(Re)Conceptualizing decision-making tools in a risk governance framework for emerging technologies—the case of nanomaterials

Abstract

The utility of decision-making tools for the risk governance of nanotechnology is at the core of this paper. Those working in nanotechnology risk management have been prolific in creating such tools, many derived from European FP7 and H2020-funded projects. What is less clear is how such tools might assist the overarching ambition of creating a fair system of risk governance. In this paper, we reflect upon the role that tools might and should play in any system of risk governance. With many tools designed for the risk governance of this emerging technology falling into disuse, this paper provides an overview of extant tools and addresses their potential shortcomings. We also posit the need for a data readiness tool. With the EUs NMP13 family of research consortia about to report to the Commission on ways forward in terms of risk governance of this domain, this is a timely intervention on an important element of any risk governance system.

Status, implications and challenges of European safe and sustainable by design paradigms applicable to nanomaterials and advanced materials

“…Such activities are fundamental in clarifying the utility of decision-making tools for the risk governance of nanotechnology might assist the overarching ambition of creating a fair system of risk governance. 26…”

Tyre wear nanoparticles as test for a nano risk governance framework

“…While integration is essential for risk management and frequently advocated, balanced integration often fails (e.g., Miller and Wickson, 2015;Patenaude et al, 2015). Indeed, an earlier review of existing governance frameworks suggested that despite a long-standing interest in integrating stakeholder concerns in risk governance, agreement on how to implement such accommodating mechanisms has thus far proved elusive (Mullins et al, 2022). This is in part due to the incommensurability of 'hard' scientific risk assessment data with 'soft' qualitative data from concern assessment (Mullins et al, 2022).…”

“…It comprises six subsequent interlinked elements. It includes risk management models, tools and approaches relevant to nanomaterials, as well as nano-oriented LCA and grouping, and takes into account socio-economic aspects and risk-benefit assessment (Franken et al, 2019;Sørensen et al, 2019;Isigonis et al, 2020;Mullins et al, 2022). (see Figure 1):…”

“…Concern assessment is a social research activity: it draws on expertise from policy studies, anthropology, sociology, economics, innovation studies, communication sciences, ethics and philosophy to identify public perceptions, social concerns and socio-economic impacts of the risk issue at hand. It does this by way of literature review and horizon-scanning, finding out what is already known in terms of public perceptions, social concerns and socio-economic impacts related to the governance issues at hand (Mullins et al, 2022).…”

Application of Extended Fuzzy ISOCOV Methodology in Nanomaterial Selection Based on Performance Measures

“…Nanomaterials, with their dimensions on the order of 10 −9 meters, are renowned for their high chemical reactivity and the quantum effects that they display, traits that make them particularly suitable for commercial product development. Though these materials can be found in nature, they are often synthesized through various techniques, including decomposition and combustion methods [1][2][3].…”