Emulated around the world, the U.S.
National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) has set the pace for government-driven nanotechnology research and development. Yet as the science and technology of working at the nanoscale mature, the challenges of transforming laboratory curiosities into safe, successful and sustainable products loom large.
The National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of 2008—just passed by the U.S. House of Representatives—aims to tackle these challenges head-on.
The 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, signed by President Bush In 2003, codified the NNI as a cross-agency research and development initiative focused on knowledge generation to underpin new technological advances. In this, the NNI has been an unqualified success. Even accounting for research re branding (“nano” is most definitely a broad church), the NNI has stimulated tremendous advances in understanding how materials behave and can be manipulated at the nanoscale; and the new possibilities that open up as a result. But as an R&D initiative, the NNI has struggled to bridge the gap between innovative science and sustainable technologies.
This year the 2003 Act is up for reauthorization, and both the U.S. House and Senate are looking to further support the potential economic and social benefits that nanotech R&D promises. The bill just passed by the House (by a vote of 407 to 6) is an important step towards ensuring nanotechnology’s use in the service of society. Still to come is a Senate bill addressing the reauthorization, but the signs are positive that as nanotechnology begins to grow up, the emphasis is shifting from generating new knowledge to using it wisely.
The new Act makes a number of changes to the NNI, but the following strike me as being particularly relevant:
Designation of a coordinator for the social dimensions of nanotechnology. The new position would reside in the
Office of Science and Technology Policy (in the Executive Office of the President), and would be responsible (among other things) for ensuring an Environment, Health and Safety (EHS) research plan is developed, updated and implemented across the federal government.
This coordinator would bring much-needed leadership to nanotechnology EHS research within the federal government, and would help focus efforts on what is needed to underpin the emergence of safe nanotechnologies. Whoever gets fingered for the position will have a tough job of it though—federal agencies typically resist “interference” from the Whitehouse, and very real concerns over the politicization of science in the U.S. could undermine trust in the appointee. And of course, a coordinator with no fiscal authority will find it hard to get the agencies’ attention in the first place.
Yet even with these hurdles in place, a coordinator with vision, sound scientific credentials and a willingness to work in partnership with federal agencies could put federal nano-EHS research back on track.
Development and implementation of a nanotechnology risk-research plan. The Act calls for the coordinator (see above) to develop, periodically update and implement a research plan addressing the societal dimensions of nanotechnology, including potential environment, health and safety impacts. Key specified components include: Near and long-term research objectives; milestones, along with delivery times and resource-requirements; agency roles in carrying out the research plan; funding requirements, allocations and sources.
Where there’s a plan, there is at least the possibility of progress—something that many of us have been saying for some time (
check out here, for instance). ’Nuff said!
Development and maintenance of a publicly accessible database of research projects funded to address nanotechnology environmental, health and safety impacts.
Sound familiar? This database already exists in the guise of the
Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies inventory of nanotechnology EHS research—currently being taken over and updated by the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Knowing what is currently going on is a no-brainer in developing an effective research plan. But the utility of a research database is only as good as its implementation and the data it holds. Get it right, and you have a powerful tool. But get it wrong, and you are lumbered with a bureaucratic obstacle course that serves no-one.
Given the utility of an effective database that handles risk-relevant research information in a sophisticated way, this is one the federal government’ cannot afford to get wrong.
Establish interdisciplinary research centres addressing Green Nanotechnology. These centres to include: research on methods and approaches to develop environmentally benign nanoscale products and manufacturing processes; fostering the transfer of green nanotech knowledge to industry; and educating scientists and engineers in the principles and techniques of green nanotech.
Back in 2007, the
Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies published the report
“Green Nanotechnology: It’s Easier Than You Think,” highlighting research, perspectives and policy options in this area. Learning how to use a new technology in environmentally sound ways at the beginning of its development cycle makes a lot of sense—and specific inclusion of Green Nano in the new Act is an encouraging step in the right direction.
Overall, the National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of 2008 begins to shift the emphasis of nanotech in the U.S. from innovative research, to effective development, and lays a firm foundation on which to build socially beneficial and economically successful technologies.
Will it succeed in what it sets out to do? That will depend on how the federal government chooses to respond. There is nothing to stop federal agencies continuing with business as usual, tortuously justifying current activities as adhering to the letter of the Act. But for real progress to be made, the NNI will need to embrace the spirit behind this reauthorization, and take action because it is
needed, not because it is demanded.