A Basis for Action - Commission de l'Ã©thique de la science et de la ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Position Statement of the Commission de l'éthique de la science et de la technologie “The poor cousin of the LCA [life cycle assessment] is the social dimension and with it the condition of democracy, which is generally accepted as essential to decision making. Yet the inclusion of social criteria in LCA methodology is problematic—primarily according to stakeholders—due to objectivity, given the scientific nature of the tool.” Gisèle BELEM 183 The concept of sustainable development refers to the meaning given in Québec’s Sustainable Development Act: “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. [It] is based on a long term approach which takes into account the inextricable nature of the environmental, social, and economic dimensions of development activities.” 184 As indicated in a consultation paper released prior to adoption of the act, 185 “this definition draws on the following: • The idea of intergenerational equity from the initial definition in the Brundtland Report • The idea of improved living conditions from the enhanced definition issued in 1991 by IUCN, UNEP, and WWF • The international consensus that the environment, society, and the economy should be the three fundamental dimensions of sustainable development” 186 Although the act mentions life cycle twice—with regard to the internalization of costs (Section 6, Paragraph p) and the preparation of a government sustainable development strategy (Section 11, Paragraph 2)—there is no indication that life cycle is “essential for the attainment of sustainable development,” as some believe. 187 Recommendation No. 1 The Commission recommends That the Québec Government, guided by the principle of precaution and from the perspective of sustainable development, be concerned with all phases of the life cycle of a product derived from nanotechnology or containing nanometric components, and that in this respect it should integrate the concept of “life cycle” into all policies where such an approach is appropriate, in order to avoid any damaging impact of technological innovation on health and the environment 183 Gisèle BELEM, op. cit., p. 44 [our translation]. 184 Section 2 of the Sustainable Development Act, GOUVERNEMENT DU QUÉBEC, op. cit. 185 GOUVERNEMENT DU QUÉBEC, Plan de développement durable du Québec, consultation paper, November 2004, p. 19 [online] http://www.mddep.gouv.qc.ca/developpement/2004-2007/plan-consultation.pdf. 186 Ibid. [our translation]. 187 INTERUNIVERSITY RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE LIFE CYCLE OF PRODUCTS, PROCESSES, AND SERVICES (CIRAIG), op. cit., p. 7 [our translation]. 44 Ethics and Nanotechnology: A Basis for Action
CHAPTER 3 NANOTECHNOLOGY: ETHICAL CONCERNS In its examination of the ethical issues of nanotechnology, the Commission first notes that the responsible management of nanotechnology development turns on three fundamental premises: establishing a nomenclature specific to nanoscience and nanotechnology, developing nanometrology to establish international standards, and continuing to conduct research and disseminate research findings. After explaining these premises, the Commission first raises a number of ethical concerns related to nanotechnology-derived products, specifically those associated with health, the environment, and safety. It then explores the broader ethical questions raised by the development of nanotechnology as well as other emerging technologies, such as biotechnology and genomics. The issues raised include governance, economic activity, and citizenship. It is important to be aware of all of these concerns right from the outset and to intervene as early as possible so these emerging technologies can realize their potential to the benefit—and not the detriment—of society and the public. FUNDAMENTAL REQUIREMENTS AS PREMISES Since Feynman’s now famous speech on the world of the infinitely small, 188 the field of nanoscience and nanotechnology has emerged across a broad range of disciplines, including physics, chemistry, biology, information and communication science, cognitive science, and other well-established disciplines. The newness of the field and the contributions to its emergence by numerous disciplines have created a need for action to ensure its systematic, responsible development. This includes developing a common terminology and nomenclature, establishing procedures and standards, and continuing research efforts to clear up current uncertainties as to nanotechnology’s impact on health and the environment. The need to establish a common scientific terminology and nomenclature The cross-fertilization of knowledge from various disciplines and the emergence of new discoveries underscore the need to standardize the scientific terminology (i.e., coming to consensus on definitions for the terms used) and scientific nomenclature (i.e., agreeing on the rules for naming a group of similar objects) specific to the field of nanotechnology. This is a complex issue, because the scientific nomenclature is based on the size and chemical composition of nanoparticles, but does not take into account specificities of the nanoscale material in terms of its physical structure—like that of carbon 188 Richard P. FEYNMAN, “There Is Plenty of Room at the Bottom: An Invitation to Enter a New Field of Physics,” Engineering and Science, vol. 23, No. 5, 1960 [online] http://clsdemo.caltech.edu/archive/00000047/ 02/1960Bottom.pdf. 45
Page 1:
COMMISSION DE L’ÉTHIQUE DE LA SC
Page 4 and 5:
Commission de l’éthique de la sc
Page 7 and 8:
TABLE OF CONTENTS List of acronyms.
Page 9:
Position Statement of the Commissio
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21: Position Statement of the Commissio
Page 111 and 112: CONCLUSION It is with great curiosi
Page 113 and 114: GLOSSARY ∗ Atomic force microscop
Page 121 and 122:
BIBLIOGRAPHY ∗ Sources cited: ABE
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 151 and 152:
APPENDIX 2 Summary of applications
Page 153 and 154:
APPENDIX 3 Proposed taxonomy of the
Page 155 and 156:
The Consultation and Information Ac
Page 157 and 158:
MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION DE L’É
show all

A Basis for Action - Commission de l'Ã©thique de la science et de la ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?