IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/glenvp/v12y2012i1p30-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulating Nanotechnologies: Risk, Uncertainty and the Global Governance Gap

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Falkner

    (Robert Falkner is Senior Lecturer in International Relations at the London School of Economics and Political Science. He holds Masters-level degrees in politics and economics from Munich University and a DPhil in international relations from Oxford University. He has published widely on global environmental politics and risk regulation, including Business Power and Conflict in International Environmental Politics (2008). In 2008–09, he coordinated a transatlantic research team that investigated emerging nanotechnology regulation in Europe and the US, which led to the publication of the Chatham House report Securing the Promise of Nanotechnologies: Towards Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation (2009).)

  • Nico Jaspers

    (Nico Jaspers is a post-doctoral researcher at the Free University of Berlin. He studied economics at Columbia University, New York, international political economy at Sciences Po, Paris (Institut d'Etudes Politiques) and received a doctorate in international relations from the London School of Economics in 2011. He has published widely on nanotechnology policy and in 2009 coauthored an EU commissioned report on transatlantic cooperation in nanotechnology regulation.)

Abstract

Nanosciences and nanotechnologies are set to transform the global industrial landscape, but the debate on how to regulate environmental, health and safety risks is lagging behind technological innovation. Current regulatory efforts are primarily focused on the national and regional level, while the international dimensions of nanotechnology governance are still poorly understood and rarely feature on the international agenda. However, with the ongoing globalization of nanosciences and the rapid expansion of international trade in nanomaterials, demand for international coordination and harmonization of regulatory approaches is set to increase. Yet, uncertainty about nanotechnology risk poses a profound dilemma for regulators and policy-makers. Uncertainty both creates demand for and stands in the way of greater international cooperation and harmonization of regulatory approaches. This article reviews the emerging debate on nanotechnology risk and regulatory approaches, investigates the current state of international cooperation and outlines the critical contribution that a global governance approach can make to the safe development of nanotechnologies. © 2012 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Falkner & Nico Jaspers, 2012. "Regulating Nanotechnologies: Risk, Uncertainty and the Global Governance Gap," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 12(1), pages 30-55, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:12:y:2012:i:1:p:30-55
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1162/GLEP_a_00096
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Justo-Hanani, Ronit & Dayan, Tamar, 2014. "The role of the state in regulatory policy for nanomaterials risk: Analyzing the expansion of state-centric rulemaking in EU and US chemicals policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 169-178.
    2. Sheona A. K. Read & Gary S. Kass & Hilary R. Sutcliffe & Steven M. Hankin, 2016. "Foresight Study on the Risk Governance of New Technologies: The Case of Nanotechnology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(5), pages 1006-1024, May.
    3. Justo-Hanani, Ronit & Dayan, Tamar, 2015. "European risk governance of nanotechnology: Explaining the emerging regulatory policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1527-1536.
    4. Serkan Erbis & Zeynep Ok & Jacqueline A. Isaacs & James C. Benneyan & Sagar Kamarthi, 2016. "Review of Research Trends and Methods in Nano Environmental, Health, and Safety Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1644-1665, August.
    5. Andreas Goldthau & Benjamin K. Sovacool, 2016. "Energy Technology, Politics, and Interpretative Frames: Shale Gas Fracking in Eastern Europe," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(4), pages 50-69, November.
    6. Tran, Van T. & Yiannaka, Amalia & Giannakas, Konstantinos, 2013. "Consumer Attitudes, Labeling Regimes and the Market Success of Food Nanotechnology," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 151262, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Heather Millar, 2020. "Problem Uncertainty, Institutional Insularity, and Modes of Learning in Canadian Provincial Hydraulic Fracturing Regulation," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(6), pages 765-796, November.
    8. Ronit Justo-Hanani & Tamar Dayan, 2016. "Explaining Transatlantic Policy Divergence: The Role of Domestic Politics and Policy Styles in Nanotechnology Risk Regulation," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(1), pages 79-98, February.
    9. Steinar Andresen & G. Kristin Rosendal & Jon Birger Skjærseth, 2018. "Regulating the invisible: interaction between the EU and Norway in managing nano-risks," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 513-528, August.
    10. Igor Linkov & Benjamin D. Trump & Elke Anklam & David Berube & Patrick Boisseasu & Christopher Cummings & Scott Ferson & Marie-Valentine Florin & Bernard Goldstein & Danail Hristozov & Keld Alstrup Je, 2018. "Comparative, collaborative, and integrative risk governance for emerging technologies," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 170-176, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:12:y:2012:i:1:p:30-55. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kelly McDougall (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.