Nanomaterial and Nanotechnology Firms: A Typology

Despite many studies opening with ambitious forecasts of a rapidly evolving nanomaterial and nanotechnology industry, the industry’s boundaries are not clearly delineated. This is problematic because, in order for regulators to regulate, insurers to underwrite risk, and capital providers to provide funding, they must first have an in-depth knowledge of the industry and the idiosyncratic risks of its constituents. In this study, 517 nanomaterial and nanotechnology firms were identified, then systematically categorized under six emergent themes: Analysis, Bioanalysis, Drug Delivery, Electronics, Energy, and Materials. Such a system of categorization thus provides the starting point for a risk assessment, whereby those belonging to a certain category inherently pose similar levels of occupational, consumer, and environmental risk. Data was also gathered on each firm’s size, ownership structure, and source of funding. The majority of firms were found to have less than 50 employees and were privately held, many of which were funded by venture capital. This too has implications for industry stakeholders as their actions could potentially have an adverse impact on what is evidently still a nascent, emerging industry.