Ethics of Risk Analysis and Regulatory Review: From Bio- to Nanotechnology
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Adams JS (1965) Inequity in social exchange. In: Berkowitz L (ed) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Academic Press, New York, pp 267–299
Ag BiotechBuzz (2002a) Journal and Mexican government disagree over corn contamination. Volume 2, Issue 4. April 30. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://pewagbiotech.org/buzz/display.php3?StoryID=55
AgBiotech Buzz (2002b) Of famine and food aid: GM food internationally global GM volume 2, issue 9, spotlight, October 2. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://pewagbiotech.org/buzz/print.php3?StoryID=77
APHA (2002) Preserving right-to-know information and encouraging hazard reduction to reduce the risk of exposure to toxic substances. APHA, Washington, DC (November 13). Policy number 2002–2003. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.apha.org/legislative/policy/policysearch/index.cfm?fuseaction=view&id=279
Beauchamp TL, Walters L (1999) Ethical theory and bioethics. In: Beauchamp T, Walters L (eds) Contemporary issues in bioethics. 5th edn. Wadsworth, Belmont, CA, pp 1–32
Beauchamp TL, Childress JF (2001) Principles of biomedical ethics, 5th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK
Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP (2003) Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA 289:454–465
Besley JC, McComas KA (2005) Framing justice: using the concept of procedural justice to advance political communication research. Commun Theory 15(4):414–436
Besley JC, McComas KA, Waks L (2006) Media use and the perceived justice of local science authorities. Journal Mass Commun Q 83(4):801–818
Bozeman B, Sarewitz D (2005) Public values and public failure in U.S. Science policy. Sci Public Policy 32(2):119–136
Burkhardt J (2001) The GMO debates: taking ethics seriously. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.farmfoundation.org/2001NPPEC/burkhardt.pdf
CNS-ASU (2005) RTTA program 3: deliberation and participation. Retrieved December 31, 2007 from http://cns.asu.edu/program/rtta3.htm
CNS-UCSB (2007) Education and public engagement. Retrieved January 3, 2007 from http://www.cns.ucsb.edu/education-public-engagement/
Cho M, Bero L (1996) The quality of drug studies published in symposium proceedings. Ann Intern Med 124:495–489
Cobb MD, Macoubrie J (2004) Public perceptions about nanotechnology: risks benefits and trust. J Nanopart Res 6:395–405
Colquitt JA (2001) On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. J Appl Psychol 86(3):386–400
Colquitt JA, Shaw JC (2005) How should organizational justice be measured? In: Greenberg J, Colquitt JA (eds) Handbook of Organizational Justice. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp 113–152
Colquitt JA, Greenberg J, Zapata-Phelan CP (2005) What is organizational justice? A historical overview. In: Greenberg J, Colquitt JA (eds) Handbook of organizational justice. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp 3–58
Davies C (2006) Managing the effects of nanotechnology. PEN 2, Washington, DC. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from project on emerging nanotechnologies website: www.nanotechproejct.org
Davies C (2007) EPA and nanotechnology: oversight for the 21st century. PEN 9, Washington, DC. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from project on emerging nanotechnologies website: www.nanotechproejct.org
Ebbesen M, Andersen S, Besenbacher F (2006) Ethics in nanotechnology: starting from scratch? Bull Sci Technol Soc 26(6):451–462
Einsiedel EF, Goldenberg L (2006) Dwarfing the social? Nanotechnology lessons from the biotechnology front. In: Hunt G, Mehta M (eds) Nanotechnology: risk, ethics, and law. Earthscan, London, UK, pp 213–221
EPA (1983) Guidelines for performing regulatory impact analysis, EPA-230-01-84-003. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
EPA (2007) Nanoscale materials stewardship program and inventory status of nanoscale substances under the Toxic Substances Control Act; notice of availability. Fed Regist 72(133):38083–38085 July
EOP (1993) Executive office of the president: regulatory review and planning, executive order 12866. Federal Register 58(190):51735–51744 October
FDA (1995) U. S. food and drug administration center for food safety and applied nutrition CFSAN handout: 1995 FDA’S policy for foods developed by biotechnology. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/∼lrd/biopolcy.html
FDA (2007) Nanotechnology: a report of the U.S. food and drug administration nanotechnology task force, July 25, 2007. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.fda.gov/nanotechnology/taskforce/report2007.pdf
Gastil J, Levine P (eds) (2005) The deliberative democracy handbook: strategies for effective engagement in the twenty-first century. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA
Greenberg J (1993) The social side of fairness: Interpersonal and informational classes of organizational justice. In: Cropanzano R (ed) Justice in the Workplace: Approaching Fairness in Human Resource Management. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 79–103
Hart PD (2006) Attitudes toward nanotechnology. Woodrow Wilson International Center, Washington DC (September). Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.nanotechproject.org
ICTA (2007) International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA) (2007). Principles for the oversight of nanotechnologies and nanomaterials. August 5, 2007. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.icta.org/doc/Principles%20for%20the%20Oversight%20of%20Nanotechnologies%20and%20Nanomaterials_final.pdf
James C (2007) Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2006. ISAAA Brief 35–2006
Joss S, Belluci S (eds) (2002) Participatory technology assessment: European perspectives. Athenaeum, Gateshead, UK
Khushf G (2004) The ethics of nanotechnology: vision and values for a new generation of science and engineering. In: Emerging technologies and ethical issues in engineering: papers from a workshop, October 14–15, 2003. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, pp 29–56
Krimsky S, Rothenberg LS, Stott P, Kyle G (1998) Scientific journals and their authors’ financial interests: a pilot study. Psychother Psychosom 67:194–201
Kuzma J (2006) Nanotechnology oversight: just do it. Environ Law Rep 36:10913–10923
Kuzma J (2007) Moving forward responsibility: oversight for the nanotechnology biology interface. J Nanopart Res 9:65–182
Kuzma J, Romanchek J, Kokotovich A (2007) Upstream oversight assessment for agrifood nanotechnology: a case studies approach. Risk Analysis (in press)
Lane N, Kalil T (2005) The national nanotechnology initiative: present at the creation. Issues Sci Technol 21(4):51–52 Summer
Lee CJ, Scheufele DA, Lewenstein BV (2005) Public attitudes toward emerging technologies—examining the interactive effects of cognitions and affect on public attitudes toward nanotechnology. Sci Commun 27(2):240–267
Lewenstein B (2005) What counts as a ‘social and ethical issue’ in nanotechnology? HYLE 11(1):5–18
Macnaghten P, Kearnes MB, Wynne B (2005) Nanotechnology, governance, and public deliberation: what role for the social sciences? Sci Commun 27(2):268–291
Macoubrie J (2005) Informed public perceptions of nanotechnology and trust in government. Projects on emerging nanotechnologies, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?topic_id=166192&fuseaction=topics.event_summary&event_id=143410 , September
Macoubrie J (2006) Nanotechnology: public concerns, reasoning, and trust in government. Public Underst Sci 15:221–241
Maynard A (2006) Nanotechnology: a research strategy for addressing risk. Project on emerging nanotechnologies: Washington DC. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.nanotechproject.org
McComas KA, Trumbo CW, Besley JC (2007) Public meetings about suspected cancer clusters: the impact of voice, interactional justice, and risk perception on attendees’ attitudes in six communities. J Health Commun 12:527–549
Miller HI (2002) Nescience, not science, from the academy. Scientist 16(19):12–14
Morgan G, Henrion M (1990) The nature and sources of uncertainty. In: Morgan G, Henrion M (eds) Uncertainty. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 16–46
Michigan State University (MSU) (2005) First international IFAS conference on nanotechnology. What can nano learn from bio? Lessons from the debate over agrifood biotechnology and GMOs, October 26–27, 2005, at Michigan State University (USA). Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.ifas.msu.edu/nanoconference.htm
National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) (2007) What is nanotechnology? Retrieved on June 5, 2007, from http://www.nano.gov/html/facts/whatIsNano.html
Nelson R, Weiss R (1999) Hasty decisions in the race to a cure?: Gene therapy study proceeded despite safety, ethics concerns,” Washington Post, November 21, p A1
National Research Council (NRC) (1996) Understanding risk. National Academy, Washington, DC
National Research Council (NRC) (2000) Genetically modified pest-protected plants: Science and regulation. National Academy, Washington, D.C.
National Research Council (NRC) (2002) Environmental effects of transgenic plants. National research council. National Academy, Washington, D.C.
OMBWatch (2007) Assistance for 10.219: biotechnology risk assessment research, (FY 2000–2006) Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.fedspending.org/faads/faads.php?&cfda_program_num=10.219&sortby=u&datype=T&reptype=a&database=faads&detail=2
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) (2000) Food and agricultural biotechnology initiatives: strengthening science-based regulation. May 3, 2000. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/EOP/OSTP/html/0058.html
Pidgeon N (2006) Opportunities and uncertainties—the British nanotechnologies report and the case for upstream societal dialogue. Conference-paper: VALDOR. Stockholm, Sweeden. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.congrex.com/valdor2006/papers/53_Pidgeon.pdf
Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology (PIFB) (2002) Three years later: lessons learned from the monarch butterfly controversy. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://pewagbiotech.org/resources/issuebriefs/monarch.pdf
Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology (PIFB) (2003a) Have genes, will travel. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://pewagbiotech.org/resources/issuebriefs/geneflow.pdf
Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology (PIFB) (2003b) University-industry relationship: framing the issues for academic research in agricultural biotechnology. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://pewagbiotech.org/research/UIR.pdf
Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology (PIFB) (2005) An examination of the trade issues surrounding genetically modified food. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://pewagbiotech.org/resources/issuebriefs/useu.pdf
Press E, Washburn J (2000) The kept university. Atl Mon 285:39–54
Quist D, Chapela I (2001) Transgenic DNA introgressed into traditional maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico. Nature 414:541–543
Rendtorff JD, Kemp P (2000) Basic ethical principles in European bioethics and biolaw, vol i–ii. Institut Borja di bioètica and Centre for Ethics and Law, Barcelona and Copenhagen
Rendtorff JD (2002) Basic ethical principles in European bioethics and biolaw: autonomy, dignity, integrity and vulnerability—towards a foundation of bioethics and biolaw. Med Health Care Philos 5:235–244
Rodenmeyer M (2002) Corn fight: science suffers when the debate gets personal. San Francisco Chronicle, Tuesday, April 30
Rowe G, Frewer LJ (2004) Evaluating public-participation exercises: a research agenda. Sci Technol Human Values 29(4):512–557
Rollin B (1986) The Frankenstein thing. In: Evans JW, Hollaender A (eds) Genetic engineering of animals: an agricultural perspective. Plenum, New York, pp 285–298
The Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering (2004) Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties. The Royal Society, London July
Science (2003) On campus. Science 302:2065
Sears MK, Hellmich RL, Stanley-Horn DE, Oberhauser KS, Pleasants JM, Mattila HR, Siegfriedi BD, Dively GP (2001) Impact of Bt corn pollen on monarch butterfly populations: a risk assessment. PNAS 98:11937–11942
Shrader-Frechete K (2007) Nanotoxicology and ethical considerations for informed consent. Nanoethics 1:47–56
Singer PA, Salamanca-Buentello F, Daar AS (2005) Harnessing nanotechnology to improve global equity. Issues in Science and Technology 21(4):57–64 Summer
SourceWatch (2007) Government-industry revolving door. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Government-industry_revolving_door
Stitch S (1978) The recombinant DNA debate. Philos Public Aff 7:187–205
Taylor M, Tick JS (2003) Post-market oversight of biotech foods. Pew initiative on food and biotechnology. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.pewagbiotech.org
Taylor MR (2006) Regulating the products of nanotechnology: does FDA have the tools it needs? Project on emerging nanotechnologies. Washington, DC: PEN 5. Retrieved August 7, 2007 from http://www.nanotechproject.org
Thompson P (2007) Food biotechnology in ethical perspective, 2nd edn. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands
Tyler TR, Boeckmann RJ, Smith HJ, Huo YJ (1997) Social justice in a diverse society. Westview, Boulder, CO
USDA (2007) Adoption of genetically engineered crops in the U.S. Retrieved August 8, 2007 from http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/BiotechCrops/
Valent F, Little DA, Bertollini R, Nemer LE, Barbanc G, Tamburlini G (2004) Burden of disease attributable to selected environmental factors and injury among children and adolescents in Europe. Lancet 363:2032–2039
Wilsdon J, Willis R (2004) See-through science. Demos, London Retrieved August 8, 2007 from www.demos.co.uk