Journal of Consumer Policy

, 32:393 | Cite as

“Nobody Told Me I was a Nano-Consumer:” How Nanotechnologies Might Challenge the Notion of Consumer Rights



Regarding nanotechnologies and the consumer, a central paradox is the absence of a regulatory framework while more than 1,000 nano-enabled products are already available on the consumer markets. This represents a serious challenge for the consumer interest. Even though the prospects of nanotechnologies are truly fascinating and represent possibilities to solve major problems—for instance in the realms of health, energy and poverty—it is important to also discuss the potential risks of nano-enabled products. The present study reports on a Norwegian study with data derived from focus groups, a content analysis of advertisements, packaging and labels for cosmetics as well as on a Norwegian consumer survey. Conceptually, the paper is based on the notion of consumer rights introduced by President J.F. Kennedy in 1962. Based on the results of these studies, consumer policy implications are sketched.


Consumer rights Nanotechnologies Nano-enabled products Consumer information 



We would like to thank our project colleagues Sally Randles and Christian Greiffenhagen at Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, as well as research director at SIFO and project leader of this project Eivind Stø for inspiring discussions and collaboration. We would also like to thank two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments. Financial support from the NANOMAT-programme of the Research Council of Norway is gratefully acknowledged (Project grant no. 182043).


  1. ANEC/BEUC (2009). Nanotechnology: Small is beautiful- but is it safe? Joint ANEC/BEUC position June 2009. Retrieved from:
  2. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society. Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Cleaning up water. (2008). Nature Materials, 7, 341–347, Editorial.Google Scholar
  4. DoE (Department of Energy). (2004). Nanoscale science, engineering and technology in the departement of energy. Retrieved from:
  5. Dubey, J. & Patel, R. P. (2004). Small wonders of the Indian market. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 4, 145–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. European Commission. (2007). REACH in brief. Retrieved from:
  7. European Parliament. (2006). Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union. Article 38 consumer protection. Retrieved from:
  8. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Giddens, A. (1994). Beyond left and right. The future of radical politics. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  10. Harland, D. (1988). The United Nations guidelines for consumer protection. Reply to the comment by Weidenbaum in JCP, 10, 1987/4. Journal of Consumer Policy, 11, 111–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hart, P. (2008). Awareness of and attitudes toward nanotechnology and synthetic biology. A report of findings. Washington. Retrieved from:
  12. Kennedy, J. F. (1962). Special message to the Congress on protecting the consumer interest. Statement read by President John F Kennedy. Thursday, 15 March 1962. Retrieved from:
  13. L’Oréal. (2008). Annual report 2008. Retrieved from:
  14. Marburger, J. (2002). John Marburger’s comments on "science based science policy" at the meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Retrieved from:
  15. Maynes, E. S. (Ed.) (1988). The frontier of research in the consumer interest. Columbia: American Council on Consumer Interests.Google Scholar
  16. NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration). (2008). Sailing ships in space? Maybe. Retrieved from:
  17. Norwegian Parliament. (2005). Debate on the report to the Norwegian Parliament on research. Stortinget - Møte torsdag den 16. juni 2005 kl. 10. Sak nr. 11. Innstilling fra kirke-, utdannings- og forskningskomiteen om vilje til forskning. Retrieved from:
  18. Orthen, B. (2007). Nanotechnology: Health and environmental risks of nanomaterials. Research strategy. Bundesanstalt für Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin/Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Germany. Retrieved from:
  19. PEN (Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies). (2009). Consumer products. An inventory of nanotechnology-based consumer products currently on the market. Retrieved from:
  20. RCEP (Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution). (2008). Novel materials in the environment: The case of nanotechnology. Report No. 27. Norwich: TSO.Google Scholar
  21. Rip, A. & Nordmann, A. (2009). Mind the gap revisited. Nature Nanotechnology, 4, 273–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Satterfield, T., Kandlikar, M., Beaudrie, E. H., Conti, J., & Harthorn, B. H. (2009). Anticipating the perceived risk of nanotechnologies. Nature Nanotechnology, 4, 1–7. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2009.265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. SFT (Norwegian Pollution Control Authority). (2008). Nanomaterialer - vurdering av regelverk og bruk. Answer on an assignment given by the Ministry of the Environment. Executive officer Ingrid Roland, 07.04.2008. Retrieved from:
  24. Swagler, R. M. (1997). Consumer rights. In S. Brobeck (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of the consumer movement (pp. 168–169). Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
  25. Throne-Holst, H., Randles, S., Greiffenhagen, C., Strandbakken, P., & Stø, E. (2009). Risk, responsibility, rights, regulation and representation in the value chain of nano-products. In S. Arnaldi, A. Lorenzet & F. Russo (Eds.), Technoscience in progress. Managing the uncertainty of nanotechnology (pp. 31–52). Amsterdam: IOS.Google Scholar
  26. Throne-Holst, H. & Stø, E. (2008). Who should be precautionary? Governance of nanotechnology in the risk society. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 20, 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. UN (United Nations). (2003). United Nations guidelines for consumer protection. Retrieved from:

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute for Consumer Research (SIFO)OsloNorway

Personalised recommendations