Nanotech regulation 'can't wait'

Monday, 12 October 2009, 3:03 pm
Press Release: Science Media Centre

SMC NZ Alert
12/10/09

Nanotech regulation 'can't wait', call for adaptive policies

Nanotechnology is a rapidly advancing field, with hundreds of products containing nanomaterials already on the shelves and largely unknown health and environmental effects.

In a commentary published in top journal Nature Nanotechnology, University of Canterbury Professor Simon Brown critiques regulators' lack of decisive action.

He argues that callsNanotechnology, where it will receive wide international circulation, showing that New Zealand researchers are able to contribute at a high level in this area. The issues that are raised are important and, through the Royal Society Code of Ethics, we already require all of our scientists to strive to identify the impacts of their work (be it on nanomaterials or in any other area) and endeavour to assess and report on such impacts and seek to avoid or mitigate any adverse effects. This will include assisting the appropriate regulatory agencies if they need scientific input to adapt their governance and regulatory frameworks to account for issues that may arise with products containing new types of engineered nanomaterials."

Dr Donald Campbell, Principal Adviser (Public Health) at NZ Food Safety Authority, comments:

"I believe that the author's reasoning is based on a false premise. He assumes that it is the role of government to build confidence in these new technologies and in itself, and then argues for a system of regulation that he believes would achieve that end. He also argues against the Deficit Model, but then actually applies it himself (i.e. he recommends a governance model that is "informed", "transparent", "prospective" and "adaptive"). This leads him to some, in my opinion, costly and non-evidenced based from an effectiveness perspective regulatory proposals, such as mandatory labelling.

"A regulator's role is to ensure that unacceptable risks are not being posed. Determining what is acceptable is a social decision. Determining whether a product meets that standard is scientific.

"The author sees the public's confidence in the regulator as being an end in itself. Regulator's have an interest in the public's confidence, however that should not be their primary objective. They should be the best, most honest and most trustworthy regulator they can be, and the public's confidence should (but won't always) fall out of that endeavour.

In addition the author demonstrates a lack of understanding of science and how it works. For example, science is always questioning currently accepted theories and paradigms and does research testing them. This work has nothing to do with filling data gaps as his opening argument implies. Innovation should not be precluded simply because there is uncertainty; the risks arising from not having the new technology may be greater than the risks of living without it. New data will always influence scientific thinking and potentially lead to change. Regulators are always regulating in the face of uncertainty - it is something that they should understand and do, not wait until all uncertainty is gone before regulating."

Dr Shaun Hendy, Research scientist, Industrial Research Limited (IRL) and MacDiarmid Institute, comments:

"Dr Brown's article on the regulatory challenges ahead posed by nanotechnologies raises an important issue. In an industry where hazards are yet to be quantified, how do we adapt regulatory regimes to address as yet unknown risks? Risk can be quantified as the hazard from exposure
multiplied by the probability of exposure. Dr Brown argues that where hazard is unknown, we must ensure that risk can be minimised by enabling consumers to minimise exposure. This is a difficult task for policy makers: there is no possibility of a cost/benefit analysis to help determine the scale of the regulatory response and such regulations will inevitably restrict consumers' access to products that pose little hazard.

Nonetheless, I understand that New Zealand will follow Australia's lead, reviewing how well existing regulations encompass nanotechnologies. The Australian report concludes that "Whilst there is no immediate need for major changes to the regulatory regimes, there are many areas of our regulatory regimes which, potentially, will need amending, and this will be a long term effort across multiple regulators and regulatory agencies as nanoproducts arise and as new knowledge on hazards, exposure and monitoring tools becomes available." I suspect New Zealand will reach a
similar conclusion, so it is important that the relevant regulatory agencies maintain their awareness of nanotechnology and monitor developments here and overseas."

Notes to Editors

The Science Media Centre (SMC) is an independent source of expert comment and information for journalists covering science and technology in New Zealand. Our aim is to promote accurate, bias-free reporting on science and technology by helping the media work more closely with the scientific community. The SMC is an independent centre established by the Royal Society of New Zealand with funding from the Ministry of Research, Science and Technology. The views expressed in this Science Alert are those of the individuals and organisations indicated and do not reflect the views of the SMC or its employees. For further information about the centre, or to offer feedback, please email us at smc@sciencemediacentre.co.nz

ENDS

© Scoop Media

Science Media Centre NZ

Our aim is to promote accurate, evidence-based reporting on science and technology by helping the media work more closely with the scientific community.

The Science Media Centre is New Zealand's only trusted, independent source of information for the media on all issues related to science. Thousands of news stories providing context from and quoting New Zealand researchers have been published as a direct result of our work.

Contact Science Media Centre NZ

• Website - www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz
• Email - smc@sciencemediacentre.co.nz
• Phone - +64 4 499 5476
• Mobile - +64 21 859 365
• Facebook
• Twitter - @smcnz
• YouTube
• Postal Address - PO Box 598, Wellington 6140