journal article·2012-03

Governance implications of nanomaterials companies’ inconsistent risk perceptions and safety practices

Cassandra D. Engeman, Lynn Baumgartner, Benjamin M. Carr, Allison M. Fish, John D. Meyerhofer, Terre A. Satterfield, Patricia A. Holden, Barbara Herr Harthorn

Journal of Nanoparticle Research· Volume 14· Issue 3
Publisher page

Abstract

Current research on the nanotechnology industry indicates its downstream expansion at a rapid pace, while toxicological research and best practices for environmental health and safety are still being developed. Companies that use and/or produce engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) have enormous potential to influence safe-handling practices for ENMs across the product life cycle. Knowledge of both industry practices and leaders’ perceptions of risk is vital for understanding how companies will act to control potential environmental and health risks. This article reports results from a new international survey of nanomaterials companies in 14 countries. In this survey, company participants reported relatively high levels of uncertainty and/or perceived risk with regard to ENMs. However, these perspectives were not accompanied by expected risk-avoidant practices or preferences for regulatory oversight. A majority of companies indicated “lack of information” as a significant impediment to implementing nano-specific safety practices, but they also reported practices that were inconsistent with widely available guidance. Additionally, in the absence of safe-handling regulations, companies reported nano-specific health and safety programs that were narrow in scope. Taken together, these findings indicate that health and safety guidance is not reaching industry. While industry leaders’ reluctance toward regulation might be expected, their own reported unsafe practices and recognition of possible risks suggest a more top-down approach from regulators is needed to protect workers and the environment.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Nanoparticles: synthesis and applications · Sustainable Supply Chain Management · Occupational Health and Safety Research

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (50)

Show source-provided references
1. Balas F, Arruebo M, Urrutia J, Santamaria J (2010) Reported nanosafety practices in research laboratories worldwide. Nat Nanotechnol 5:93–9610.1038/nnano.2010.1 ↗
2. Behra R, Krug H (2008) Nanoparticles at large. Nat Nanotechnol 3:253–25410.1038/nnano.2008.113 ↗
3. Bernard HR (ed) (1998) Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek
4. California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) (2008) Chemical information call-in. http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/pollutionprevention/chemical_call_in.cfm . Accessed June 1, 2011
5. California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) (2010) Chemical information call-in: nano metals, nano metal oxides, and quantum dots. http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/TechnologyDevelopment/Nanotechnology/nanometalcallin.cfm . Accessed June 1, 2011
6. City of Berkeley (2007) Amending Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Section 15.12.040 to add Subsection I and amending BMC Section 15.12.050 to add Subsection C.7, regarding manufactured nanoparticle health and safety disclosure, January 11, 2007. Ordinance No. 6,960-N.S. http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/citycouncil/ordinances/2006/6960.pdf . Accessed June 1, 2011
7. Conti J, Killpack K, Gerritzen G, Huang L, Mircheva M, Delmas M, Harthorn BH, Appelbaum RP, Holden PA (2008) Health and safety practices in the nanomaterials workplace: results from an international survey. Environ Sci Technol 42:3155–316210.1021/es702158q ↗
8. Conti J, Satterfield T, Harthorn BH (2011) Vulnerability and social justice as factors in emergent US nanotechnology risk perceptions. Risk Anal. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01608.x10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01608.x ↗
9. Dietz T, Stern P (eds) (2008) Public participation in environmental assessment and decision making. National Academic Press, Washington, DC
10. Federal Council (2008) Action plan: synthetic nanomaterials, April 2008. http://www.umwelt-schweiz.ch/div-4002-e . Accessed June 1, 2009
11. Helland A, Kastenholz H, Thidell A, Arnfalk P, Deppert K (2006) Nanoparticulate materials and regulatory policy in Europe: an analysis of stakeholder perspectives. J Nanopart Res 8:709–71910.1007/s11051-006-9096-3 ↗
12. Helland A, Kastenholz H, Siegrist M (2008a) Precaution in practice: perceptions, procedures, and performance in the nanotech industry. J Ind Ecol 12:449–45810.1111/j.1530-9290.2008.00053.x ↗
13. Helland A, Scheringer M, Siegrist M, Kastenholz HG, Wiek A, Scholz RW (2008b) Risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials: a survey of industrial approaches. Environ Sci Technol 42:640–64610.1021/es062807i ↗
14. Kahan DM (2009) The evolution of risk perceptions. Nat Nanotechnol 4:705–70610.1038/nnano.2009.329 ↗
15. Kahan DM, Braman D, Slovic P, Gastil J, Cohen G (2009) Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Nat Nanotechnol 4:87–9010.1038/nnano.2008.341 ↗
16. Lux Research, Inc. (2007) The nanotech report: investment overview and market research for nanotechnology, vol 1, 5th edn. Lux Research, Inc, Boston
17. Lux Research, Inc. (2009) The recession’s ripple effect on nanotech. Lux Research, Inc., Boston
18. Maynard AD (2007) Nanotechnology: the next big thing, or much ado about nothing? Ann Occup Hyg 51:1–1210.1093/annhyg/mel071 ↗
19. Maynard AD et al (2006) Safe handling of nanotechnology. Nature 444:267–26910.1038/444267a ↗
20. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (JNIOSH) (2009) Notification on precautionary measures for prevention of exposure etc. to nanomaterials (NMs), March 2009. http://www.jniosh.go.jp/joho/nano/index_e.html . Accessed June 1, 2009
21. Morris J, Willis J, De Martinis D, Hansen B, Laursen H, Sintes JR, Kearns P, Gonzalez M (2011) Science policy considerations for responsible nanotechnology decisions. Nat Nanotechnol 6:73–7710.1038/nnano.2010.191 ↗
22. National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (2009) Approaches to safe nanotechnology: managing the health and safety concerns associated with engineered nanomaterials, DHHS, Publication Number 2009-125, March 2009. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2009-125/ . Accessed June 1, 2009
23. Nel A, Xia T, Madler L, Li N (2006) Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel. Science 311:622–62710.1126/science.1114397 ↗
24. Oberdorster G, Oberdorster E, Oberdorster J (2005) Nanotoxicology: an emerging discipline evolving from studies of ultrafine particles. Environ Health Perspect 113:823–83910.1289/ehp.7339 ↗
25. Ostrowski A, Martin T, Conti J, Hurt I, Harthorn BH (2009) Nanotoxicology: characterizing the scientific literature, 2000–2007. J Nanopart Res 11:251–25710.1007/s11051-008-9579-5 ↗
26. Pagell M, Gobeli D (2009) How plant managers’ experiences and attitudes toward sustainability relate to operational performance. Prod Oper Manag 18:278–29910.1111/j.1937-5956.2009.01050.x ↗
27. Pidgeon N, Kasperson R, Slovic P (eds) (2003) The social amplification of risk. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
28. Pidgeon NF, Poortinga W, Rowe G, Horlick-Jones T, Walls J, O’Riordan T (2005) Using surveys in public participation processes for risk decision-making: the case of the 2003 British GM nation public debate. Risk Anal 25:467–48010.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00603.x ↗
29. Richman EK, Hutchison JE (2009) The nanomaterial characterization bottleneck. ACS Nano 3:2441–244610.1021/nn901112p ↗
30. Safe Work Australia (2009) Engineered nanomaterials: evidence on the effectiveness of workplace controls to prevent exposure, November 2009. http://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/AboutSafeWorkAustralia/WhatWeDo/Publications/Documents/312/EngineeredNanomaterials_Evidence_Effectiveness_WorkplaceControlsToPreventExposure_2009_PDF.pdf . Accessed December 1, 2009
31. Satterfield T, Kandlikar M, Beaudrie CEH, Conti J, Harthorn BH (2009) Anticipating the perceived risk of nanotechnologies. Nat Nanotechnol 4:752–75810.1038/nnano.2009.265 ↗
32. Scheringer M (2008) Environmental risks of nanomaterials. Nat Nanotechnol 3:322–32310.1038/nnano.2008.145 ↗
33. Scheufele DA, Corley EA, Dunwoody S, Shih T, Hillback E, Guston DH (2007) Scientists worry about some risks more than the public. Nat Nanotechnol 2:732–73410.1038/nnano.2007.392 ↗
34. Schmid K, Reidiker M (2008) Use of nanoparticles in Swiss industry: a targeted survey. Environ Sci Technol 42:2253–226010.1021/es071818o ↗
35. Schmid K, Danuser B, Riediker M (2010) Nanoparticle usage and protection measures in the manufacturing industry—a representative survey. J Occup Environ Hyg 7:224–23210.1080/15459621003609127 ↗
36. Shapira P, Youtie J, Kay L (2011) National innovation systems and the globalization of nanotechnology innovation. J Technol Transfer. doi: 10.1007/s10961-011-9212-0
37. Slovic P (2000) The perception of risk. Earthscan, London
38. Stern P, Fineberg H (eds) (1996) Understanding risk: informing decisions in a democratic society. National Academic Press, Washington, DC
39. The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) International (2007) Standard guide for handling unbound engineered nanoscale particles in occupational settings. ASTM. doi: 10.1520/E2535-0710.1520/E2535-07 ↗
40. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union (EC) (2007) Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006, May 29, 2007. Official Journal of the European Union L 136, 3-17. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:136:0003:0280:EN:PDF . Accessed June 1, 2011
41. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union (EC) (2009) Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council, November 30, 2009. Official Journal of the European Union L 342, 59-209; http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:342:0059:0209:en:PDF . Accessed June 1, 2011
42. The Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA) (2007) Guidance for handling and use of nanomaterials at the workplace, August 2007. http://www.baua.de/en/Topics-from-A-to-Z/Hazardous-Substances/Nanotechnology/pdf/guidance.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 . Accessed June 1, 2009
43. The International Standards Organization (ISO) (2008) Nanotechnologies—health and safety practices in occupational setting relevant to nanotechnologies. ISO/TR 12885:2008
44. The International Standards Organization (ISO) (2011) Nanotechnologies—Nanomaterial risk evaluation. ISO/TR 13121:2011
45. UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) (2008) UK voluntary reporting scheme for engineered nanoscale materials. http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/nanotech/documents/vrs-nanoscale.pdf . Accessed June 1, 2011
46. UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) (2009) Risk management of carbon nanotubes, March 2009. http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/web38.pdf . Accessed June 1, 2009
47. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2006) Toxic Substance Control Act inventory status of carbon nanotubes. http://www.epa.gov/EPA-TOX/2008/October/Day-31/t26026.htm . Accessed June 1, 2011
48. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2008) TSCA inventory status of nanoscale substances—general approach. http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems/index.htm . Accessed June 1, 2011
49. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2011) Multi-walled carbon nanotubes; Significant New Use Rule, May 6, 2011. Fed Regist 76(88):26186–26192. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-05-06/pdf/2011-11127.pdf . Accessed June 1, 2011
50. Woskie S (2010) Workplace practices for engineered nanomaterial manufacturers. WIREs Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 2:685–69210.1002/wnan.101 ↗