) Risk Characterisation: Classification of the risk potential by making use of exposure estimation models (i.e., comparing estimated exposure levels with threshold levels); (v) Refined Risk Characterisation and Exposure Monitoring: Selection of individual exposure scenarios for exposure monitoring following the OECD Harmonized Tiered Approach to refine risk assessment; (vi) Risk Mitigation Strategies: Development of risk mitigation actions focusing on risk prevention.

show abstract

Emerging technologies in India: Developments, debates and silences about nanotechnology

Cited by 28 publications

References 28 publications

Travelling risks: How did nanotechnology become a risk in India and South Africa?

Travelling risks: How did nanotechnology become a risk in India and South Africa?

A Comparative Framework for Studying Global Ethics in Science and Technology

A methodology on how to create a real-life relevant risk profile for a given nanomaterial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About