[["What Sands' essay led this reviewer to think about was how inadequate for the Chernobyl task was traditional 19th and 20th century positivist international legal theory.
Based as it is on notions of State consent, traditional positivist international law theory does well with contract-like realities in international relations.
Multilateral agreements, for example, can certainly help handle problems of transboundary pollution and fit well within positivist theory. However, when world affairs generate tort-like problems, positivism is more or less inadequate.
Sands shows how traditional sources do much better with, say, the 1986 Vienna Early Notification Convention than with definitions of 'harm' or elaborating a 'standard of care'."]]
P.SANDS, Chernobyl: Law and Communication, The Annenberg Washington Program in Communications Policy Studies of Northwestern University and The Research Centre for International Law, University of Cambridge, Grotius Publ., Cambridge 1988, XXXIII + 312 pp., $ 75/£ 38
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Monday, November 2, 2009
Nanotech’s Evolving Environmental, Health, and Safety Landscape: The Regulations Are Coming
Nanotech’s Evolving Environmental, Health, and Safety Landscape: The Regulations Are Coming [October 2, 2009 | State of the Market Report]
Commercializing nanomaterials requires managing three aspects of environmental, health, and safety (EHS) issues: real risks, perceptual risks, and regulations. After years of slow progress on the EHS front, formal coordination of research efforts and data collection have lead to a clearer picture; however, with large data gaps remaining and with the lack of solid regulations, uncertainty still plagues the landscape. To navigate the unchartered territory, suppliers are adopting an open risk management approach by collaborating with customers, competitors, regulators, research institutes, and non-governmental organizations. Prime examples of this transparent model are the best practices used by carbon nanotube manufacturers.
Note: Lux Inc. is one of the leading research organization in nanomaterials. The reports have taken into account current and future trends. Worth reading!
Commercializing nanomaterials requires managing three aspects of environmental, health, and safety (EHS) issues: real risks, perceptual risks, and regulations. After years of slow progress on the EHS front, formal coordination of research efforts and data collection have lead to a clearer picture; however, with large data gaps remaining and with the lack of solid regulations, uncertainty still plagues the landscape. To navigate the unchartered territory, suppliers are adopting an open risk management approach by collaborating with customers, competitors, regulators, research institutes, and non-governmental organizations. Prime examples of this transparent model are the best practices used by carbon nanotube manufacturers.
Note: Lux Inc. is one of the leading research organization in nanomaterials. The reports have taken into account current and future trends. Worth reading!
Friday, October 30, 2009
International Legal Theory in International Law
The use of international legal theory is significant, particularly in relation to the development of new/emerging/ contemporary international legal system as opposed to other pattern of legal system. Hence, the work Sean Murphy, Principles of International Law (2005) makes a highly sensible account. Although it is the first work of its kind, his perspective is very enlihgtening and critical.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
An International Framework Agreement on Scientific and Technological Innovation and Regulation
Notwitstanding the fact this is just a draft paper, it demonstrated somehow an important way forward for the better governance (international transgovernmental or transnational) of the new technologies. Authored by Kenneth Abbott, a prominent scholar in the area of framework agreement, I trust this work has excellently outlined more dynamic (proactive as opposed to reactive) framework to engage with scientific and technological advances.
Looking forward to analysing the text in the published copy soon.
Citation:
Abbott, Kenneth W., An International Framework Agreement on Scientific and Technological Innovation and Regulation (June 4, 2009). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1414430
Looking forward to analysing the text in the published copy soon.
Citation:
Abbott, Kenneth W., An International Framework Agreement on Scientific and Technological Innovation and Regulation (June 4, 2009). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1414430
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Research: Adapting Law to Rapid Technological Change
Adapting Law to Rapid Technological Change
ABSTRACT
The pace of science and technology has greatly accelerated in recent decades, whereas the capability of regulatory frameworks to adapt to these changing technologies has, if anything, slowed down. The problem this creates is that our laws are increasingly out-of-date for regulating new technologies, and as this gap between technology and the law grows, so too does the likelihood of inadequate or inappropriate regulation of new technologies. Since it is unlikely to be feasible or perhaps even desirable to significantly slow the pace of science and technology, the only way to keep regulation up-to-date with technology is to speed up the adaptive capability of law and regulation.
The goal of this project will therefore be to identify and evaluate new legal regulatory approaches that will be more adaptive and flexible to better keep pace with rapidly evolving technologies. The problems and limitations encountered by regulatory systems to keep pace with technology will be evaluated for six emerging technology case studies:
(1) military robotics;
(2) direct-to-consumer genetic testing;
(3) nanotechnology health risks;
(4) fMRI Lie Detection; (5) criminal activities in virtual worlds; and
(6) surveillance technologies.
Based on the shortcomings of present regulatory systems identified for these six emerging technologies, the project will develop and evaluate five new regulatory models to provide more adaptive oversight that are better able to keep pace with emerging technologies. The five regulatory models to be considered are provisionally identified in general terms as
(1) real time adaptive management;
(2) principles-based regulation;
(3) collaborative voluntary programs;
(4) framework agreements; and
(5) institutional innovations such as cybercourts or independent commissions.
The project will conclude by assessing the potential of these or alternative models for keeping law and regulation in synch with science and technology.
Investigator(s): Gary Marchant gary.marchant@asu.edu (Principal Investigator)
Joseph Herkert (Co-Principal Investigator)
Braden Allenby (Co-Principal Investigator)
Andrew Askland (Co-Principal Investigator)
ABSTRACT
The pace of science and technology has greatly accelerated in recent decades, whereas the capability of regulatory frameworks to adapt to these changing technologies has, if anything, slowed down. The problem this creates is that our laws are increasingly out-of-date for regulating new technologies, and as this gap between technology and the law grows, so too does the likelihood of inadequate or inappropriate regulation of new technologies. Since it is unlikely to be feasible or perhaps even desirable to significantly slow the pace of science and technology, the only way to keep regulation up-to-date with technology is to speed up the adaptive capability of law and regulation.
The goal of this project will therefore be to identify and evaluate new legal regulatory approaches that will be more adaptive and flexible to better keep pace with rapidly evolving technologies. The problems and limitations encountered by regulatory systems to keep pace with technology will be evaluated for six emerging technology case studies:
(1) military robotics;
(2) direct-to-consumer genetic testing;
(3) nanotechnology health risks;
(4) fMRI Lie Detection; (5) criminal activities in virtual worlds; and
(6) surveillance technologies.
Based on the shortcomings of present regulatory systems identified for these six emerging technologies, the project will develop and evaluate five new regulatory models to provide more adaptive oversight that are better able to keep pace with emerging technologies. The five regulatory models to be considered are provisionally identified in general terms as
(1) real time adaptive management;
(2) principles-based regulation;
(3) collaborative voluntary programs;
(4) framework agreements; and
(5) institutional innovations such as cybercourts or independent commissions.
The project will conclude by assessing the potential of these or alternative models for keeping law and regulation in synch with science and technology.
Investigator(s): Gary Marchant gary.marchant@asu.edu (Principal Investigator)
Joseph Herkert (Co-Principal Investigator)
Braden Allenby (Co-Principal Investigator)
Andrew Askland (Co-Principal Investigator)
Monday, October 26, 2009
EASST Conference, 2-4 September 2010, Italy
EASST Conference, 2-4 September 2010
University of Trento, Italy
Call for convenors and thematic tracks: PRACTISING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, PERFORMING THE SOCIAL
The 2010 EASST conference, to be held in Trento (Italy), from the 2-4 September is the biennial forum of the European Association for the Study of Science and Technology (EASST) for contributions on topics from the range of disciplines found within science, technology and innovation studies.
As in previous years the conference provides a broad platform for presentations based on contemporary research on the wide variety of topics in which STS and innovation scholars are active. These include risk and regulation, environmental sustainability, systems of innovation, sociology of expectations, sociotechnical transitions, science and technology policy, ethics of health & medicine, governance of emerging technologies, gender and science.
The particular focus for the 2010 conference is that of practice and performance. It turns its attention to science and technology as situated practices rooted and grown in a sociomaterial context, exploring the performativity of technoscientific practices.
The notions of “social construction” and “social shaping” of science and technology have been crucial for the development (and success) of science & technology studies. Increasingly, however, the “social” is seen as a question rather than as a distinctive explanatory category. The “social” begins to be viewed as the result of the connections that take place in an ecology of elements and heterogeneous relations, as well as of the scenarios these connections depict. Terms such as “construction” and “shaping” are frequently replaced by concepts, verbs and metaphors drawn from the cultures of performance. Science and technology, are seen as performative domains of the “social”; choreographies of sociomaterial relations where realities and representations are enacted simultaneously.
One approach recognizes the performative character of science and technology, understanding when, where and how a “thing” arises, and explores the ways in which science and technology “do things”. Another approach addresses the “doing” of things: namely, that the performances and the performativity of scientific and technological practices are embedded and embodied in material, symbolic and textual artefacts.
Practice, is probably one of the most useful concepts to capture this ambivalence. It allows us to look at science and technology as an ecology of heterogeneous elements and interactions, embodying and enacting situated processes of change and repetition of different sociomaterial worlds. Through practising science and technology, and in scientific and technological practices, so, “doing things” and the “doing of things” find a common ground of expression.
A key characteristic of the contemporary world is the role played by knowledge practices in the production and reproduction of the sociomaterial configuration which is often called “society”. STS and the concepts of practice and performance enable a unique perspective for studying and observing scientific and technological innovations, as well as the articulation of different forms of sociality and ideas of the social. This is the challenge addressed in key areas such as medicine and genomics, body and gender, work and organizations, communication & technology, consumption & markets, geographies and space.
New procedure for submission of sessions and papers
In contrast to previous EASST conferences, the 2010 conference involves a first stage call for track convenors, with a subsequent call for papers. The conference will be organized in approximately 20-30 parallel thematic tracks (each collecting approximately 20-30 participants) that run through the whole conference (3 days, 7 sessions).
This initial call is for thematic tracks by convenors who will be responsible for organizing them. Convenors of track proposals accepted by the Programme Committee of the conference will manage their theme within the call for abstracts, and will be responsible for reviewing, accepting/rejecting and organising submissions into their track. Teams of convenors (up to a maximum of four people) are welcomed, particularly if they are international in composition.
Track proposals are invited for EASST 2010 which address any theme within the field of science, technology and innovation studies. Track proposals may address (but are not limited to) the particular focus on practice & performance These could include the following
1. Technoscientific networks, uncertainty and
2. Medicine and healthcare as technoscientific practices;
3. Dispersed practices, mobile technologies and information infrastructures in networks of innovation and financial
4. The ‘doing’ of bodies and gender in science and technology;
5. Methodological approaches for investigating scientific and technological practices.
6. The performativity of technical objects and design;
7. Working and organizing in technologically dense practices;
8. Juxtapositions in science and technology communicating practices.
Tracks should address broad issues and themes within the field of science, technology and innovation studies, in order to attract a large number of scholars and last for the entire duration of the conference. Submissions for thematic tracks are expected to include an outline of the proposed theme and the area of interest (maximum of 500 words), as well as a short description of the convenors.
There will also be an open stream, whose convenors will be indicated ex-post by the Programme Committee of the conference. As for the others, this track will include between 20-30 participants, selected by the Programme Committee on the basis of the abstracts received and not addressed to any particular track.
Convenors will independently set the session topics and overall organization of the track. If a track collects less then 10 abstracts, there will be a discussion with the Programme Committee to decide whether to run the track anyway or join another track. In case a track collects more then 40 abstracts, there will be a discussion with the Programme Committee to decide whether to split the track in two or not. In case the convenors consider an abstract interesting, but not fitting with the thematic track, they will be free to re-address the abstract to the convenors of the track they think it fits better or to the convenors of the open track.
IMPORTANT DATES AND DEADLINES:
October 12 (2009): Proposal for convenors and thematic tracks deadline;
Please email proposals, following the guidelines, as a Word document, to conference@easst.net
November 2 (2009): Communication to the convenors of the tracks accepted/rejected (or to be reviewed);
November 23 (2009): Official announcement of the Conference, with the final track list included and the call for submission of abstracts of papers;
March 15 (2010): deadline for abstracts submission;
May 15 (2010): Communication of acceptance/rejection of abstracts to authors and opening of online
June 15 (2010): early registrations deadline (required for all presenters);
June 20 (2010): Final draft of the organization of each thematic session (to be sent by the convenors to the Scientific and Local Committee);
July 5 (2010): Publication on the website of the final Conference program.
University of Trento, Italy
Call for convenors and thematic tracks: PRACTISING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, PERFORMING THE SOCIAL
The 2010 EASST conference, to be held in Trento (Italy), from the 2-4 September is the biennial forum of the European Association for the Study of Science and Technology (EASST) for contributions on topics from the range of disciplines found within science, technology and innovation studies.
As in previous years the conference provides a broad platform for presentations based on contemporary research on the wide variety of topics in which STS and innovation scholars are active. These include risk and regulation, environmental sustainability, systems of innovation, sociology of expectations, sociotechnical transitions, science and technology policy, ethics of health & medicine, governance of emerging technologies, gender and science.
The particular focus for the 2010 conference is that of practice and performance. It turns its attention to science and technology as situated practices rooted and grown in a sociomaterial context, exploring the performativity of technoscientific practices.
The notions of “social construction” and “social shaping” of science and technology have been crucial for the development (and success) of science & technology studies. Increasingly, however, the “social” is seen as a question rather than as a distinctive explanatory category. The “social” begins to be viewed as the result of the connections that take place in an ecology of elements and heterogeneous relations, as well as of the scenarios these connections depict. Terms such as “construction” and “shaping” are frequently replaced by concepts, verbs and metaphors drawn from the cultures of performance. Science and technology, are seen as performative domains of the “social”; choreographies of sociomaterial relations where realities and representations are enacted simultaneously.
One approach recognizes the performative character of science and technology, understanding when, where and how a “thing” arises, and explores the ways in which science and technology “do things”. Another approach addresses the “doing” of things: namely, that the performances and the performativity of scientific and technological practices are embedded and embodied in material, symbolic and textual artefacts.
Practice, is probably one of the most useful concepts to capture this ambivalence. It allows us to look at science and technology as an ecology of heterogeneous elements and interactions, embodying and enacting situated processes of change and repetition of different sociomaterial worlds. Through practising science and technology, and in scientific and technological practices, so, “doing things” and the “doing of things” find a common ground of expression.
A key characteristic of the contemporary world is the role played by knowledge practices in the production and reproduction of the sociomaterial configuration which is often called “society”. STS and the concepts of practice and performance enable a unique perspective for studying and observing scientific and technological innovations, as well as the articulation of different forms of sociality and ideas of the social. This is the challenge addressed in key areas such as medicine and genomics, body and gender, work and organizations, communication & technology, consumption & markets, geographies and space.
New procedure for submission of sessions and papers
In contrast to previous EASST conferences, the 2010 conference involves a first stage call for track convenors, with a subsequent call for papers. The conference will be organized in approximately 20-30 parallel thematic tracks (each collecting approximately 20-30 participants) that run through the whole conference (3 days, 7 sessions).
This initial call is for thematic tracks by convenors who will be responsible for organizing them. Convenors of track proposals accepted by the Programme Committee of the conference will manage their theme within the call for abstracts, and will be responsible for reviewing, accepting/rejecting and organising submissions into their track. Teams of convenors (up to a maximum of four people) are welcomed, particularly if they are international in composition.
Track proposals are invited for EASST 2010 which address any theme within the field of science, technology and innovation studies. Track proposals may address (but are not limited to) the particular focus on practice & performance These could include the following
1. Technoscientific networks, uncertainty and
2. Medicine and healthcare as technoscientific practices;
3. Dispersed practices, mobile technologies and information infrastructures in networks of innovation and financial
4. The ‘doing’ of bodies and gender in science and technology;
5. Methodological approaches for investigating scientific and technological practices.
6. The performativity of technical objects and design;
7. Working and organizing in technologically dense practices;
8. Juxtapositions in science and technology communicating practices.
Tracks should address broad issues and themes within the field of science, technology and innovation studies, in order to attract a large number of scholars and last for the entire duration of the conference. Submissions for thematic tracks are expected to include an outline of the proposed theme and the area of interest (maximum of 500 words), as well as a short description of the convenors.
There will also be an open stream, whose convenors will be indicated ex-post by the Programme Committee of the conference. As for the others, this track will include between 20-30 participants, selected by the Programme Committee on the basis of the abstracts received and not addressed to any particular track.
Convenors will independently set the session topics and overall organization of the track. If a track collects less then 10 abstracts, there will be a discussion with the Programme Committee to decide whether to run the track anyway or join another track. In case a track collects more then 40 abstracts, there will be a discussion with the Programme Committee to decide whether to split the track in two or not. In case the convenors consider an abstract interesting, but not fitting with the thematic track, they will be free to re-address the abstract to the convenors of the track they think it fits better or to the convenors of the open track.
IMPORTANT DATES AND DEADLINES:
October 12 (2009): Proposal for convenors and thematic tracks deadline;
Please email proposals, following the guidelines, as a Word document, to conference@easst.net
November 2 (2009): Communication to the convenors of the tracks accepted/rejected (or to be reviewed);
November 23 (2009): Official announcement of the Conference, with the final track list included and the call for submission of abstracts of papers;
March 15 (2010): deadline for abstracts submission;
May 15 (2010): Communication of acceptance/rejection of abstracts to authors and opening of online
June 15 (2010): early registrations deadline (required for all presenters);
June 20 (2010): Final draft of the organization of each thematic session (to be sent by the convenors to the Scientific and Local Committee);
July 5 (2010): Publication on the website of the final Conference program.
Friday, October 23, 2009
Nano Regulation Symposium: Giant solutions for tiny problems?
Nano Regulation Symposium: Giant solutions for tiny problems?
TILT together with the Association for the Environment and the University's Science Shop are organising a symposium on nano regulation on Friday 13th November next. For more details see their website: www.uvt.nl/nanotechnologie
TILT together with the Association for the Environment and the University's Science Shop are organising a symposium on nano regulation on Friday 13th November next. For more details see their website: www.uvt.nl/nanotechnologie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
