Next Article in Journal
Electrical Properties and Interfacial Issues of HfO2/Ge MIS Capacitors Characterized by the Thickness of La2O3 Interlayer
Previous Article in Journal
Multi-Scale Modeling and Simulation of Thermoplastic Automated Tape Placement: Effects of Metallic Particles Reinforcement on Part Consolidation
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle

Risk Governance of Nanomaterials: Review of Criteria and Tools for Risk Communication, Evaluation, and Mitigation

1
Department of Environmental Sciences, Informatics and Statistics, University Ca’ Foscari of Venice, Via Torino 155, 30172 Mestre, Italy
2
GreenDecision s.r.l.—Via delle Industrie, 21/8, 30175 Venice, Italy
3
DIALOGIK—Lerchenstraße 22, 70176 Stuttgart, Germany
4
Genetic Engineering and Society Center, North Carolina State University, 1070 Partners Way, 5th floor, Raleigh, NC 27695-7565, USA
5
US Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Boston, MA 01472, USA
6
Department of Engineering and Public Policy, College of Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Nanomaterials 2019, 9(5), 696; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano9050696
Received: 10 April 2019 / Revised: 24 April 2019 / Accepted: 29 April 2019 / Published: 4 May 2019
  |  
PDF [741 KB, uploaded 20 May 2019]
  |  

Abstract

Nanotechnologies have been increasingly used in industrial applications and consumer products across several sectors, including construction, transportation, energy, and healthcare. The widespread application of these technologies has raised concerns regarding their environmental, health, societal, and economic impacts. This has led to the investment of enormous resources in Europe and beyond into the development of tools to facilitate the risk assessment and management of nanomaterials, and to inform more robust risk governance process. In this context, several risk governance frameworks have been developed. In our study, we present and review those, and identify a set of criteria and tools for risk evaluation, mitigation, and communication, the implementation of which can inform better risk management decision-making by various stakeholders from e.g., industry, regulators, and the civil society. Based on our analysis, we recommend specific methods from decision science and information technologies that can improve the existing risk governance tools so that they can communicate, evaluate, and mitigate risks more transparently, taking stakeholder perspectives and expert opinion into account, and considering all relevant criteria in establishing the risk-benefit balance of these emerging technologies to enable more robust decisions about the governance of their risks. View Full-Text
Keywords: manufactured nanomaterials; risk governance; decision analysis; risk communication; risk perception; risk assessment; risk management manufactured nanomaterials; risk governance; decision analysis; risk communication; risk perception; risk assessment; risk management
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Supplementary material

SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Isigonis, P.; Hristozov, D.; Benighaus, C.; Giubilato, E.; Grieger, K.; Pizzol, L.; Semenzin, E.; Linkov, I.; Zabeo, A.; Marcomini, A. Risk Governance of Nanomaterials: Review of Criteria and Tools for Risk Communication, Evaluation, and Mitigation. Nanomaterials 2019, 9, 696.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Nanomaterials EISSN 2079-4991 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top