Search news

Click here for search tips

Most searched tags

Nanotechnology Codes of Conduct under the Microscope

Published: Thursday 25 June 2009

The online publication service of the journal ‘Regulation and Governance’ has published an article entitled ‘Counting on codes: An examination of transnational codes as a regulatory governance mechanism for nanotechnologies’ (DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-5991.2009.01046.x; published online: 28th April 2009).

Written by Diana Bowman and Graeme Hodge form Monash University, the paper aims to examine ’the rise of nanotechnology-specific codes of conduct (nano-codes) as a private governance mechanism to manage potential risks and promote the technology. It examines their effectiveness as well as their legitimacy as regulatory instruments in the public domain. [...] It concludes that these voluntary nano-codes have weaknesses including a lack of explicit standards on which to base independent monitoring, as well as no sanctions for poor compliance. At the same time it also highlights the potential power of these governance mechanisms under conditions of uncertainty and co-regulation with government. It is likely that nano-codes will become the "first cut" of a new governance regime for nanotechnologies.’

An overview of the full paper is provided in the 25th June issue of the European Commission’ DG Environment News Alert Service ‘Science for Environment Policy’: entitled ‘Nanotechnology governance: balancing promotion and protection’, the article outlines the organisations that created the five codes investigated by the study:

  • A multinational chemical company
  • A coalition of NGOs initiated by the International Centre for Technology Assessment in the US.
  • The European Commission
  • The Swiss Retailers’ Association
  • The UK’s Royal Society, Insight Investment, the Nanotechnology Industries Association (NIA) and the Nanotechnology Knowledge Transfer Network

The article summarises the key points of the study:

  • A strength of voluntary codes is their flexibility and capacity to evolve so that, as co-operation, consensus and scientific knowledge grow, detailed regulations can develop.
  • [S]everal governance tools could be applied simultaneously and that a single instrument strategy may not work on its own.
  • Co-regulation is proposed, whereby voluntary codes exist alongside government regulation and varying degrees of government involvement are possible.
  • As such, voluntary nano-codes are likely to be the first step in the development of future regulation which appropriately balances the opportunities offered with the challenges posed by nanotechnology.

Follow these links to access the full paper published in ‘Regulation & Governance’ (subscribers only), or to read the article in the 25th June issue of Science for Environment Policy.

 
Related Links:
Switzerland’s Centre for Technology Assessment (TA-Swiss) has published a report on ‘Nanotechnology in the food sector’, recommending specific labelling of nano-materials in ingredients and in packaging, as well as offering the freedom of choice to consumers, whilst rejecting the enaction of a specific ‘nano food law’. (23rd January 2009)
 
The Swiss Retail Organisation (IG DHS) published a Code of conduct for nanotechnologies. By adopting the Code, the members, amongst whom are some of the most important actors in the Swiss Retailing, commit to a high degree of transparency for consumers and to the application of the precautionary principle. (14th April 2008)
 
The European Commission recommended to the Member States to adopt a code of conduct for responsible nanosciences and nanotechnologies. The Commission Recommendation of 7th February 2008 on a code of conduct for responsible nanosciences and nanotechnologies research highlights the history of the EC’s initiatives in nanosciences and nanotechnologies recommends: [...] (7th February 2008).