Managing uncertainty: Public and stakeholder opinion on nanotechnologies in Australia

Abstract

Nanotechnologies is a collective term covering a range of technologies, techniques and processes that involve the manipulation of matter at the nanoscale – a size range from approximately 1 nanometre to 100 nanometres. These technologies have led, and will continue to lead, to the development of new products within our society. While the products of nanotechnologies show great promise, the health effects from being exposed to many of these products is unknown, placing regulators of the technology in a ‘regulator’s dilemma’ – should the regulator allow the release of these products into society where they may lead to health gains versus health losses? These regulators rely on a system of regulation and policies to inform these decisions. Should a potential issue occur with a nanotechnology, this system will be questioned by numerous bodies including the public, media and politicians, all with differing risk attitudes. Our first original contribution to knowledge was to explore this system, to understand it so we could suggest enhancements to it. We identified a federal, state and local government regulatory system which relies on compartmentalisation of issues; those defined issues have been used to structure the research in this thesis. The ‘regulator’s dilemma’ is a situation where the current limitations of science provide little guidance to regulators regarding how to regulate risks. Where a ‘regulator’s dilemma’ exists a wider range of factors beyond science are drawn upon to address the uncertain knowledge about the risk and benefits, from societal risk attitudes and political ideology to national and sectoral economic interests. Societal risk attitudes are recognised as an important component of environmental risk assessment with the United States and European Union moving to integrate them within their environmental risk assessment frameworks. Societal risk attitudes affect environmental regulation through their ability to influence public policy, where public opinion, views of stakeholder and vested interests interact with the regulators’ own risk culture to shape environmental regulations. Our second original contribution to knowledge was to understand the societal risk attitudes of the Australian public and various influential Australian stakeholders, and to explore the factors that influence these perceptions. Further, we examined the interaction between these perceptions and views on labelling products containing nanomaterials, labelling being one possible regulatory tool to address the ‘regulator’s dilemma’. This thesis found that the regulatory system could be enhanced through a precautionary approach in the regulation of sensitive areas, such as food products. Targeted messaging sensitive to the differing intuitive toxicological viewpoints in our society would enhance risk communication. Finally, the labelling of products made by nanotechnologies would have broad popular acceptance and allow greater scrutiny of these products in our society.