TY - JOUR
T1 - Sustainable nanotechnology decision support system
T2 - bridging risk management, sustainable innovation and risk governance
AU - Subramanian, Vrishali
AU - Semenzin, Elena
AU - Hristozov, Danail
AU - Zabeo, Alex
AU - Malsch, Ineke
AU - McAlea, Eamonn
AU - Murphy, Finbarr
AU - Mullins, Martin
AU - van Harmelen, Toon
AU - Ligthart, Tom
AU - Linkov, Igor
AU - Marcomini, Antonio
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.
PY - 2016/4/1
Y1 - 2016/4/1
N2 - The significant uncertainties associated with the (eco)toxicological risks of engineered nanomaterials pose challenges to the development of nano-enabled products toward greatest possible societal benefit. This paper argues for the use of risk governance approaches to manage nanotechnology risks and sustainability, and considers the links between these concepts. Further, seven risk assessment and management criteria relevant to risk governance are defined: (a) life cycle thinking, (b) triple bottom line, (c) inclusion of stakeholders, (d) risk management, (e) benefit–risk assessment, (f) consideration of uncertainty, and (g) adaptive response. These criteria are used to compare five well-developed nanotechnology frameworks: International Risk Governance Council framework, Comprehensive Environmental Assessment, Streaming Life Cycle Risk Assessment, Certifiable Nanospecific Risk Management and Monitoring System and LICARA NanoSCAN. A Sustainable Nanotechnology Decision Support System (SUNDS) is proposed to better address current nanotechnology risk assessment and management needs, and makes. Stakeholder needs were solicited for further SUNDS enhancement through a stakeholder workshop that included representatives from regulatory, industry and insurance sectors. Workshop participants expressed the need for the wider adoption of sustainability assessment methods and tools for designing greener nanomaterials.
AB - The significant uncertainties associated with the (eco)toxicological risks of engineered nanomaterials pose challenges to the development of nano-enabled products toward greatest possible societal benefit. This paper argues for the use of risk governance approaches to manage nanotechnology risks and sustainability, and considers the links between these concepts. Further, seven risk assessment and management criteria relevant to risk governance are defined: (a) life cycle thinking, (b) triple bottom line, (c) inclusion of stakeholders, (d) risk management, (e) benefit–risk assessment, (f) consideration of uncertainty, and (g) adaptive response. These criteria are used to compare five well-developed nanotechnology frameworks: International Risk Governance Council framework, Comprehensive Environmental Assessment, Streaming Life Cycle Risk Assessment, Certifiable Nanospecific Risk Management and Monitoring System and LICARA NanoSCAN. A Sustainable Nanotechnology Decision Support System (SUNDS) is proposed to better address current nanotechnology risk assessment and management needs, and makes. Stakeholder needs were solicited for further SUNDS enhancement through a stakeholder workshop that included representatives from regulatory, industry and insurance sectors. Workshop participants expressed the need for the wider adoption of sustainability assessment methods and tools for designing greener nanomaterials.
KW - Decision support system
KW - Engineered nanomaterials
KW - Risk governance
KW - Risk management
KW - Sustainable nanotechnology
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84964045823&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11051-016-3375-4
DO - 10.1007/s11051-016-3375-4
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84964045823
SN - 1388-0764
VL - 18
SP - -
JO - Journal of Nanoparticle Research
JF - Journal of Nanoparticle Research
IS - 4
M1 - 89
ER -