Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The law will play a central role in promoting the benefits and controlling the risks of nanotechnology. The two most important initial applications of law to nanotechnology are health and safety regulations, and patent and other intellectual property protection. Over the longer run, other important applications of law to nanotechnology will include product liability and toxic tort liability, privacy law, and international regulation. All of these applications of law to nanotechnology will present unique challenges to the institutions and practice of law.

One of the most immediate demands on the legal system resulting from the development of nanotechnology is the implementation of appropriate health and safety regulation for nanotechnology. In designing such regulation, the legal system must address a series of threshold issues. One threshold issue is the choice of the appropriate level and institution of government to take regulatory action. In federal systems, one aspect of this issue is whether regulation should be undertaken at the federal or national level, at the state or local level, or both. Regulation by local and other subunits of a national system may facilitate a “laboratory of democracy” in which local jurisdictions experiment with different regulatory approaches, providing an empirical record of which approaches work better and worse that other jurisdictions can then learn from. At the same time, inconsistent local regulations can disrupt commerce and impose undue burdens on manufacturers, who must meet different requirements in different jurisdictions within a nation.

Health and Safety Regulation

In any given jurisdiction at the national, supranational. or local level, there is also an issue of which institution should take the lead in regulating nanotechnology. In jurisdictions such as the United States, with a strong separation of powers doctrine, nanotechnology regulation could be initiated by either the legislative (i.e., U.S. Congress) or the executive (i.e., regulatory agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency or the Food and Drug Administration) branches of government. Similarly, in the European Union (EU), different regulatory impetus may emerge from the Commission, the Council, or the European Parliament. A related issue is whether nanotechnology regulation should be undertaken under existing regulatory authorities by existing institutions, or whether new regulatory authorities and/or institutions are needed. Many jurisdictions (e.g., EU, Australia, the United States) have undertaken “gap analyses” to determine whether existing regulatory authorities are sufficient to govern nanotechnology risks or whether new statutes or regulations are needed. While these analyses have generally all found that existing authorities are sufficient to cover nanotechnology in the near term, there are growing strains and pressures for new or amended statutes and regulations to address some of the unique regulatory issues presented by nanotechnology.

Another aspect of this same issue is whether nanotechnology regulation can be parceled out to various existing agencies covering different nanotechnology products and exposures (e.g., environmental exposures, occupational exposures, consumer products, drugs and medical devices), or whether all nanotechnology regulation should be consolidated into a single new regulatory entity specifically created to oversee nanotechnology. To date, no jurisdiction has created a new regulatory agency or institution specifically to regulate nanotechnology; rather nations are relying (at least initially) on existing institutions and instruments to regulate nanotechnology.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading