Nanometrology, Standardization and Regulation of Nanomaterials in Brazil: A Proposal for an Analytical-Prospective Model

Ana Rusmerg Giménez Ledesma, Maria Fatima Ludovico Almeida

Abstract


The main objective of this paper is to propose an analytical-prospective model as a tool to support decision-making processes concerning metrology, standardization and regulation of nanomaterials in Brazil, based on international references and ongoing initiatives in the world. In the context of nanotechnology development in Brazil, the motivation for carrying out this research was to identify potential benefits of metrology, standardization and regulation of nanomaterials production, from the perspective of future adoption of the model by the main stakeholders of development of these areas in Brazil. The main results can be summarized as follows: (i) an overview of international studies on metrology, standardization and regulation of nanomaterials, and nanoparticles, in special; (ii) the analytical-prospective model; and (iii) the survey questionnaire and the roadmapping tool for metrology, standardization and regulation of nanomaterials in Brazil, based on international references and ongoing initiatives in the world.

Keywords


metrology; standardization; regulation; nanotechnology; nanomaterials; nanoparticles; roadmapping; Brazil.

Full Text:

PDF [en]

References


ABDI. CGEE (2008). Agência Brasileira de Desenvolvimento Industrial. Centro de Gestão e Estudos Estratégicos. Estudo prospectivo em nanotecnologia: 2008-2025.

http://www.mdic.gov.br. [Accessed April 19, 2013].

BRASIL (2005). Ministério do Desenvolvimento, Indústria e Comércio Exterior. MDIC. Programa Nacional de Nanotecnologia. http://www.mdic.gov.br. [Accessed April 19, 2013].

BRASIL (2010). Ministério do Desenvolvimento, Indústria e Comércio Exterior. MDIC. Ata da 4ª reunião do Grupo de Trabalho Marco Regulatório. Fórum de Competitividade de Nanotecnologia. São Paulo, 29 de abril de 2010. http://www.mdic.gov.br. [Accessed April 19, 2013].

DAY, G.S., Schoemaker, P.J.H. (Eds.) (2000). Wharton on Managing Emerging Technologies (pp. 1-23). New York, John Wiley & Sons.

DOSI, G. (1082). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories. Research Policy, v.2, n. 3, p.147-162.

EMERGNANO (2009). A review of completed and near completed environment, health and safety research on nanomaterials and nanotechnology. Defra Project CB0409. (concise report).

EUROPEAN COMISSION (2008). Commission recommendation of a code of conduct for responsible nanosciences and nanotechnologies research. EC, Brussels 02/02/2008.

EUROPEAN NANOTECHNOLOGY GATEWAY (2006). Eighth Nanoforum Report: Nanometrology. http://nanoforum.org. [Accessed April 19, 2013].

FRATER, L., Stokes, E., Lee, R., Oriola, T. (2006). An overview of the framework of current regulation affecting the development and marketing of nanomaterials. ESRC Centre for Business Relationships Accountability Sustainability and Society. BRASS. Cardiff: Cardiff University.

HASCHE, K., Mirande, W., Wilkening, G. Dimensional measurements in the micro- and nanometer range: applications, challenges, state-of-the art. In: Proceedings of the 4th Seminar on Quantitative Microscopy, Bremerhaven: Wirtschaftsverlag NW, 2000.

JOINT COMMITTEE FOR GUIDES IN METROLOGY (2008). International vocabulary of metrology: basic and general concepts and associated terms (VIM). JCGM, 2008.

KUHN, T.S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions (1st ed.). University of Chicago Press.

LEDESMA, A. R. G. (2010). Nanometrology, standardization and regulation of nanomaterials in Brazil: a proposal for an analytical-prospective model. M.Sc. Dissertation. M.Sc Programme on Metrology, Quality and Innovation. Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro.

LUX RESEARCH INC. (2004). Statement of findings: sizing nanotechnology’s value chain. Executive summary. Oct 2004. 31 p.

NANOSTRAND (2007). Standardization related to research and development for nanotechnologies. NMP4-CT-2006-033167. Deliverable number 9. Quantitative survey of European stakeholders.

NANOSTRAND. (2006). Standardization related to research and development for nanotechnologies. NMP4-CT-2006-033167. Deliverable number 7. State-of-art report on nanometrology.

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH (2009). Approaches to safe nanotechnology: managing the health and safety concerns associated with engineered nanomaterials. Publication No. 2009–125.

OBSERVATORIO DE PROSPECTIVA TECNOLÓGICA INDUSTRIAL. OPTI. (2008). Aplicaciones Industriales de las nanotecnologías en España en el horizonte 2020. Madri: Fundación OPTI. 2008.

OBSERVATORYNANO (2010). Developments in Nanotechnologies Regulation and Standards – 2010. NMP – Nanosciences, Nanotechnologies, Materials and New Production Technologies.

PHAAL, R., Farrukh, C.J.P., Probert, D.R. (2004). Customizing roadmapping, Research Technology Management, v. 47, n.2, p. 26-37.

RINNE, M. (2004). Technology roadmaps: infrastructure for innovation, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, v.71, n.1, p. 67-80.

SALERNO, M., Landonia, P., Vergantia, R. (2008). Designing foresight studies for nanoscience and nanotechnology (NST) future developments. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, v.75, n.8, p.1202-1223.

SCOPUS Database (2013). http://www.scopus.com/home.url. [Accessed April 19, 2013].

DERWENT INNOVATION INDEX (2013).

http://diipcs.webofknowledge.com. [Accessed April 19, 2013].

THE ROYAL SOCIETY, INSIGHT INVESTMENT, THE NANOTECHNOLOGY INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION (NIA). (2008). Code of conduct for responsible nanotechnology; the responsible nano code. http://www.responsiblenanocode.org. [Accessed April 19, 2013].

THE ROYAL SOCIETY; THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING (2004). Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties, London: The Royal Society/The Royal Academy of Engineering.

UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION (2006). The ethics and politics of nanotechnology, Paris: Unesco, 2006.

ZWANENBERG, P. et al. (2008). How can regulation shape the direction of nanomaterials innovation? Discussion paper. Science & Technology Policy Research (SPRU), Freeman Centre. University of Sussex, Brighton.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242013000300033



Copyright (c)



2017 © Universidad Alberto Hurtado - Facultad de Economía y Negocios. 
Erasmo Escala 1835 - Santiago, Chile.
Economic Analysis Review | Observatorio Económico | Gestión y Tendencias