����������� ������ ������������������ ������������������������������������������������� ����!������"# �$����%�&$������

'"()�)* **)"�+ )",��,- ./���� ���������

Socio-ethical Issues and Nanotechnology Development: Perspectives from India

Subhasis Sahoo Science and Technology Area

The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) Email: subhasis.sahoo@teri.res.in

Abstract- Ethical issues arise when the technology is developed with inadequate information about right/wrong outcomes and the costs for future generations.. In the context of nanotechnology in developing countries a range of socio-ethical issues pertaining to - benefits vs. risks, equity and access to technology, public engagement and democratic participation, the need for involvement of various stakeholders from developing countries – needs to be addressed. This paper explores socio-ethical issues associated with nanotechnology development in India. First, it provides nanotechnology in India by describing investment climate, priority areas, institutions and issues. Second, reflections on socio-ethical issues in nanotechnology are drawn from a survey across various scientific institutions of India. Third, it addresses the relevance of the precautionary principle in practice for the regulation of nanotechnology in India. Fourth, it examines how the public should be engaged in cooperation with government and industry and finally makes suggestions of how to go about responsible nanotechnology governance in India.

I. INTRODUCTION

Emerging technologies come with social and ethical debate. Nanotechnology (NT) is no exception. NT is a powerful and revolutionary development that is likely to have a significant impact on society. The societal impacts of NT can be generally divided into two types: EHS (environmental, health and safety issues), and ESI (ethical and social issues). Reflections on ESI of NT are indispensable since the implications of NT inevitably arise from the fact that technology development and use is social embedded. It is widely acknowledged that, since the applications of NT are not yet clear, neither the ethical nor the social issues are clear. However, it is argued that researchers must address these issues before they overwhelm NT and upset potential benefits. In this context, this paper is an attempt to identify some of the major social and ethical issues - : benefits and risks, equity and access to technology, public engagement and democratic participation, involvement of developing countries and various stakeholders - in the context of NT developments in India. A. Benefits vs. Risks

NT is an enabling technology which gets reflected in diverse applications and innovations ranging from new materials for textiles, packaging, and food, to sophisticated medical procedures and treatments. These are some of the potential benefits given in the NT argument. It is believed that the impact of NT on health, wealth, and the standard of living for people will be at least the equivalent of the combined microelectronics, medical-imaging, computer-aided engineering, and man-made polymers in this century [1].

Survey estimates that the net worth of nano-enabled products is to increase from $147 billion in 2007 to $3.1 trillion in 20151.

On the one hand, the deployment of NT products implies the speed of progress in the science and on the other hand, reflects the unknown risks and uncertainties inherent in the NT products/nanomaterials. The risk of nanomaterials is latent because nanoparticles exhibit unique properties, particularly related to their smaller size. Research suggests that NT might pose risks by generating novel types of matter and substances e.g. carbon nanotubes. Where do these and other nanomaterials go when they enter the environment or human body through inhalation, ingestion or dermal contact and what are their effects? B. Equity and Access to Technology Will all sections in a society have equitable access to the technology? If not, then who gets what and technology for whom? Since technology and development are intricately related and in the case of NT, the technology is very expensive which requires high investments. The developed countries will have the capacity to invest in this technological innovation while others may be thwarted by lack of access to capital or technological expertise. For example, many nano-enabled products including those at any stage of pharmaceutical production will not be affordable in underdeveloped regions and therefore those products needed there will not even be conceived or produced [2]. Moreover, the exploitation of NT for industrial gain will completely be dominated by big multinational companies. It is reported that in developing countries like India, none of the public sector companies have done any investment in NT. From that point of view, NT can be exploitative. There is certainly an ethical and political issue related to it. To what extent will issues of financing, investment pattern, political ideology and industry participation shape these decisions? Access to technology is also protected by patents and licensing systems. It is argued that patenting and licensing systems favor the control of NT by developed countries which could restrict the access to research, leading to a widening of the gap between rich and poor countries. C. Public Engagement and Democratic Participation While several developed countries are encouraging different ways of public participation to assess NT development, this is

1 Lux Research, Over-hyped technology starts to reach potential: Nanotech

to impact $3.1 trillion in manufactured Goods in 2015, July, 2008.

Distribution of DST sponsored nanotechnolgy related R&D projects across various sectors

0123456789

10

2002-03(22)

2003-04(35)

2004-05(19)

2005-06(12)

2006-07(18)

2007-08(45)

2008-09(42)

2009-10(31)

Year (Total no. of projects)

Health Energy WaterAgriculture & Nutrition Environment Toxicity

rare in developing countries. Public participation is required not only because the (unknown) risks of a new technology cause serious concern but also due to the controversies that arise when people are unable to ask more fundamental questions: What is the technology for? Who owns it? Who will take ‘responsibility’ if, when things go wrong and Can we trust them? Studies show that every technological revolution in the past has had major impact on the perceptions of the public about right and/or wrong and consequently, the legitimacy of technological change. D. Involvement of Developing Countries and Various Stakeholders One of the problems with socio-ethical work of NT is that it gets confined to the developed countries and within developed countries only few major players are involved. The early identification of ethical and social issues associated with NT, appears in reports and proceedings of NT initiatives by developed countries e.g. US National Nanotechnology Initiative [3]. A survey on the social and ethical issues in NT, argues that all these issues refer to the concepts such as fairness, justice, equity and power [4]. In the European Union, discussions of ethical and social issues of NT have also started e.g. Germany and Denmark. But the inclusion of voices on NT from developing countries is required since developing countries look toward technology for solutions to complex social problems in the field of energy, environment and health. Even within a country what obligations are there among various stakeholders—scientists, policy-makers, technology developers, industry, and civil society groups — for sharing technological development in the country? Our research revealed that there is a paucity of studies on ethical and social issues associated with NT in developing country context.

II. THE CONTEXT FOR NT INNOVATION IN INDIA

Worldwide, interest in NT is on the rise. Developing countries usually find themselves on the sidelines watching the excitement of technological innovation [5]. Looking at the global NT developments, countries like China, India, Brazil, South Africa, Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Philippines, and Mexico etc. have initiated extensive engagement in NT research and development (R&D). As such, among these countries, India has undertaken initiatives to engage with NT and harness its benefits. In a developing country like India, a liberalizing economy set on a growth path, and techno-bureaucracy willing to pursue new/emerging technologies with a reasonably open mind, the situation seems ripe for NT innovation. Thus, NT innovation in India can be seen through a social matrix of investment climate and research areas, institutions and issues, relevance and potential applications. A. Investment Climate and Areas of Priority in NT Investment is essential for the development of science and technology (S&T). NT investment in India is a government-led initiative through the Department of Science and Technology (DST), and the Nanoscience and Technology Initiative (NSTI). During 2002-06, the NSTI invested about 350 crores and in

May 2007, the government agreed to invest another 1000 crores for a period of five years. Looking at such investment, Prof. C. N. R. Rao, the Chairperson of NSTI, remarks that the allocated funding, though, is substantial but less as compared to other countries like Korea, China, Japan and Taiwan. Since 2001, the total investments made in NT by India have been $144 million. The eleventh five-year plan has dedicated investments worth $200 million for the technology. It indicates that the investment in NT is picking up and the public funded research has been given a pivotal role. Investment from NSTI would be to support a number of institutions to have adequate facilities and to carry out research and teaching in NT. In addition, specialized centres/units are to be established for NT research in the country. A proportion of the funding is used to sponsor international conferences that improve the international visibility of India’s NT research, and to facilitate the international communication and collaborations. Dozens of international and national conferences in the field have been held in India since 2000, such as the International Conferences on Nanoscience and Technology (2003, 2006, and 2008), the International Conference on Nanotech India (2009), the International Conference on Advanced Nanomaterials and Nanotechnology (2009), the International Conference on the applications of Nanotechnology in Electroceramics (2009). Besides NSTI, various other S&T agencies within the government started investing in NT research in India such as Department of Information Technology (DIT), Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Science and Engineering Research Council (SERC). Sectors such as electronics, health, energy and environment have received greater attention for the NT investment in India. In the field of electronics, the Department of Information Technology (DIT) has launched a NT programme. DBT is supporting research in nano-bio interface. SERC has also aided research projects on NT [6]. Fig. 1 shows the distribution of sponsored projects from 2006 to 2008 across key sectors [6]. From the perspectives of NT research, nano structures, nanoparticles, nano composites, magneto-resistant materials, carbon nano tubes, ceramics, semi-conductors are the top NT funding areas of research. In the industrial sector, the focus is on the diagnostic and therapeutic uses.

Fig. 1. Distribution of DST, DBT, and SERC sponsored nanotechnology

related R&D projects across various sectors. Source: http://nanomission.gov.in

Distribution of existing "Centres of Excellence" across the various categories of R&D

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Central/ StateUniversities

DeemedUniversities

CSIRLaboratories

AutonomousInstitutes

PrivateUniversity/ResearchInstituteUnits Centre Others

B. Organizations, Institutions and Issues NT research in India are mostly concentrated in the top public universities, government research institutions, and the individual researchers are also from the same research institutions and universities, including Indian Institutions of Technology (IITs), Indian Institute of Science (IISc.), Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research (JNCASR), Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Universities of Delhi, Guwahati, Hyderabad and Pune. It implies that domestic industry, at this stage, seems to be not investing much on NT R&D. The DST has also set up ‘Centre of Excellence (CoE) for NT established under the NSTI to undertake R&D to develop scientific applications in a fixed period of time [6].

Fig. 2. Distribution of existing “Centre of Excellence” across the various

categories of R&D institutes. Source: http://nanomission.gov.in

As shown in Fig. 2, the 19 CoE have been spread across 14 distinct institutions in India. These CoE have been set up primarily at those institutes that have either been engaging in NT based R&D prior to their establishment or have developed the resources to do. Council of Scientific and Industrial research (CSIR) in India, a network of 38 laboratories/research institutes, engages in scientific and industrial R&D for socio-economic benefit has also commissioned R&D in NT in diverse areas. Similarly in China NT community is drawn from not only its 50 universities but also 20 research institutes of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [7]. Unlike China where 3000 industrial enterprises are involved in NT research; in India vital links with industry are currently missing. D. Relevance and Potential Applications of NT in India The properties of NT have caused researchers and companies to consider using it in several fields. The major applications of NT in India can be seen in the field of materials, security, medicine, textiles, cosmetics, cleaner water, among others. The application of NT in the field of materials, are better known as “smart materials” e.g. sensors, actuators, and computer chips, which would enable the device to “smartly”, adjust itself to the environment by making changes within it. NT has implications for the development of small, low-profile biometric sensors which along with voice, handwriting, and finger printing and other bio-system recognition could provide personal security systems and have use for both police and the

military. Researchers are developing customized nanoparticles the size of molecules that can deliver drugs directly to diseased cells of a human body. There is some experience in India where drug delivery using nanoparticles has been accomplished by some of the industries e.g. companies like Dabur have brought NanoExcel, an anti-cancer drug in India. Making composite fabric with nano-sized particles or fibers allows improvement of fabric properties without a significant increase in weight, thickness, or stiffness. Indian textile companies like Raymond has come up with anti-microbial finish to garments. NT is being used to develop solutions to the problems in water quality. In this regard, Tata has developed a Swach water purifier which removes organic impurities from water for its domesticated use.

III. VIEWS AND PERCEPTIONS OF INDIAN SCIENTISTS TO

SOCIO-ETHICAL ISSUES IN NT DEVELOPMENT

A cross-sectional survey of 15 scientific institutes/laboratories associated with NT from various parts of the country was undertaken during December 2009-February 2010 to understand the perceptions of scientists on different socio-ethical dimensions such as economic and human resources, benefits and risks, regulation and governance of NT [8]. A pool of 35 scientists was interviewed. Out of the 35 scientists, there were twelve scientists from materials sciences and engineering, six scientists from chemistry, four scientists each from physics, biological sciences and social sciences, one each from electrical engineering, electronics and communication engineering, mechanical engineering, instrumentation science, toxicology. It shows that scientists from different disciplines were taken into account for the study. Fieldwork was carried out by varying combinations of participant observation and interviewing. Interviews were face-to-face and open, guided by a pre-designed and tested questionnaires, audio-recorded and then transcribed. It is noted that scientists/researchers located within an institution/organization vary in their views regarding the various issues associated with NT. Therefore, institutional/organizational/disciplinary affiliations do not play any significant role in shaping the perceptions of scientists. A similar study has also been conducted in a developing country context [9] A. Perception on Funding and Resources among the Scientists One of the important social issues associated with S&T field is funding. Sometimes funding makes scientists to shift to a particular S&T field which is nicely-funded. The same thing happened to NT. When one looks at the funding issues to NT in India, the bigger (and the elite) institutes was reported to receive maximum funding as compared to smaller institutes/universities. Funding existed for certain Institutes like IISc., JNCASR, IIT, BARC, International Advanced Research Centre for Powder Metallurgy and New Materials (ARCI), etc. It may however, be noted that the funding available for NT development in India was reasonable. It seemed that there is a lack of transparency in funding due to

improper allocation of funds e.g. when you don’t come from big institutes/have link with big personalities in S&T field. Even the massive infusion of research funds showed that too many institutes involved in NT research without having capabilities. But there were no allocated portions of their NT budgets to ethical and social implications. NT is perceived by scientists as an interdisciplinary field which requires knowledge from biology, chemistry, materials science and metallurgy, physics and engineering sciences. The interdisciplinary nature of NT demanded the trained labour force for research. In addition, scientists advocated for specific training programmes for PhD and Post-doctoral positions. Even the adequate training is required at the operational level for the technicians. It is suggested that all research students and faculties be required to study social and ethical issues [10]. Scientists in India vouched for this provided additional incentives such as training grants. B. Risk Perception among the Scientists It was observed that almost Indian scientists confirm to the presence of risk in every technology and hence NT is not risk-free. They argued that though nanomaterials carries risk, but the lack of documentation makes it unproven. Scientists were asked, whether they perceive any risks in NT or nano-enabled products. It is revealed that a varied risk perception existed among the scientists according to the specific NT application. For instance, applications within the health area were considered more negatively than applications in the field of electronics. As shown in Table III, the scientists’ views were clubbed into two categories such as ‘supporters’ and ‘risk-tolerant supporters’. It is emerged that both are similar in being supportive, but they display different perceptions of risk in NT. For the ‘supporters’, risk is not an issue. The ‘risk-tolerant supporter’ perceives risk but then discounts it. Scientists were asked whether they take any precautions dealing with NT research or products. It is reported that there were no ‘special’ precautions taken by the scientists during their lab-work on nanomaterials. However, they indicated that safety protocols for R&D in NT, particular and other areas, in general need to be developed. Some scientists recommended that 2-5% of their research budgets to be spent for the implementation of precautions and best practices in laboratories. So, researchers need to assign a certain percentage of their budgets to solving consequential risk issues. On being asked whether scientists consider studying risk issues, almost all scientists reported negative. Though scientists are concerned about risk issues but they might not be able to devote time to risk issues. It is emerged that scientists want policymakers to take the initiative to develop the environment for assessing risks while technology is evolving. In India, voices from toxicologists alarmed the issues of risk and toxicity existence which later got supplemented by social and legal scientists. Toxicologists argued that ethical issues of science as a whole where scientist should consider there may be some danger of NT because the nanoparticles are floatable

particles. It does not settle down. So if it comes in contact with air, then it can have some toxic effect.

TABLE III

Risk Perception of NT and Nano-enabled Products

among Indian Scientists/Researchers

Sl. No. Category Benefits Risky Ethically

Acceptable

Promoted

1 Supporters Yes No Yes Yes

2 Risk-

tolerant

Supporters

Yes Yes Yes Yes

Source: Survey Report of Capability, Governance and Nanotechnology

Developments: A Focus on India, Supported by IDRC, Canada, TERI, 2010.

C. Perception of Regulation and Governance among the Scientists

When asked whether NT requires a regulatory body for its R&D in India, the scientists’ responses were seen at three levels (as shown Table IV). At the beginning of NT research, scientists want complete freedom. A group of scientists argued that since NT is at nascent stage, regulatory measures impede the growth of S&T. In this regard, another group of scientists could make some points saying that a too much regulated system is ineffective and therefore scientific creativity and innovation requires some freedom to develop. They refer to ‘freedom of research’ as a license to do what they want. Taking freedom of research as a ‘higher’ value, they reject any claims of particular groups or societies to the control of their research. But the argument hardly applies to NT, however, because first, its products are not only ideas but also new substances changing the material world and second, lack of knowledge about these materials might outweigh the risk of unintended harm over benefits.

At any stage of NT research, a group of scientists advocated for regulatory measures with safety guidelines. Their argument is that no research is completely free from some kind of monitoring and for them; safety guidelines will be acted as a mechanism for valid standards of controlling and ethically justified. At the large scale NT production level vis-à-vis specific applications, one group of scientists argued for the involvement of various stakeholders in order to avoid some ill effect on the environment and society. Another group of scientists recommended for the sector-specific regulation in NT. For example, in the field of health, NT can be beneficial for prevention, diagnosis and treatment of illnesses and disabilities. In fact, the development of NT enables early diagnosis and better treatment with transplants and cellular repair systems. Some avenues of research in NT include the incorporation of machines in human systems. So, when it comes to the question of implanting artificial materials or machines in human system, then scientists think the question of ethics take a front-seat.

It was learnt that there is an absence of the regulation of nanomaterials and NT in India. In this regard, as discussed above, regulatory efforts were proposed, but scientists admitted

their lack of knowledge about the long-term safety of nanomaterials. Scientists agreed that the duty to contribute to a responsible governance of NT as part of their ethos, but they more or less explicitly rejected taking ‘responsibility’ for any consequences of the knowledge they produce beyond quite narrowly defined imminent risks arising from their work. They argued that taking any role in governance of these consequences is not part of their professional role. However, it was suggested that a mechanism could be considered for providing license to industries and laboratories dealing with manufacture or usage of nanomaterials.

TABLE IV

Perception of Regulation and Governance towards NT

among Indian Scientists/Researchers

Sl.

No.

Level Risk

Research

Required

Reason Regulatory Permission

1 At the

beginning of

research

No Freedom of

research

Granted

2 At any stage of

research

Yes/No Safety

guidelines

(for Yes);

Experiment

with Nature

(for No)

Granted with

regulatory

guidelines/Granted

3 At the

production

level

(application-

specific)

Yes Impacts on

society and

the public

Granted with

regulatory guidelines

and stakeholders

involvement

Source: Survey Report of Capability, Governance and Nanotechnology

Developments: A Focus on India, Supported by IDRC, Canada, TERI, 2010.

IV. RELEVANCE OF PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN NT

The precautionary principle (PP) acts as a useful mechanism for guiding the technology where the risks of a new technology are uncertain, unknown, and unpredictable (3Us). For example, new technologies like NT that could cure cancer may be used even if all side effects are known. NT is a diverse field and its definitions vary around the world, depending much on national strengths. PP not only questions acceptability and significance of the risks and health impacts associated with technology but also whether that technology and applications should be developed at all [11]. According to the World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology (COMEST), the PP applies when there exist considerable scientific uncertainties about causality, magnitude, probability, and nature of harm [12]. In relation to India, the PP has not been recognized in NT yet. The solution seems to be drawing insights from the application of PP in other new technologies like biotechnology context [13]. In addition, a democratic participation in the decision-making process as well as the involvement of various stakeholders e.g. industry

representatives and consumer groups should evaluate potential benefits of a technology over its risks resulting from certain activities and vice versa.

V. ADDRESSING PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

NT community in India worries that media coverage focuses too much on the NT as “one-shot solution to all problems”. Sometimes, the risks in NT have been overstated by media. Such coverages are the constant textual and visual interpretation of images associated with NT. It is assumed that even scientists rarely take up the social responsibility for communicating their research to the larger public. As a result, all these may affect public opinion. In this context, the most pressing issue in NT is public involvement. The issue of public participation in decision-making and using inputs from a wider public has been debated in the literature. In case of environmental policy-making the Aarhus Convention recognizes the right to participate in decision-making and also has provisions for applying this right in practice. Some other international declarations and conventions do recognize the right to participate and to be informed while Convention on Biological Diversity has included Prior Informed Consent in the context of Access and Benefit Sharing. When people perceive that scientists/policy-makers take their concerns into account, this promotes greater public trust in their relevant actors and institutions. This argument is also relevant for NT.

A group of scientists in India agreed upon that communication and public engagement with NT is essential to avoid hype and unexpected/unintended negative consequences. However, both NSTI 2001 and Nano Mission 2007 documents do not find a place for public engagement. Hence the issue of public engagement has remained untouched yet in white papers.

Scientists stressed upon ‘awareness’ which can be done through certain mechanisms such as campaign, public forums, exhibitions (e.g. where they could showcase NT products, nanomedicine, new materials) and seminars regarding its various features. In Republic of Korea, science museums are exhibiting various features of NT as well as application of NT in biotechnology and medicine to help public to gain a deeper understanding of NT [14]. They remarked that if there were greater public awareness of NT then there could be more support towards it. However, in NT right now in India the pressure for the inclusion of public is less because NT is so diverse. But given the widespread use of technology and concerns about social, ethical and environmental issues, public participation has to be anticipated.

VI. POLICY SUGGESTIONS

For responsible NT development, there is a need for ethical reflexivity2 at the institutional level where ethical issues are likely to arise in different stages of funding to basic research, manufacturing to maintenance, diffusion into society, operation

2 The idea of ethical reflexivity has been borrowed from Ulrich Beck’s

‘reflexive modernization’. For details see U. Beck, Risk Society: A New Modernity, CA: Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, 1992.

and use, monitoring and recycling. Let’s say, during funding a project, the funding agency must have some portions of budget for ethical issues of research, e.g. How salient or frequent ethical issues are or likely to be in scientists’ work? What it is they think makes an issue an ethical? Scientists’ notions of key ethical concepts like harm, acceptable risk and social responsibility of the technical professionals. Such inquiries could yield useful baseline information about perceived ethical issues in NT development. In the case of India, despite the fact that a certain amount of government funding is allocated every year for NT development, no percentage of NT budgets are allocated for the consideration of socio-ethical issues; therefore steps should be taken towards a serious consideration of this issue.

Indian scientists should think of safety guidelines for handling nanomaterials [8] and the guidelines must adhere to socio-economic conditions of the country since S&T development is a country-specific phenomenon. It would ensure that practitioners in this field do not feel the adverse effects. Though scientists and policy-makers should have a lead role for the regulation of NT in the country, however, representation of social scientists is needed. Social scientists contribute to the role and impact of a technology on society, evaluation of risk, whether consumer accepts/rejects, ethical, economic, legal and social implications of a technology [8]. Recognizing the ethical and social implications of technological development, government should intervene and regulate experimentation with fabrication and usage of nanomaterials.

In order to provide information on NT in a clear and effective manner, NT community should publicize their research on nanomaterials and the government should advertise ongoing NT research in the country as well [8]. There should be correct awareness. In this regard, the role of actors like non-governmental organizations (NGOs) particularly environmental NGOs can reinforce people’s ethical views regarding technology and its effects on human lives and societies. They should monitor potential consequences of rapidly emerging technologies as well as participate in these fields, often dominated by the government, industry, and the S&T elite. Dialogue between research institutes, granting bodies and the public on socio-ethical issues is necessary; all aspects of NT development and related results need to be explored from various professional and lay perspectives. To conclude, India requires good practices, training and dialogues for governance of nanomaterials.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The paper has been developed under the project titled “Capability, Governance and Nanotechnology Developments: a focus on India”, supported by International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada. I thank the team members of this project, particularly Shilpanjali Deshpande Sarma and Manish Anand for their comments on the earlier drafts. I also thank K. Ravi Srinivas for pressing me to make my argument

stronger. I wish to thank Jungil Lee, KIST and Sang-Hee Suh, CNMT, Korea for providing the opportunity to present this work. The views expressed in the article need not necessarily be the views of the funding organization or the organization with whom the author is affiliated.

REFERENCES

[1] National Science Foundation, Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology,.Arlington: VA.. 2001, Accessed on July 14, 2010 www.wtec.org/loyola/nano/NSET.Societal.Implications/.

[2] G. Hunt, “The Global Ethics of Nanotechnology”, in Nanotechnology: Risk, Ethics and Law, G. Hunt and M. D. Mehta, Eds, London: Earthscan, 2007, pp. 183-195.

[3] M.C. Roco and W.S. Bainbridge, Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, Dordrecht and Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.

[4] B. Lewenstein, “What Counts as a ‘Social and Ethical Issue’ in Nanotechnology?”, HYLE-International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 5-18, 2005.

[5] P.F. Singer, Salamanca-Buentello, and S.S. Daar, “Harnessing nanotechnology to improve global equity”, 2005, Accessed on July 15, 2010, http://www.issues.org/21.4index.html.

[6] TERI, “Nanotechnology development in India: building capability and governing the technology”, TERI Briefing Paper, supported by IDRC, Canada, 2010.

[7] C. Bai, “Ascent of Nanoscience in China”, Science, Vol. 30 No, 5731, pp. 61-63, 2005.

[8] S. Sahoo and S. Deshpande Sarma, “Nanotechnology, Scientists and Perceptions: A View From the Field”, Survey Report of Capability, Governance and Nanotechnology Developments: A Focus on India,Supported by IDRC, Canada, TERI, 2010.

[9] D. Patra, E. Haribabu and K. McComas, “Perceptions of Nano Ethics among Practitioners in a Developing Country Context: A Case of India”, Nano Ethics, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 67-75, April, 2010.

[10] The Royal Academy of Engineering and The Royal Society, Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties, London: The Royal Academy of Engieering and The Royal Society, 2004, Accessed on 16 July, 2010, http://www.nanotech.org.uk.

[11] M. Stebbing, “Avoiding the Trust Deficit: Public Engagement, Values, the Precautionary Principle and the Future of Nanotechnology”, Bioethical Inquiry, Vol. 6, pp. 37-48, 2009.

[12] COMEST, The Precautionary Principle, Expert Group’s Report, UNESCO, 2005, Accessed on 20 July, 2010, http://unesco.unesco.org/images/0013/001395/139578e.pdf.

[13] N. Chowdhury and S. Sabhapandit, “The Legal Regime for Application of the Precautionary Principle in India: Future Directions for the GM Regulatory Regime”, International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Vol. 7, pp. 281-300, 2007.

[14] K. Choi, “Public Engagement and Education for Ethics in Nanotechnology”, in Nanotechnologies, Ethics and Politics, UNESCO, Eds, UNESCO, 2007.