The nanotechnology sector, which generated about $225 billion in product sales in 2009, is predicted to expand rapidly over the next decade with the development of new technologies that have new capabilities. The increasing production and use of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) may lead to greater exposures of workers, consumers, and the environment, and the unique scale-specific and novel properties of the materials raise questions about their potential effects on human health and the environment. Over the last decade, government agencies, academic institutions, industry, and others have conducted many assessments of the environmental, health, and safety (EHS) aspects of nanotechnology. The results of those efforts have helped to direct research on the EHS aspects of ENMs. However, despite the progress in assessing research needs and despite the research that has been funded and conducted, developers, regulators, and consumers of nanotechnology-enabled products remain uncertain about the types and quantities of nanomaterials in commerce or in development, their possible applications, and their associated risks.

A Research Strategy for Environmental, Health, and Safety Aspects of Engineered Nanomaterials presents a strategic approach for developing the science and research infrastructure needed to address uncertainties regarding the potential EHS risks of ENMs. The report summarizes the current state of the science and high-priority data gaps on the potential EHS risks posed by ENMs and describes the fundamental tools and approaches needed to pursue an EHS risk research strategy. The report also presents a proposed research agenda, short-term and long-term research priorities, and estimates of needed resources and concludes by focusing on implementation of the research strategy and evaluation of its progress, elements that the committee considered integral to its charge.

Contents

• THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
• COMMITTEE TO DEVELOP A RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH, AND SAFETY ASPECTS OF ENGINEERED NANOMATERIALS
• BOARD ON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES AND TOXICOLOGY
• OTHER REPORTS OF THE BOARD ON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES AND TOXICOLOGY
• BOARD ON CHEMICAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY
• OTHER REPORTS OF THE BOARD ON CHEMICAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY
• NATIONAL MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING BOARD
• OTHER REPORTS OF THE NATIONAL MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING BOARD
• Preface
• Summary
  • WHY IS ANOTHER STRATEGY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH, AND SAFTETY RESEARCH NEEDED
  • THE COMMITTEE'S CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
  • CRITICAL RESEARCH GAPS
  • TOOLS AND APPROACHES NEEDED TO ADDRESS RESEARCH GAPS
  • RESEARCH PRIORITIES AND RESOURCE NEEDS
  • IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION
  • CONCLUDING REMARKS
• 1. Background
  • OVERVIEW
  • OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES
  • COMMERCIALIZATION OF ENGINEERED NANOMATERIALS
  • PRESENT STATE OF STRATEGIC NANOTECHNOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH, AND SAFETY RESEARCH
  • HISTORY OF NANOTECHNOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH, AND SAFETY RESEARCH ASSESSMENTS
  • WHY ANOTHER STRATEGY IS NEEDED
  • SCOPE OF THIS REPORT
  • ELEMENTS OF A NANOTECHNOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH, AND SAFETY RESEARCH STRATEGY
  • PRIOR APPROACHES TO SETTING RESEARCH AGENDAS ON OTHER TOPICS
  • GOALS OF THIS STRATEGY
  • REFERENCES
• 2. A Conceptual Framework for Considering Environmental, Health, and Safety Risks of Nanomaterials
  • THE NATURE OF THE CHALLENGE
  • DEVELOPING A STRATEGY AND A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
  • RISK-ASSESSMENT CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING NANOMATERIALS
  • A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK LINKED TO RISK ASSESSMENT
  • A LIFE-CYCLE AND VALUE-CHAIN PERSPECTIVE WITHIN THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
  • PRINCIPLES FOR IDENTIFYING AND SETTING PRIORITIES FOR RESEARCH NEEDS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
  • REFERENCES
• 3. Critical Questions for Understanding Human and Environmental Effects of Engineered Nanomaterials
  • INTRODUCTION
  • PRIOR RESEARCH-GAP ANALYSIS—AN OVERVIEW
  • RESEARCH-GAP ANALYSIS AND IDENTIFICATION OF CRITICAL RESEARCH QUESTIONS
  • REFERENCES
• 4. New Tools and Approaches for Identifying Properties of Engineered Nanomaterials That Indicate Risks
  • CHARACTERIZED NANOMATERIALS FOR NANOTECHNOLOGY-RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH, AND SAFETY RESEARCH
  • TOOLS, STANDARDIZED CHARACTERIZATION METHODS, AND NOMENCLATURE OF ENGINEERED NANOMATERIALS
  • STANDARDIZED EXPERIMENTAL PROTOCOLS FOR NANOTECHNOLOGY-RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH, AND SAFETY RESEARCH
  • EXPOSURE MODELING
  • MODELS FOR PREDICTING HUMAN HEALTH, ORGANISMAL, AND ECOLOGIC EFFECTS
  • EXPOSURE TO DOSE MODELS
  • INFORMATICS
  • REFERENCES
• 5. Research Priorities and Resource Needs
  • OVERVIEW
  • ADAPTIVE RESEARCH AND KNOWLEDGE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR ACCELERATING RESEARCH PROGRESS AND PROVIDING RAPID FEEDBACK TO ADVANCE RESEARCH
  • CHARACTERIZING AND QUANTIFYING THE ORIGINS OF NANOMATERIAL RELEASES
  • PROCESSES AFFECTING BOTH EXPOSURE AND HAZARD
  • NANOMATERIAL INTERACTIONS IN COMPLEX SYSTEMS RANGING FROM SUBCELLULAR SYSTEMS TO ECOSYSTEMS
  • RESOURCES FOR ADDRESSING RESEARCH PRIORITIES
  • REFERENCES
• 6. Implementing the Research Strategy and Evaluating Progress
  • INTRODUCTION
  • INFRASTRUCTURE FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY
  • EVALUATING AND ASSESSING PROGRESS FOR REVISING THE STRATEGY
  • RESOURCES
  • KEY AUDIENCES NEEDED TO IMPLEMENT THE STRATEGY
  • CONCLUDING REMARKS
  • REFERENCES
• APPENDIXES
  • Appendix A Biographic Information on the Committee to Develop A Research Strategy for Environmental, Health, and Safety Aspects of Engineered Nanomaterials
  • Appendix B Implementation Scenarios: Informatics and Information-Sharing

This project was supported by Contract EP-C-09-003 between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the organizations or agencies that provided support for this project.

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.