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 humankind is the yardstick by which all else is measured. A second model, the one endorsed by the Government of Québec with the adoption of its Sustainable Development Act and the definition contained therein, 272 is a moderate anthropocentrism that recognizes the interdependence of humankind and nature. The third conceptual model is biocentric in that all life is considered to have the same value, whether it be human, animal, or plant. According to this model, nature has its own purpose and its own rights; humankind cannot under any circumstances seek to modify or manipulate it for its own benefit. It is in the spirit of the Sustainable Development Act that the Commission holds that humans and the environment are interdependent. Society and its decision makers need to take this interdependence into account when they make decisions that could impact environmental quality, whether in the immediate future or for future generations. Increasingly, and particularly in the wake of the adoption of the Kyoto protocol, efforts have been made in this regard on a local and global scale. However, people’s daily lives and behaviors—as decision makers or ordinary citizens—stand as a reminder of the disconnect that sometimes exists between what they say and what they do. Given the current state of development of nanotechnology and the potential it holds for the preservation or restoration of the environment, the technology could prove a boon for improving the quality of the environment, although, as stressed above, some applications may also contribute to the environment’s deterioration. It will therefore be important to strike a balance in the use of nanotechnology so that it benefits the greatest number of people while respecting the environment. Striking this balance entails decisions that concern society as a whole, and should therefore be the focus of public debate, which is a theme of governance addressed in the next section. ETHICAL CONCERNS NOT LIMITED TO NANOTECHNOLOGY As mentioned above, the development of nanotechnology raises ethical questions about its possible impacts on health and the environment, its applications in the field of security, and its influence on how people perceive human identity and their relationship with nature. But the Commission has observed that nanotechnology also raises other ethical concerns not limited to nanotechnology. While not totally new, these concerns cannot be overlooked. They have to do with nanotechnology management in terms of governance and economic development, and the role individuals can play in this regard. The Commission feels it is important to consider the rapid development of nanotechnology in this position statement and to offer possible solutions that are flexible enough to develop alongside the technology to ensure that nanotechnology is managed ethically and responsibly. Concerns related to governance Governments are responsible for protecting the environment, human health, and the wellbeing of society as a whole. This responsibility manifests itself through governance, i.e., “the manner in which one oversees, guides, and coordinates the activities of a country, region, social group, or private or 272 See Chapter 2 of this position statement. 68 Ethics and Nanotechnology: A Basis for Action
Position Statement of the Commission de l'éthique de la science et de la technologie public organization.” 273 According to Einsiedel and Goldenberg of the University of Calgary, the notion of governance encompasses issues of legitimacy, accountability, and management of the inherent societal tensions between maintaining public trust in the way decisions are made and the role played by the various stakeholders (like businesses, government bureaucracies, and even market forces). 274 It concerns all political, social, and economic stakeholders in one way or another. In the short to medium term, the Commission feels that society must ask a certain number of questions regarding the development of nanotechnology 275 or other emerging technologies. For example, who controls and benefits from their use? 276 What are the risks and who bears them? 277 Who guides the government grant strategies for new technology R&D? Do political decision makers have a duty to make sure nanotechnology-derived products are safe for human health and the environment? Do the existing regulations implemented before the emergence of these technologies still meet society’s needs in this regard? 278 All these are questions of societal governance and readily bring to mind the GMO saga, which saw the public boycott genetically modified products when presented with a fait accompli. This difficult experience taught valuable lessons. Nanotechnology promoters want to avoid a similar situation at all costs by informing the public and fostering dialog to ensure the social acceptability of these new technologies. 279 However, an important point is often overlooked in comparing nanotechnology to GMOs: Much research still needs to be done in the field of nanotechnology before the various nanotechnology applications under development flood the market. This is in fact why those concerned agree that it is critical to seize this opportunity to collectively debate the social choices that must be made with regard to nanotechnology. In the following paragraphs, the Commission questions some of the mechanisms likely to contribute to the ethical governance of technological development, more specifically that of nanotechnology. To this end, the Commission draws on values such as legitimacy, transparency, democracy, and responsibility. Legitimacy and transparency of the decision-making process First, it is important to remember that various federal departments document the potential repercussions of nanotechnological development in their respective fields of jurisdiction, and that Industry Canada implemented a federal interdepartmental public service network on nanotechnology in 2002. The national science advisor to the prime minister has also stressed the need for a national 273 OFFICE QUÉBÉCOIS DE LA LANGUE FRANÇAISE, Le grand dictionnaire terminologique, op. cit. [online] http://www.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/ressources/gdt.html. [Our translation] 274 Edna F. EINSIEDEL and Linda GOLDENBERG, op. cit., p. 31. 275 In this regard, see Appendix 3, which lists questions to ask regarding nannotechnology research, development, and commercialization in Canada. These questions are taken from Lorraine SHEREMETA and Abdallah S. DAAR, “The Case for Publicly Funded Research on the Ethical, Environmental, Economic, Legal and Social Issues Raised by Nanoscience and Nanotechnology (NE 3 LS),” Health Law Review, Vol. 12, No. 3, 2004. 276 THE ROYAL SOCIETY & THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING (United Kingdom), op. cit., p. x. 277 Edna F. EINSIEDEL and Linda GOLDENBERG, op. cit., p. 30. 278 INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE (United States), op. cit., p. 8. 279 See, among others, Ronald SANDLER and W.D. KAY, “The GMO-Nanotech (Dis)Analogy?” Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, Vol. 26, No. 1, February 2006, p. 57–62; Mark ROSEMAN, op. cit., p. 14. Chapter 3 – Nanotechnology: Ethical Concerns 69
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:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45: 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 143: Position Statement of the Commissio
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?