Journal of Nanoparticle Research

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 1341–1343 | Cite as

Introduction: designing nanobiotechnology oversight

  • Leili FatehiEmail author
  • Susan M. Wolf
  • Gurumurthy Ramachandran
  • Jennifer Kuzma
Special focus: Governance of Nanobiotechnology

Nanobiotechnology has potential for enormous good: the ability to create new and improved health and medical applications to diagnose and treat many diseases and disorders that continue to elude conventional interventions, environmental remediation techniques to treat soil and water contamination, and agricultural products to improve farming practices and enable biorenewable sources of energy. A convergence of nanoscale science and engineering with molecular biology and biomedical engineering, nanobiotechnology involves the use of nanotechnology tools to engineer biological materials with novel properties or to engineer nanomaterials that are derived from or mimic biological materials. Just as nanotechnology expands the boundaries of physics and chemistry by enabling the understanding, manipulation, and control of materials at the nanoscale to produce novel physiochemical properties, nanobiotechnology expands the boundaries of biology that have proven to be obstacles for biomedical...


Human Subject Research National Nanotechnology Initiative Working Group Member Oversight System Public Policy Perspective 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Preparation of this article was supported by National Science Foundation (NSF) grant #0608791, “NIRT: Evaluating Oversight Models for Active Nanostructures and Nanosystems: Learning from Past Technologies in a Societal Context” (Principal Investigator: S. M. Wolf; Co-PIs: E. Kokkoli, J. Kuzma, J. Paradise, and G. Ramachandran). The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF. Thanks to the project’s Working Group members: Profs. Susan Foote, Ralph Hall, Christy Haynes, Terrance Hurley, Jeffrey Kahn, Bradley Karkkainen, Kristen Nelson, David Pui, T. Andrew Taton, and Elizabeth Wilson (University of Minnesota); Prof. Stephen Ekker (Mayo Clinic College of Medicine); Robert Hoerr (Nanocopoeia, Inc.); Robbin Johnson (Cargill Foundation); George Kimbrell (International Center for Technology Assessment and the Center for Food Safety); Prof. Andrew Maynard (University of Michigan); and Prof. Susanna Hornig Priest (University of Nevada, Las Vegas). Thanks also to the project’s Advisory Board members: David Chittenden (Science Museum of Minnesota); Judy Crane (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency); Prof. Linda Hogle (University of Wisconsin, Madison); Prof. William Kay (Northeastern University); Prof. Milind Kandlikar (University of British Columbia); and Maria Powell (Nanotechnology Citizen Engagement Organization). Thanks to Research Assistant Katie Wolf for editorial assistance with this symposium.


  1. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) (2010) Manual of policies and procedures: reporting format for nanotechnology-related information in CMC review. CDER, Silver SpringGoogle Scholar
  2. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2008) Toxic substances control act inventory status of carbon nanotubes. Federal Register 73:64946Google Scholar
  3. Kuzma J, Romanchek J, Kokotovich A (2008) Upstream oversight assessment for agrifood nanotechnology: a case studies approach. Risk Anal 28:1081–1098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (2009) Approaches to safe nanotechnology: managing the health and safety concerns associated with engineered nanomaterialsGoogle Scholar
  5. National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) (2010) Supplement to the President’s 2011 Budget. Report prepared by the National Science and Technology Council Committee of Technology, Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  6. Paradise J, Tisdale AW, Hall RF, Kokkoli E (2009) Evaluating oversight of human drugs and medical devices: a case Study of the FDA and implications for nanobiotechnology. J Law Med Ethics 37:598–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ramachandran G, Wolf SM, Paradise J, Kuzma J, Hall R, Kokkoli E, Fatehi L (2010) Recommendations for oversight of nanobiotechnology: dynamic oversight for complex and convergent technologies (cite to publication in this volume)Google Scholar
  8. Wolf SM, Ramachandran G, Kuzma J, Paradise J (eds) (2009) Symposium on Developing oversight approaches to nanobiotechnology: the lessons of history. J Law Med Ethics 37:543–789Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leili Fatehi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Susan M. Wolf
    • 2
  • Gurumurthy Ramachandran
    • 3
  • Jennifer Kuzma
    • 4
  1. 1.Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, Law School University of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, Law School, Medical School, Center for BioethicsUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  3. 3.Division of Environmental Health SciencesSchool of Public Health, University of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  4. 4.Humphrey Institute of Public AffairsUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations