Governing Nanomedicine: Lessons from within, and for the EU medical technology regulatory framework.

Barbel R. Dorbeck-Jung, Diana M. Bowman, Geert van Calster

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Rapidly emerging technologies, such as nanotechnologies, are posing significant challenges to regulatory governance due to the uncertainties of development trajectories, product properties, and potential risk problems (Davies 2009). While nanotechnology-based products and processes fall within the scope of current regulatory instruments (European Commission 2008a; Ludlow, Bowman, and Hodge 2007; van Calster 2006), there is increasing concern that such frameworks may not be appropriate for adequately or effectively regulating all dimensions of the technology (see, for example, House of Lords Science and Technology Committee 2010; European Parliament 2009a; Chaudhry et al. 2006; Taylor 2008, 2006; Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering 2004). The traditional approach of evidencebased regulation is not equipped to cope with myriad uncertainties surrounding the development and commercialisation of nanotechnologies. This does not mean that public policy can wait and see, however. Even in the case of evidence deficiencies, public responsibility goes beyond a laissez-faire approach to risk regulation. In the European Union and some other countries, precautionary regulatory action is required when basic values like human dignity, health, safety, environment, property, and privacy are at risk (Fisher 2007; European Commission 2000).
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)online-online
JournalLaw & policy
Volumeonline
Issue numberonline
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010

Fingerprint

medical technology
nanotechnology
EU
European Commission
uncertainty
value
commercialization
academy
privacy
public policy
governance
engineering
regulation
responsibility
science
health

Keywords

  • METIS-271226
  • IR-78742

Cite this

Dorbeck-Jung, Barbel R. ; Bowman, Diana M. ; van Calster, Geert. / Governing Nanomedicine: Lessons from within, and for the EU medical technology regulatory framework. In: Law & policy. 2010 ; Vol. online, No. online. pp. online-online.
@article{3b4a5999e46c475dbc3d064d4edf6b3f,
title = "Governing Nanomedicine: Lessons from within, and for the EU medical technology regulatory framework.",
abstract = "Rapidly emerging technologies, such as nanotechnologies, are posing significant challenges to regulatory governance due to the uncertainties of development trajectories, product properties, and potential risk problems (Davies 2009). While nanotechnology-based products and processes fall within the scope of current regulatory instruments (European Commission 2008a; Ludlow, Bowman, and Hodge 2007; van Calster 2006), there is increasing concern that such frameworks may not be appropriate for adequately or effectively regulating all dimensions of the technology (see, for example, House of Lords Science and Technology Committee 2010; European Parliament 2009a; Chaudhry et al. 2006; Taylor 2008, 2006; Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering 2004). The traditional approach of evidencebased regulation is not equipped to cope with myriad uncertainties surrounding the development and commercialisation of nanotechnologies. This does not mean that public policy can wait and see, however. Even in the case of evidence deficiencies, public responsibility goes beyond a laissez-faire approach to risk regulation. In the European Union and some other countries, precautionary regulatory action is required when basic values like human dignity, health, safety, environment, property, and privacy are at risk (Fisher 2007; European Commission 2000).",
keywords = "METIS-271226, IR-78742",
author = "Dorbeck-Jung, {Barbel R.} and Bowman, {Diana M.} and {van Calster}, Geert",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.1111/j.1467-9930.2010.00335.x",
language = "English",
volume = "online",
pages = "online--online",
journal = "Law & policy",
issn = "0265-8240",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "online",

}

Governing Nanomedicine: Lessons from within, and for the EU medical technology regulatory framework. / Dorbeck-Jung, Barbel R.; Bowman, Diana M.; van Calster, Geert.

In: Law & policy, Vol. online, No. online, 2010, p. online-online.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Governing Nanomedicine: Lessons from within, and for the EU medical technology regulatory framework.

AU - Dorbeck-Jung, Barbel R.

AU - Bowman, Diana M.

AU - van Calster, Geert

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Rapidly emerging technologies, such as nanotechnologies, are posing significant challenges to regulatory governance due to the uncertainties of development trajectories, product properties, and potential risk problems (Davies 2009). While nanotechnology-based products and processes fall within the scope of current regulatory instruments (European Commission 2008a; Ludlow, Bowman, and Hodge 2007; van Calster 2006), there is increasing concern that such frameworks may not be appropriate for adequately or effectively regulating all dimensions of the technology (see, for example, House of Lords Science and Technology Committee 2010; European Parliament 2009a; Chaudhry et al. 2006; Taylor 2008, 2006; Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering 2004). The traditional approach of evidencebased regulation is not equipped to cope with myriad uncertainties surrounding the development and commercialisation of nanotechnologies. This does not mean that public policy can wait and see, however. Even in the case of evidence deficiencies, public responsibility goes beyond a laissez-faire approach to risk regulation. In the European Union and some other countries, precautionary regulatory action is required when basic values like human dignity, health, safety, environment, property, and privacy are at risk (Fisher 2007; European Commission 2000).

AB - Rapidly emerging technologies, such as nanotechnologies, are posing significant challenges to regulatory governance due to the uncertainties of development trajectories, product properties, and potential risk problems (Davies 2009). While nanotechnology-based products and processes fall within the scope of current regulatory instruments (European Commission 2008a; Ludlow, Bowman, and Hodge 2007; van Calster 2006), there is increasing concern that such frameworks may not be appropriate for adequately or effectively regulating all dimensions of the technology (see, for example, House of Lords Science and Technology Committee 2010; European Parliament 2009a; Chaudhry et al. 2006; Taylor 2008, 2006; Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering 2004). The traditional approach of evidencebased regulation is not equipped to cope with myriad uncertainties surrounding the development and commercialisation of nanotechnologies. This does not mean that public policy can wait and see, however. Even in the case of evidence deficiencies, public responsibility goes beyond a laissez-faire approach to risk regulation. In the European Union and some other countries, precautionary regulatory action is required when basic values like human dignity, health, safety, environment, property, and privacy are at risk (Fisher 2007; European Commission 2000).

KW - METIS-271226

KW - IR-78742

U2 - 10.1111/j.1467-9930.2010.00335.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1467-9930.2010.00335.x

M3 - Article

VL - online

SP - online-online

JO - Law & policy

JF - Law & policy

SN - 0265-8240

IS - online

ER -