A response to ‘Nanotechnology and the need for risk governance’, O. Renn & M.C. Roco, 2006. J. Nanoparticle Research 8(2): 153–191
- 176 Downloads
In the April 2006 issue of the Journal of Nanoparticle Research, Renn and Roco wrote a thorough analysis of the future of nanotechnology and the concomitant process of risk governance (Renn and Roco 2006a). Their view was based on the first white paper on risk governance of the International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) (Renn 2005) and also published as the second IRGC white paper (Renn and Roco 2006b). Approximately at the same time, the Health Council of the Netherlands published an advisory report on the health significance of nanotechnologies based on our work in an ad hoc committee (Health Council of the Netherlands 2006). In the final chapter of this report, we argued in favour of the establishment of sound procedures for democratic, scientifically informed, control and decision-making and independently proposed that the risk governance framework of the IRGC (Renn 2005) may serve this purpose. In this letter, we draw a comparison between the results of both efforts to use the...
KeywordsFullerene Risk Issue Risk Management Strategy Risk Governance Human Enhancement
- Health Council of the Netherlands (2006) Health significance of nanotechnologies. The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands; publication no. 2006/06E; www.healthcouncil.nlGoogle Scholar
- Renn O (2005) White paper on risk governance; towards an integrative approach. White paper no. 1. Geneva: International Risk Governance Council; www.irgc.orgGoogle Scholar
- Renn O, Roco MC (2006b) White paper on nanotechnology risk governance. White paper no. 2. Geneva: International Risk Governance Council; www.irgc.orgGoogle Scholar
- Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) (2005) Opinion on the appropriateness of existing methodologies to assess the potential risks associated with engineered and adventitious products of nanotechnologies. Brussels: European Commission, Health & Consumer Protection Directorate-General, Directorate C—Public Health and Risk AssessmentGoogle Scholar