CIKC Brochure 201003_5b - University of Cambridge

CIKC
14
Regulation of Molecular and
Macromolecular Materials
Laure Dodin from IfM has been exploring the
regulatory regimes for nanomaterials in the
EU, US and Japan as part of the IKCCL
project.
Nanotechnology has been earmarked by the
UK, the US and the Japanese governments as
a strategic sector for their economy. But the
development of a regulatory framework for this
technology, rendered necessary by the rapid
expansion of nanotechnology R&D as well as
the handling and commercialisation of nanoproducts,
is difficult as this new technology
presents risks still largely unknown.
The regulators from all three countries have
adopted a similar regulatory strategy to deal
with the situation: prioritising the reduction of
scientific uncertainty over the creation of new
regulations, they have developed a cradle-tograve
approach which permits taking into
account the possible hazards posed by
nanomaterials at each stage of their life
cycle.
However, the investigation of possible
regulatory options solely at the domestic level
is insufficient and national regulators are also
involved in an international collaboration.
Laure’s notes on the regulatory regimes in
each region and a comparison of the different
approaches they have adopted can be
accessed on our Camtools site.
Funding Breakthrough Technology
The research aimed to understand the
process of commercialization of science
through the lens of how this process is
funded. The research questions were:
− How do commercialisation patterns
emerge for breakthrough technologies?
− What are the key factors/ decision points
in commercialisation?
− UK performance in commercialising these
technologies
The researchers (Samantha Sharpe and
Andy Cosh from CBR) produced case studies
of seven “breakthrough” technologies that
have emerged to commercial prominence
over the last 50 years – liquid crystals, fibre
optics, LEDs, PV, inkjet printing, MEMs and
GMR. From these case studies, they
conclude that the development of these
breakthrough technologies was a cumulative
process with long time horizons, multidisciplinary
teams were often important,
niche and non-price sensitive customers
were very valuable and that there was a
surprisingly limited role for venture capital.
The implications they draw for an innovation
policy to improve UK performance in this
area include that long term consistent public
support for science discovery and
commercialisation is required along with
support for focus driven environments, the
strategic use of public procurement and a
recasting the role of public money in risk
capital.
The case studies are available at
http://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk/research/programme1
/project1-24.htm