IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v25y2005i6p1621-1635.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of a Preliminary Framework for Informing the Risk Analysis and Risk Management of Nanoparticles

Author

Listed:
  • Kara Morgan

Abstract

Erratum Risk Analysis 25: 3, 711‐718 Decisions are often made even when there is uncertainty about the possible outcomes. However, methods for making decisions with uncertainty in the problem framework are scarce. Presently, safety assessment for a product containing engineered nano‐scale particles is a very poorly structured problem. Many fields of study may inform the safety assessment of such particles (e.g., ultrafines, aerosols, debris from medical devices), but engineered nano‐scale particles may present such unique properties that extrapolating from other types of studies may introduce, and not resolve, uncertainty. Some screening‐level health effects studies conducted specifically on engineered nano‐scale materials have been published and many more are underway. However, it is clear that the extent of research needed to fully and confidently understand the potential for health or environmental risk from engineered nano‐scale particles may take years or even decades to complete. In spite of the great uncertainty, there is existing research and experience among researchers that can help to provide a taxonomy of particle properties, perhaps indicating a relative likelihood of risk, in order to prioritize nanoparticle risk research. To help structure this problem, a framework was developed from expert interviews of nanotechnology researchers. The analysis organizes the information as a system based on the risk assessment framework, in order to support the decision about safety. In the long term, this framework is designed to incorporate research results as they are generated, and therefore serve as a tool for estimating the potential for human health and environmental risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Kara Morgan, 2005. "Development of a Preliminary Framework for Informing the Risk Analysis and Risk Management of Nanoparticles," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1621-1635, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:25:y:2005:i:6:p:1621-1635
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00681.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00681.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00681.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin P. Krayer von Krauss & Elizabeth A. Casman & Mitchell J. Small, 2004. "Elicitation of Expert Judgments of Uncertainty in the Risk Assessment of Herbicide‐Tolerant Oilseed Crops," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 1515-1527, December.
    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. Carless, Travis S. & Redus, Kenneth & Dryden, Rachel, 2021. "Estimating nuclear proliferation and security risks in emerging markets using Bayesian Belief Networks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    2. Sharon M. Friedman & Brenda P. Egolf, 2011. "A Longitudinal Study of Newspaper and Wire Service Coverage of Nanotechnology Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(11), pages 1701-1717, November.
    3. Ann Bostrom & Ragnar E. Löfstedt, 2010. "Nanotechnology Risk Communication Past and Prologue," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(11), pages 1645-1662, November.
    4. Christian E. H. Beaudrie & Milind Kandlikar & Robin Gregory & Graham Long & Tim Wilson, 2015. "Nanomaterial risk screening: a structured approach to aid decision making under uncertainty," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 88-109, March.
    5. Serkan Erbis & Zeynep Ok & Jacqueline A. Isaacs & James C. Benneyan & Sagar Kamarthi, 2016. "Review of Research Trends and Methods in Nano Environmental, Health, and Safety Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1644-1665, August.
    6. Wiek, Arnim & Zemp, Stefan & Siegrist, Michael & Walter, Alexander I., 2007. "Sustainable governance of emerging technologies—Critical constellations in the agent network of nanotechnology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 388-406.
    7. Michael Siegrist & Carmen Keller & Hans Kastenholz & Silvia Frey & Arnim Wiek, 2007. "Laypeople's and Experts' Perception of Nanotechnology Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 59-69, February.
    8. Ineke Malsch & Vrishali Subramanian & Elena Semenzin & Danail Hristozov & Antonio Marcomini, 2015. "Supporting decision-making for sustainable nanotechnology," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 54-75, March.
    9. Richard A. Canady, 2010. "The Uncertainty of Nanotoxicology: Report of a Society for Risk Analysis Workshop," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(11), pages 1663-1670, November.
    10. Niall Joseph O’Brien & Enda J. Cummins, 2011. "A Risk Assessment Framework for Assessing Metallic Nanomaterials of Environmental Concern: Aquatic Exposure and Behavior," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 706-726, May.
    11. Vicki Bier, 2020. "The Role of Decision Analysis in Risk Analysis: A Retrospective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2207-2217, November.

    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. Martine J. Barons & Lael E. Walsh & Edward E. Salakpi & Linda Nichols, 2024. "A Decision Support System for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Loss Reduction under Uncertain Agricultural Policy Frameworks," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-21, March.
    2. Baruch Fischhoff & Wändi Bruin & Ümit Güvenç & Denise Caruso & Larry Brilliant, 2006. "Analyzing disaster risks and plans: An avian flu example," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 131-149, September.
    3. Mitchell J. Small & Ümit Güvenç & Michael L. DeKay, 2014. "When Can Scientific Studies Promote Consensus Among Conflicting Stakeholders?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(11), pages 1978-1994, November.
    4. Vicki Bier, 2020. "The Role of Decision Analysis in Risk Analysis: A Retrospective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2207-2217, November.
    5. Ides Boone & Yves Van der Stede & Kaatje Bollaerts & David Vose & Dominiek Maes & Jeroen Dewulf & Winy Messens & Georges Daube & Marc Aerts & Koen Mintiens, 2009. "NUSAP Method for Evaluating the Data Quality in a Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment Model for Salmonella in the Pork Production Chain," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 502-517, April.
    6. Valentine E. Nnadi & Christian N. Madu & Ikenna C. Ezeasor, 2021. "A Systematic Technique to Prioritization of Biodiversity Conservation Approaches in Nigeria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-23, August.
    7. Ian J. Mauro & Stéphane M. McLachlan, 2008. "Farmer Knowledge and Risk Analysis: Postrelease Evaluation of Herbicide‐Tolerant Canola in Western Canada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 463-476, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:25:y:2005:i:6:p:1621-1635. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.