Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1632531
 
 

References (61)



 
 

Citations (2)



 


 



Developing U.S. Oversight Strategies for Nanobiotechnology: Learning from Past Oversight Experiences


Jordan Paradise


Seton Hall University - School of Law

Susan M. Wolf


University of Minnesota Law School

Jennifer Kuzma


University of Minnesota, Twin Cities - Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs

Aliya Kuzhabekova


University of Minnesota - Twin Cities

Alison Tisdale


University of Minnesota - Twin Cities - Dept of Sociology

Efrosini Kokkoli, PhD


University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

Gurumurthy Ramachandran, PhD


University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

December 1, 2009

Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 688-705, Winter 2009

Abstract:     
Devising appropriate oversight for nanotechnology is a challenge. The field spans many scientific disciplines and product areas, capitalizing on the unusual properties and capabilities of material at the atomic scale. The critical feature of nanotechnology is not only the size at which manufacture occurs (~1-100 nanometers), but also the ability to control and manipulate the novel chemical, physical, and mechanical properties that emerge at this scale, including increased conductivity, optical properties, and reactivity. As nano-products enter the research and development (R&D) phase, hit the market, and enter consumer households, debate has emerged on oversight approaches. Regulators, manufacturers, and commentators are considering whether existing oversight systems are sufficient, those oversight systems need adjustment, or new oversight systems are needed.

In order to devise recommendations for nanobio oversight, we studied the history of oversight in five related areas: genetically engineered organisms (GEOs) in the food supply, pharmaceuticals ('drugs'), medical devices, chemicals in the workplace, and gene transfer research (commonly called 'gene therapy'). Each case study was selected because of its relevance to nanobio; these case studies focus on agencies potentially involved in nanobio oversight and consider product domains in which nanobio is potentially or already active. The successes and failures of each oversight regime offer lessons to apply in developing a sound approach to nanobio oversight. The purpose of this paper is to compare the five case studies in order to derive overarching lessons for nanobio oversight.

This article uses multiple disciplines and methodologies, both qualitative and quantitative, to compare our oversight case studies. In doing so, we offer a new way to evaluate oversight and derive recommendations for future oversight approaches. Part I offers background on the comparative studies and their interrelationship. Part II then discusses the methods used for comarative quantitative and qualitative research. Part III reports the results of our comparative analysis, using strengths and weaknesses of each oversight system to frame the discussion. Part IV provides further results by comparing correlations in each case study among evaluative criteria, asking what oversight system features seem to be related to one another. Part V then synthesizes the findings across case studies to identify key lessons learned from comparative analysis.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 18

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: June 30, 2010 ; Last revised: February 11, 2014

Suggested Citation

Paradise, Jordan and Wolf, Susan M. and Kuzma, Jennifer and Kuzhabekova, Aliya and Tisdale, Alison and Kokkoli, PhD, Efrosini and Ramachandran, PhD, Gurumurthy, Developing U.S. Oversight Strategies for Nanobiotechnology: Learning from Past Oversight Experiences (December 1, 2009). Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 688-705, Winter 2009. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1632531

Contact Information

Jordan K. Paradise (Contact Author)
Seton Hall University - School of Law ( email )
One Newark Center
Newark, NJ 07102-5210
United States
Susan M. Wolf
University of Minnesota Law School ( email )
229 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
United States
612-625-3406 (Phone)
612-624-9143 (Fax)
HOME PAGE: http://www.law.umn.edu/facultyprofiles/wolfs.html
Jennifer Kuzma
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities - Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs ( email )
301 19th Ave S
Minneapolis, MN 55455
United States
Aliya Kuzhabekova
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities ( email )
420 Delaware St. SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455
United States
Alison Tisdale
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities - Dept of Sociology ( email )
Minneapolis, MN 55455
United States
Efrosini Kokkoli, PhD
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities ( email )
420 Delaware St. SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455
United States
Gurumurthy Ramachandran, PhD
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities ( email )
420 Delaware St. SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 599
Downloads: 73
Download Rank: 190,872
References:  61
Citations:  2

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.313 seconds