Nanotechnology Lawyer & Attorney : Porter Wright Morris & Arthur : Nanotechnology Law Report - Germanium nanobead image provided by UT-Battelle, which manages Oak Ridge National Laboratory for the Department of Energy

The report, available on the Institute's website, lists twelve policy considerations that it believes should be considered as a policy framework is developed.  Those policy considerations are: 1) societal goals, 2) public education and engagement, 3) activity and information inventories, 4) identification of lead agencies, 5) technical issue identification such as terminology and metrology, 6) regulatory framework priority identification including risk assessment, science, and stakeholder involvement, 7) labeling and consumer protection, 8) liability and intellectual property issues, 9) support for science and research, 10) commercialization and economic benefits, 11) training, and 12) security.

The report delves into each consideration in more detail, but the Institute believes that each should be developed in order to establish a solid nanotechnology framework in Canada.

Interestingly, the report also touches on barriers to a national nanotechnology policy in Canada, many of which are the same as those facing the United States.  The report cites such policy development challenges as the lack of information and lack of tools to "deal responsibly" with nanomaterials already in commerce.  The needed tools the Institute points to include: standard definitions, labels, and data sheets, as well as "structures and resources for public education and engagement."  These are some of the very challenges facing policy development in the United States.

Through consideration of the twelve points above, the Institute believes that Canada can begin to create a policy framework.  The Institute states that at this early stage, "our proposed policy framework focuses on goals; on what needs to be attended to; and to a lesser extent how it should be done: the elements of a policy framework."

Clearly nanotechnology policy development is an international issue, with many, if not all, of the same challenges and questions arising for each country to delve into the regulatory questions surrounding nanotechnology.

The partnership agreement outlines the relationship, and includes such areas as human health hazards, release and exposure potential, and occupational and environmental risk management.  The framework will primarily focus on the industrial, chemical, and manufacturing industries, and each partner will bear its own costs of research.  Further, the parties plan to involve additional stakeholders throughout the project in an effort to form a framework that will be widely accepted across all areas of nanotechnology.  Once the partnership is complete (following publication of the findings) all information will be released publicly for consideration.  A draft framework is available here, and is open for comment.

MEH:  This is exactly the type of partnership that will forward the research and understanding of nanotechnology impacts and how to address them.  By having two differing views involved, an understanding can be reached that can then be spread to the industry at-large.  The more stakeholders that get involved in the process, the better the resulting research and regulations will be.  This partnership is an excellent first step, and both DuPont and Environmental Defense should be commended for their initiative.