IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v44y2015i8p1527-1536.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

European risk governance of nanotechnology: Explaining the emerging regulatory policy

Author

Listed:
  • Justo-Hanani, Ronit
  • Dayan, Tamar

Abstract

This paper explores political drivers and policy processes of the emerging EU’s regulatory policy for nanotechnology risks. Since 2004 the EU has been developing a regulatory policy to tighten control and to improve regulatory adequacy and knowledge of nanotechnology risks. This regulatory evolution is of theoretical interest as well as of policy relevance, addressing the links between risk governance and technological innovation policy in Europe. Although nanotechnology is among the largest EU-regulated industries and a policy domain in which EU regulatory activities continue to grow, political perspective (actors, institutions and processes) remain underexplored. We explored the emergent policy at the EU-level from three theoretical perspectives and a set of derived testable hypotheses concerning the co-evolution of global economic competition, policymakers' preferences and institutional structure. We thus pave the way for developing grounded analytical accounts of this newly-created governance domain. We argue that all three are key drivers shaping the technology regulation policy and each explains some aspect of the policy process: motivation, agenda-setting and decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Justo-Hanani, Ronit & Dayan, Tamar, 2015. "European risk governance of nanotechnology: Explaining the emerging regulatory policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1527-1536.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:44:y:2015:i:8:p:1527-1536
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2015.05.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733315000773
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2015.05.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vogel, David, 2003. "The Hare and the Tortoise Revisited: The New Politics of Consumer and Environmental Regulation in Europe," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(4), pages 557-580, October.
    2. Justo-Hanani, Ronit & Dayan, Tamar, 2014. "The role of the state in regulatory policy for nanomaterials risk: Analyzing the expansion of state-centric rulemaking in EU and US chemicals policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 169-178.
    3. Peter Newell, 2003. "Globalization and the Governance of Biotechnology," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 3(2), pages 56-71, May.
    4. Robert Falkner & Nico Jaspers, 2012. "Regulating Nanotechnologies: Risk, Uncertainty and the Global Governance Gap," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 12(1), pages 30-55, February.
    5. Elizabeth Fisher, 2008. "The 'perfect storm' of REACH: charting regulatory controversy in the age of information, sustainable development, and globalization," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(4), pages 541-563, June.
    6. Christopher Palmberg & Hélène Dernis & Claire Miguet, 2009. "Nanotechnology: An Overview Based on Indicators and Statistics," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2009/7, OECD Publishing.
    7. Faulkner, Alex, 2009. "Regulatory policy as innovation: Constructing rules of engagement for a technological zone of tissue engineering in the European Union," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 637-646, May.
    8. Claire A. Auplat, 2012. "The Challenges of Nanotechnology Policy Making PART 1. Discussing Mandatory Frameworks," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 3(4), pages 492-500, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ronit Justo-Hanani, 2022. "The politics of Artificial Intelligence regulation and governance reform in the European Union," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(1), pages 137-159, March.
    2. Mordue, Greig & Yeung, Anders & Wu, Fan, 2020. "The looming challenges of regulating high level autonomous vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 174-187.
    3. Ronit Justo-Hanani & Tamar Dayan, 2016. "Explaining Transatlantic Policy Divergence: The Role of Domestic Politics and Policy Styles in Nanotechnology Risk Regulation," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(1), pages 79-98, February.
    4. Kirsten Rodine-Hardy, 2016. "Nanotechnology and Global Environmental Politics: Transatlantic Divergence," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(3), pages 89-105, August.
    5. Vicki Stone & Martin Führ & Peter H. Feindt & Hans Bouwmeester & Igor Linkov & Stefania Sabella & Finbarr Murphy & Kilian Bizer & Lang Tran & Marlene Ågerstrand & Carlos Fito & Torben Andersen & Diana, 2018. "The Essential Elements of a Risk Governance Framework for Current and Future Nanotechnologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(7), pages 1321-1331, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ronit Justo-Hanani & Tamar Dayan, 2016. "Explaining Transatlantic Policy Divergence: The Role of Domestic Politics and Policy Styles in Nanotechnology Risk Regulation," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(1), pages 79-98, February.
    2. Justo-Hanani, Ronit & Dayan, Tamar, 2014. "The role of the state in regulatory policy for nanomaterials risk: Analyzing the expansion of state-centric rulemaking in EU and US chemicals policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 169-178.
    3. Lakitan, Benyamin, 2013. "Connecting all the dots: Identifying the “actor level” challenges in establishing effective innovation system in Indonesia," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 41-54.
    4. Patrick Herron & Aashish Mehta & Cong Cao & Timothy Lenoir, 2016. "Research diversification and impact: the case of national nanoscience development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 629-659, November.
    5. Steinar Andresen & G. Kristin Rosendal & Jon Birger Skjærseth, 2018. "Regulating the invisible: interaction between the EU and Norway in managing nano-risks," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 513-528, August.
    6. Runhui Lin & Yuan Gui & Zaiyang Xie & Lu Liu, 2019. "Green Governance and International Business Strategies of Emerging Economies’ Multinational Enterprises: A Multiple-Case Study of Chinese Firms in Pollution-Intensive Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-32, February.
    7. Qingjun Zhao & Jiancheng Guan, 2012. "Modeling the dynamic relation between science and technology in nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 561-579, February.
    8. Kvakkestad, Valborg & Vatn, Arild, 2011. "Governing uncertain and unknown effects of genetically modified crops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 524-532, January.
    9. Daniil P. Frolov & Agnessa O. Inshakova & Marina L. Davydova, 2017. "The Institutional Factors of Strategic Development and the Tactical Regulation of Nanotechology," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3B), pages 588-606.
    10. Alenka Guzmán & Edgar Acatitla Romero & Flor Brown Grossman, 2018. "Convergence of innovation in the nanotechnology paradigm across countries," Contaduría y Administración, Accounting and Management, vol. 63(1), pages 37-38, Enero - M.
    11. Gita Ghiasi & Matthew Harsh & Andrea Schiffauerova, 2018. "Inequality and collaboration patterns in Canadian nanotechnology: implications for pro-poor and gender-inclusive policy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 785-815, May.
    12. Johannes Urpelainen, 2011. "A California Effect for International Environmental Externalities?," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 170-189, April.
    13. Muhammad Nouman & Mohammad Sohail Yunis & Muhammad Atiq & Owais Mufti & Abdul Qadus, 2022. "‘The Forgotten Sector’: An Integrative Framework for Future Research on Low- and Medium-Technology Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-19, March.
    14. Zilberman, David & Graff, Gregory & Hochman, Gal & Kaplan, Scott, 2015. "The Political Economy of Biotechnology," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 64(04), December.
    15. Hogarth, Stuart & Löblová, Olga, 2022. "Regulatory niches: Diagnostic reform as a process of fragmented expansion. Evidence from the UK 1990–2018," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    16. John Braithwaite & Cary Coglianese & David Levi‐Faur, 2007. "Can regulation and governance make a difference?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 1-7, March.
    17. Diego Badell & Jordi Rosell, 2021. "Are EU Institutions Still Green Actors? An Empirical Study of Green Public Procurement," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(6), pages 1555-1572, November.
    18. Fritz W. Scharpf, 2009. "The Asymmetry of European Integration - or why the EU cannot be a Social Market Economy," KFG Working Papers p0006, Free University Berlin.
    19. Sophie Nappert, 2013. "The Reality of Precaution -- Comparing Risk Regulation in the United States and Europe, Jonathan B Wiener, Michael D Rogers, James K Hammitt, Peter H Sand, eds, RFF Press, 2011," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(10), pages 1317-1320, November.
    20. Richard Cowell, 2017. "Decentralising energy governance? Wales, devolution and the politics of energy infrastructure decision-making," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(7), pages 1242-1263, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:44:y:2015:i:8:p:1527-1536. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.