Microtechnology Focus The Responsible NanoCode


“


The market for nanotechnology is rapidly expanding and has been predicted to be associated with 15% of all manufactured goods by 2014, worth roughly $2.6 trillion and equating to 10 million jobs worldwide [1]. This growth is occurring against a relatively slower pace of research into the risk [2], toxicology [3], fate and ecotoxicology of manufactured nanomaterials [4]. The risk governance of nanotechnology applications in food and cosmetics has recently been detailed and the need for a voluntary code was highlighted in order to earn a ‘licence to operate’ in an attempt to avoid a restrictive cycle developing in the nanotechnology debate [5].


A nanoscale particle (for example see Figure 1) has at least one dimension in the range of 1nm to 100nm (note 1nm =10-9


m). In this range, materials can have


substantially different properties compared to the same substances at larger sizes, due to the significantly increased ratio of surface area to mass as well as the role of quantum effects which become significant towards the lower end of this range, leading to significant changes in several types of physical properties [6].


manufacturing, distribution and retailing) with the overall aim that compliance with the Responsible NanoCode would be seen as a beneficial exercise for a company enabling them to demonstrate responsible use and growth.


Seven Principles were defined to reflect all aspects of business, as below:-


Principle One - Board Accountability


Each Organisation should ensure that accountability for guiding and managing its involvement with nanotechnologies resides with the Board or with an appropriate senior executive or committee


Principle Two - Stakeholder Involvement


Each Organisation should identify its nanotechnology stakeholders, proactively engage with them and be responsive to their views


Principle Three - Worker Health and Safety


Each Organisation should ensure high standards of occupational health and safety for its workers handling nano-materials and nano-enabled products. It should also consider occupational health and safety issues for workers at other stages of the product lifecycle


Companies that use the Code are encouraged to demonstrate their adherence to the principles of the Responsible NanoCode on a ‘comply or explain’ basis.


Figure 1. Scanning Electron Micrograph of PZT (lead zirconate titanate)


DEVELOPMENT OF THE RESPONSIBLE NANOCODE


In 2006, the Royal Society, Insight Investment and the Nanotechnology Industries Association began a partnership to develop a voluntary code of conduct for businesses involved in nanotechnologies as a result of concerns raised by the Royal Society. Alongside this, the investment community, notably Insight Investments, had also identified potential investment issues. It was believed that it was important that the business community participated in the development of a Code of Conduct related to the safe use of nanotechnology and nanomaterials based products. Later on the Nanotechnology Knowledge Transfer Network also joined the partnership.


The code was developed by an independent working group comprising experts from business, non-governmental organisations and academics:-


Companies:- BASF, Johnson & Johnson, Johnson Matthey, Oxonica, Smith & Nephew, Tesco, Thomas Swan and Unilever.


Academics/Scientists: Institute of Occupational Medicine, Edinburgh Napier University, University of Sheffield and University of Cardiff.


Unions/NGOs:- Amicus, Which? and Practical Action.


Author Details: Simon Collinson1


Barry Park2 Rocks1


, Sarah Alarcon1 , Steffi Friedrichs3


, Robert Dorey1 ,


Rachel Crossley4, Hilary Sutcliffe5 David Grayson1


, , Sophie , and Simon Pollard1


Risk Centre, Cranfield University, Cranfield, MK43 0AL1


, Responsible Nanoforum5 ,


www.cranfield.ac.uk/sas/risk/nanocode/ www.responsiblenanocode.org


, NanoKTN2 ,


Nanotechnology Industries Association3 Insight Investment4


, .


It was not intended that this Responsible NanoCode should replace or prevent the development of future regulation for nanotechnologies; however, given the absence of comprehensive appropriate legislation, it aimed to provide clear guidance about the expected behaviour of companies in relation to their nanotechnology activities. It was believed that the Code and the process of its development might assist with the evolution of such legislation by clarifying the principles that could underpin more detailed, verifiable, regulations.


The Responsible NanoCode, like other principles-based codes, illustrates expected behaviours and processes rather than the standards of performance. The Responsible NanoCode was not intended, however, to be an auditable standard; it does not detail levels of performance expected of companies, nor does it give guidance on definitions, characterisation and measurement. The voluntary code was aimed at promoting best practice within this emerging industry (i.e. from research and development to


Principle Four - Public Health, Safety & Environmental Risks


Each Organisation should carry out thorough risk assessments and minimise any potential public health, safety or environmental risks relating to its products using nanotechnologies. It should also consider the public health, safety and environmental risks throughout the product lifecycle


Principle Five - Wider Social, Ethical Environmental & Health Impacts


Each Organisation should consider and contribute to addressing the wider social, environmental, health and ethical implications and impacts of their involvement with nanotechnologies.


Principle Six - Engaging with Business Partners


Each Organisation should engage proactively, openly and co-operatively with business partners to encourage and stimulate their adoption of the Code


Principle Seven - Transparency and Disclosure


Each Organisation should be open and transparent about its involvement with and management of nanotechnologies and report regularly and clearly on how it implements the Responsible Nano Code


Companies that use the Code are encouraged to demonstrate their adherence to the principles of the Responsible NanoCode on a ‘comply or explain’ basis.


Previous codes adopting this approach lay down rules or guidance and companies are encouraged to publicly explain how they either comply with them or why they do not, usually through statements in their annual or social reports. It was also the intention of the working group to develop a code that has international relevance, reflecting the increasingly trans-boundary nature of manufacture and use of such technologies.


As part of the international launch of the Code, a consultation process was conducted in Europe, USA and Australia. As an example, an interactive session was held in Washington DC to launch the Code at an event organised by the Project for Emerging Nanotechnologies of the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars.


These consultations provided opportunities for experts to offer their initial views and to comment on the Code. In addition, it was possible for interested parties to submit comments directly via the Code’s website.


“


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68