Cargando…

Scientists versus Regulators: Precaution, Novelty & Regulatory Oversight as Predictors of Perceived Risks of Engineered Nanomaterials

Engineered nanoscale materials (ENMs) present a difficult challenge for risk assessors and regulators. Continuing uncertainty about the potential risks of ENMs means that expert opinion will play an important role in the design of policies to minimize harmful implications while supporting innovation...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Beaudrie, Christian E. H., Satterfield, Terre, Kandlikar, Milind, Harthorn, Barbara H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4164444/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25222742
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106365
_version_ 1782334956932956160
author Beaudrie, Christian E. H.
Satterfield, Terre
Kandlikar, Milind
Harthorn, Barbara H.
author_facet Beaudrie, Christian E. H.
Satterfield, Terre
Kandlikar, Milind
Harthorn, Barbara H.
author_sort Beaudrie, Christian E. H.
collection PubMed
description Engineered nanoscale materials (ENMs) present a difficult challenge for risk assessors and regulators. Continuing uncertainty about the potential risks of ENMs means that expert opinion will play an important role in the design of policies to minimize harmful implications while supporting innovation. This research aims to shed light on the views of ‘nano experts’ to understand which nanomaterials or applications are regarded as more risky than others, to characterize the differences in risk perceptions between expert groups, and to evaluate the factors that drive these perceptions. Our analysis draws from a web-survey (N = 404) of three groups of US and Canadian experts: nano-scientists and engineers, nano-environmental health and safety scientists, and regulatory scientists and decision-makers. Significant differences in risk perceptions were found across expert groups; differences found to be driven by underlying attitudes and perceptions characteristic of each group. Nano-scientists and engineers at the upstream end of the nanomaterial life cycle perceived the lowest levels of risk, while those who are responsible for assessing and regulating risks at the downstream end perceived the greatest risk. Perceived novelty of nanomaterial risks, differing preferences for regulation (i.e. the use of precaution versus voluntary or market-based approaches), and perceptions of the risk of technologies in general predicted variation in experts' judgments of nanotechnology risks. Our findings underscore the importance of involving a diverse selection of experts, particularly those with expertise at different stages along the nanomaterial lifecycle, during policy development.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4164444
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41644442014-09-19 Scientists versus Regulators: Precaution, Novelty & Regulatory Oversight as Predictors of Perceived Risks of Engineered Nanomaterials Beaudrie, Christian E. H. Satterfield, Terre Kandlikar, Milind Harthorn, Barbara H. PLoS One Research Article Engineered nanoscale materials (ENMs) present a difficult challenge for risk assessors and regulators. Continuing uncertainty about the potential risks of ENMs means that expert opinion will play an important role in the design of policies to minimize harmful implications while supporting innovation. This research aims to shed light on the views of ‘nano experts’ to understand which nanomaterials or applications are regarded as more risky than others, to characterize the differences in risk perceptions between expert groups, and to evaluate the factors that drive these perceptions. Our analysis draws from a web-survey (N = 404) of three groups of US and Canadian experts: nano-scientists and engineers, nano-environmental health and safety scientists, and regulatory scientists and decision-makers. Significant differences in risk perceptions were found across expert groups; differences found to be driven by underlying attitudes and perceptions characteristic of each group. Nano-scientists and engineers at the upstream end of the nanomaterial life cycle perceived the lowest levels of risk, while those who are responsible for assessing and regulating risks at the downstream end perceived the greatest risk. Perceived novelty of nanomaterial risks, differing preferences for regulation (i.e. the use of precaution versus voluntary or market-based approaches), and perceptions of the risk of technologies in general predicted variation in experts' judgments of nanotechnology risks. Our findings underscore the importance of involving a diverse selection of experts, particularly those with expertise at different stages along the nanomaterial lifecycle, during policy development. Public Library of Science 2014-09-15 /pmc/articles/PMC4164444/ /pubmed/25222742 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106365 Text en © 2014 Beaudrie et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Beaudrie, Christian E. H.
Satterfield, Terre
Kandlikar, Milind
Harthorn, Barbara H.
Scientists versus Regulators: Precaution, Novelty & Regulatory Oversight as Predictors of Perceived Risks of Engineered Nanomaterials
title Scientists versus Regulators: Precaution, Novelty & Regulatory Oversight as Predictors of Perceived Risks of Engineered Nanomaterials
title_full Scientists versus Regulators: Precaution, Novelty & Regulatory Oversight as Predictors of Perceived Risks of Engineered Nanomaterials
title_fullStr Scientists versus Regulators: Precaution, Novelty & Regulatory Oversight as Predictors of Perceived Risks of Engineered Nanomaterials
title_full_unstemmed Scientists versus Regulators: Precaution, Novelty & Regulatory Oversight as Predictors of Perceived Risks of Engineered Nanomaterials
title_short Scientists versus Regulators: Precaution, Novelty & Regulatory Oversight as Predictors of Perceived Risks of Engineered Nanomaterials
title_sort scientists versus regulators: precaution, novelty & regulatory oversight as predictors of perceived risks of engineered nanomaterials
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4164444/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25222742
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106365
work_keys_str_mv AT beaudriechristianeh scientistsversusregulatorsprecautionnoveltyregulatoryoversightaspredictorsofperceivedrisksofengineerednanomaterials
AT satterfieldterre scientistsversusregulatorsprecautionnoveltyregulatoryoversightaspredictorsofperceivedrisksofengineerednanomaterials
AT kandlikarmilind scientistsversusregulatorsprecautionnoveltyregulatoryoversightaspredictorsofperceivedrisksofengineerednanomaterials
AT harthornbarbarah scientistsversusregulatorsprecautionnoveltyregulatoryoversightaspredictorsofperceivedrisksofengineerednanomaterials