Abstract
Engineered nanoscale materials (ENMs) present a difficult challenge for risk assessors and regulators. Continuing uncertainty about the potential risks of ENMs means that expert opinion will play an important role in the design of policies to minimize harmful implications while supporting innovation. This research aims to shed light on the views of ‘nano experts’ to understand which nanomaterials or applications are regarded as more risky than others, to characterize the differences in risk perceptions between expert groups, and to evaluate the factors that drive these perceptions. Our analysis draws from a web-survey (N = 404) of three groups of US and Canadian experts: nano-scientists and engineers, nano-environmental health and safety scientists, and regulatory scientists and decision-makers. Significant differences in risk perceptions were found across expert groups; differences found to be driven by underlying attitudes and perceptions characteristic of each group. Nano-scientists and engineers at the upstream end of the nanomaterial life cycle perceived the lowest levels of risk, while those who are responsible for assessing and regulating risks at the downstream end perceived the greatest risk. Perceived novelty of nanomaterial risks, differing preferences for regulation (i.e. the use of precaution versus voluntary or market-based approaches), and perceptions of the risk of technologies in general predicted variation in experts' judgments of nanotechnology risks. Our findings underscore the importance of involving a diverse selection of experts, particularly those with expertise at different stages along the nanomaterial lifecycle, during policy development.
Highlights
Rapid advances in promising new nanotechnologies have been accompanied by mounting concerns over their human health and environmental risks – concerns that are exacerbated by the uncertainties inherent in this still-emerging domain [1]
We found that perceptions of risk from other technologies, measured here with a comprehensive set of technologies frequently studied in the risk literature, proved to be a good predictor of risk perceptions for nanotechnologies
This research shows that differences in nanotechnology risk perceptions across expert groups are not driven by the group distinction per se, but rather are the result of characteristic perceptions and attitudes of the experts within each group
Summary
Rapid advances in promising new nanotechnologies have been accompanied by mounting concerns over their human health and environmental risks – concerns that are exacerbated by the uncertainties inherent in this still-emerging domain [1]. Some have argued that risks from engineered nanoscale technologies are not novel [5]; whereas policy analysts have found gaps in existing regulations and have identified numerous challenges for risk assessment These include a high degree of scientific uncertainty, a paucity of nanomaterial risk data, and a lack of nano-specific risk assessment tools [1,4,6,7]. The result is that regulatory agencies may be ill prepared for assessing and managing risks from emerging nanotechnologies [8] Given these challenges, expert opinion will play an important role in the formulation of policies and programs to address nanomaterial risks [9]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
