Regulation For Whom? By Whom? With Whom? for what?

Gregor Wolbring[i]

 

 

The discourse around the regulation of many biotechnology products, goals, processes and applications are perceived by many as highly flawed.

Many feel that the nanotechnology is just developing and the nanotechnology discourse might be able to generate a decent regulation discourse preventing the pitfalls of the biotech regulation discourse. So where are we in the nanotechnology regulation discourse?

The objective of this paper is to address the issues of regulation with whom’, ‘for whom’, ‘by whom’ and ‘for what’ in order to ascertain whether the Nano discourse of today is better than the bio discourse of the past especially in regards to disadvantaged and marginalized social groups especially disabled people.

 

This paper addresses these questions among others by using keyword searches in Google, Google Scholar and different types of academic clusters of databases (results see table),

 

The paper will conclude with an assessment of the state of the nano regulation discourse, the feasibility of the nano regulation discourse ever becoming inclusive and suggestions of tool development needed and attitude change needed to make the nano regulation discourse inclusive.

 

 

 

Nanoregulation for what?

 

An increasing amount of people ask for the regulation of Nanotechnology. However what should be regulated? The safety of nanomaterials, the safety of nanotechnology processes and products? The equitable distribution of nanotechnology products and processes? The governance of nanotechnology?

The proper selection of R&D priorities for a balanced and equitable development of nanotechnology? Should we regulate access issues or privacy issues?

When we chose regulations should they first be related to the needs of the marginalized or the needs of the already powerful social groups? Should they be locally or globally or should the local ones have a global outline? Can the regulatory system of today deal with the increasing speed of inventions and the decreasing time of an invention cycle?

 

It is reaonable to expect that perceptions and social values and the existing hierachy within stakeholders shape what regulation issues are covered with what kind of angles and even how much visibility any given issue receives. Within the biotechnology debate, agriculture biotechnology gained much more visibility and controversy than human ‘health’ biotechnology.  Medical Health safety issues gained much more visibility than social health safety issues such as equity and justice. The same dynamic of medical health safety issues versus social health safety issues appears also within nanotechnology and NBICS. The safety card was played by Bill Joy(1) putting nanobots and nanotech on the agenda and the field of nanotoxicology of nanomaterials becomes increasingly visible. The social issues such as distributive justice, enhancement medicine, transhumanism, concept of health and others are second tier if that. In the moment the Biotechnology hierarchy of issues replays itself within Nanotechnology. The results of the keyword combination search method in Google, Google Scholar, Ovid, Academic Search Premier and Cambridge Scientific Databases (for a description of the academic databases see appendix in (2)) highlight certain characteristics and certain realities.

 

 

 

1)     The Term “Nanotechnology Regulation” receives less or equal hits than Nanotechnology with my name. That is a clear indication of the lack of discourse around Nanotechnology regulation

2)     If one looks at which social groups are mentioned within ‘Nanotechnology Regulation’ one can clearly see a hierarchy with disabled people and indigenous people on the bottom. This is an indication of the prevailing biases within the nanotechnology regulation for whom discourse

3)     The much higher hits with patients versus disabled people indicates a very medical flavor of the nanotechnology regulation discourse

4)     It also allows for the conclusion that terms such as safety and risks are interpreted in certain medical ways 

5)     The keyword combination ‘Nanotechnology and safety’ has Twenty Thousand times more hits than the combination ‘ Nanotechnology and distributive justice

6)     Nanotechnology applications like Energy water and food have only 10% or less hits if combined with the terms law and regulation

7)     Nanotechnology teamed up with human rights has only 20% of the hits of the combination Nanotechnology and weapons and only 1% of  hits of the combination Nanotechnology and health

8)     So far the regulation discourse seems to be much more concerned with medical health safety than social safety

9)     We have not even started the debate around the regulation of nanotechnology and we see already the appearance of synthetic biology which is 1) the design and construction of new biological parts, devices, and systems, and 2) the re-design of existing, natural biological systems for useful purposes which has many envisioned applications (appendix 1) in need of regulation.  The regulatory system of today can not deal with the increasing speed of inventions and the decreasing time of an invention cycle

 

Table 1: Word combination/hits for Google, Google Scholar, Ovid, Academic Search Premier and Cambridge Scientific Databases

SINGLE/COMBINATIONAL KEYWORD/SEARCHTERM

Google

Google Scholar

Ovid

Academic Search Premier

Cambridge Scientific Databases

Nanotechnology

“Nanotechnology regulation”

“Regulation of Nanotechnology”

Nanotechnology+ Regulation

Regulation of Nanotechnology

137,000,000/

928/767

3,370,000

1,170,000

85,700/

10/45/

5,110

3,990

 

15258/

0/1

296/

201

16040

10/11

718/718

14790

0/0

177/4

Nanotechnology + Wolbring

840

23

0

7

1

“Nanotechnology regulation”  + women 

252

 

 

 

 

+ “the south”

52

 

 

 

 

+ "indigenous people" 

3

 

 

 

 

 + disabled people/ 

2

 

 

 

 

+ people with disabilities

8

 

 

 

 

+ the poor

88

 

 

 

 

+ patient 

122

 

 

 

 

      + Safety

950

 

 

 

 

 + Risk

1340

 

 

 

 

SINGLE/COMBINATIONAL KEYWORD/SEARCHTERM

Google

Google Scholar

Ovid

Academic Search Premier

Cambridge Scientific Databases

Nanotechnology + Law

14,000,000

9,350

176

1807

184

Nanotechnology +Law + safety

2,340,000

2,090

24

26