European Union
International Standa...
NGOs
United Nations
Algeria
Angola
Benin
Botswana
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cameroon
Cape Verde Islands
Central African Republic
Chad
Comoros
Congo (Brazzaville)
Congo, Democratic Re...
Cote d'Ivoire
Djibouti
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Gabon
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Kenya
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Madagascar
Malawi
Mali
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mayotte
Morocco
Mozambique
Namibia
Niger
Nigeria
Reunion
Rwanda
Sao Tome & Principe
Senegal
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Somalia
South Africa
St. Helena
Sudan
Swaziland
Tanzania
Togo
Tunisia
Uganda
Western Sahara
Zambia
Zimbabwe
|
ChadInternational Risk Governance Council (IRGC)
| Report Title: |
A Report for IRGC: Risk Governance of Nanotechnology Applications in Food and Cosmetics |
| Report ID: |
162 |
| Date: |
9/1/2008 |
| Author: |
International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) |
| Report Type: |
General Report |
| URL: |
[IRGC_Report_FINAL_For_Web.pdf] |
| Country: |
NGOs |
| Organization: |
International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) |
| Summary: |
In 2005, the International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) initiated a project on risk governance in nanotechnology. This report on risk governance of nanotechnology in food and cosmetics is part of a series of reports and white papers stemming from this project. The IRGC investigated applications of nanotechnology in food and cosmetics, reviewed current risk assessments of these applications, identified gaps in global risk governance, and explored a voluntary certification program for nanoparticle-containing materials. A workshop was held in April 2008, and the subsequent workshop briefing paper was developed into this report. Current nanoparticle hazards are uncertain and despite the recommendations of occupational protection measures, there is a lack of trust between stakeholders. The report discusses two approaches to risk assessment: nanoparticle safety and whole product safety. Regulators in the US and Europe have chosen a whole product approach; however, main NGOs criticize this approach as missing the point. This report encourages a proactive initiative by industry to implement voluntary agreements so as to best gain consumer trust in nanoparticle food and cosmetic products. |
| Archived Copy: |
Michael Vincent IRGC (2008), Food and Cosmetics_162_4517.pdf |
 |
|
| Report Title: |
White Paper on Risk Governance: Towards an Integrative Approach |
| Report ID: |
161 |
| Date: |
7/1/2005 |
| Author: |
International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) |
| Report Type: |
White Paper |
| URL: |
[IRGC_WP_No_1_Risk_Governance__reprinted_versi.....] |
| Country: |
NGOs |
| Organization: |
International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) |
| Summary: |
In 2004, the International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) undertook a project, Basic Concepts of Risk Characterisation and Risk Governance. This white paper is the first deliverable of this project, and presents a integrated analytic framework for risk governance. This framework is not specific to nanotechnology, and integrates scientific, economic, social, and cultural aspects. It distinguishes between simple, complex, uncertain, and ambiguous risk problems, and provides differing strategies for each type of risk based upon its categorization. Risk assessment is a three-step process: pre-assessment, appraisal, and management. This framework also addresses risk communication and wider governance issues such as different regulatory styles across countries. |
| Archived Copy: |
Michael Vincent IRGC (2006), White Paper on Risk Governance - Towards_161_8965.pdf |
|
|
| Report Title: |
White Paper on Nanotechnology Risk Governance |
| Report ID: |
160 |
| Date: |
6/1/2006 |
| Author: |
International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) |
| Report Type: |
White Paper |
| URL: |
[IRGC_white_paper_2_PDF_final_version-2.pdf] |
| Country: |
NGOs |
| Organization: |
International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) |
| Summary: |
In 2005, the International Risk Governance Council (IRGC) undertook a comprehensive project, Addressing the need for adequate risk governance approaches at the national and international levels in the development of nanotechnology and nanoscale products. Following two workshops, the IRGC authored this white paper, which contains recommendations for risk governance in nanotechnology. It suggests a regulatory framework which anticipates four generations of nanotechnology products (steady function nanostructures, active function nanostructures, systems of nanosystems, and heterogeneous molecular nanosystems). The proposed framework integrates a scientific risk-benefit assessment, addressing environmental, health, legal, ethical, and social issues. It attempts to resolve the educational gap, political and security issues, and human development issues of nanotechnology. Nanotechnology development is divided into two frames of reference, with first generation nanoparticles being in Frame 1 and second through fourth generation nanoparticles (some which do not yet exist), being in Frame 2. The IRGC believes that these frames possess different risk perceptions and will require separate identification of risks and concerns |
| Archived Copy: |
Michael Vincent IRGC (2006), White Paper on Nanotechnology Risk Governance_160_2579.pdf |
|
|
|