A survey of recent studies and projects to bridge the nanotechnology regulatory gap in the developing world.

Two environmental activist groups have petitioned the U.S. government to pursue new regulations on numerous products such as sunscreens and cosmetics that contain potentially hazardous nanoparticles but lack adequate warning labels of their possible health effects.

Amid growing evidence that some of the tiniest materials ever engineered pose potentially big environmental, health and safety risks, momentum is building in Congress, environmental circles and in the industry itself to beef up federal oversight of the new materials, which are already showing up in dozens of consumer products.

The invisibly small particles and fibers that scientists are producing in the hot new field of nanotechnology pose health and environmental risks great enough to justify banning, for now, certain cosmetics now found on the U.S. market and also halting the deliberate release of nanomaterials into the environment, according to an independent report commissioned by the British government.

The authors argue that the developing world has more to lose from a moratorium on nanotechnology then they have to gain. They survey the potential benefits to the developing world from nanotechnology research and call for "a new international network to assess emerging technologies for development, identify the potential risks and benefits of nanotechnology incorporating developed and developing world perspectives".

The authors make the case for developing a "collaborative international administrative council" to deal with the risks from molecular manufacturing.

Lawmakers are closely watching developments developments in nanotechnology and are considering rules and regulations to deal with its legal and ethical issues.

Greenpeace has released a 72-page report on the environmental and societal consequences of both nanotechnology and artificial intelligence. It argues that government and industry must do much more to confront these challenges while the technologies are still in development.

[ Link to Full Study ]

Chris Phoenix argues that while the economic value and military significance of molecular manufacturing will be immense, "if a well-designed plan is not in place, serious risks will very likely lead to military destruction, social or economic disruption or unnecessary human suffering on a large scale."

A comprehensive guide to the recent debate over nanoethics and government regulation.