When Risk Management Systems ‘Fail’: On Criminal Negligence and the Limits of Scientists’ Responsibility

This chapter consists of a brief discussion on some legal aspects concerning scientists’ responsibility in risk prevention processes. After proposing some introductory considerations on scientists’ responsibility as such, the author deals with the L’Aquila earthquake crisis of 2009, when a strong quake destroyed significant parts of L’Aquila (Italy) and surrounding villages, killing more than 300 people. The chapter focuses on the relations between scientific knowledge, normative expectations, decision-making and criminal negligence for ‘failed’ risk assessment and management, paying particular attention to the role of ‘regulatory science’ in constructing the ‘reasonable person’ normative standard of care in the theory of criminal negligence. This allows explaining why the first judgement in the L’Aquila trial (2012) is not convincing, having misunderstood how policy-relevant science should participate in prevention processes and the construction of normative standards. In his conclusions, the author suggests some reasons for the recent tendency to blame experts when natural or technological disasters occur

A bibliometric analysis of the development of next generation active nanotechnologies

Delineating the emergence of nanotechnologies that offer new functionalities is an important element in an anticipatory approach to the governance of nanotechnology and its potential impacts. This paper examines the transition to next generation active nanotechnologies which incorporate functions that respond to the environment or systems concepts that combine devices and structures that are dynamic and which may change their states in use. We develop an approach to identifying these active nanotechnologies and then use bibliometric analysis to examine the extent of research papers and patents involving these concepts. We also examine references to environmental, health, and safety concepts in these papers, given that these next generation nanotechnologies are likely to have risk profiles that are different from those of first-generation passive nanomaterials. Our results show a steady growth overall in focus on active nanotechnologies in the research literature and in patents over the study period of 1990–2010. We also find an increase in consideration given to environmental, health, and safety topics. While gaps are highlighted in our understanding of research and innovation in active nanotechnologies, the results suggest that there is beginning to be a shift to active nanotechnologies, with the implication that governance processes need to be conscious of this shift and to prepare for it.</p