Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
there may be a need to establish multiple sector-specific or material-based public-private partnerships
(for example, a CNT-based public-private partnership that includes CNT manufacturers, researchers, and
other key stakeholders).
Partners should share in the funding of the public-private partnerships; this would help to ensure
active participation of all parties in moving toward clearly articulated and agreed-on goals. Although the
goals will depend on the nature and scope of the specific partnership, some basic goals modeled on those
of HEI would provide direction applicable to all public-private partnerships.
Public-private partnerships should foster open sharing of information, both internally among
partners and externally with a broader audience, via reports, conferences, and other media. Public-private
partnership agreements should take into account the confidentiality concerns of industrial partners. It is
understood that the organization of an effective and well-run public-private partnership takes time, but
NNI agencies should increase their efforts to initiate partnership programs because they are critical for the
implementation of the research strategy; without them, research progress will be slower and more limited.
The committee recognizes that there are mechanisms that allow agencies to share and pool
resources for collaborative projects. An example is the joint funding of federally funded research and
development centers (FFRDCs), such as the EPA- and NSF-funded University of California Center for
Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology and the Center for Environmental Implications of
Nanotechnology.
Steps to Ensure Progress Toward Addressing Conflict of interests
Conflict of interest is an issue of public concern that affects many societal sectors and institutions,
both public and private. From government agencies, academic institutions, and professional organizations
to industry, financial institutions, and nonprofit organizations, that concern has resulted in the
proliferation of conflict-of-interest policies, reporting and disclosure requirements, and training programs
meant to restore or ensure public confidence and trust.
In one widely used definition, conflict of interest is described as “a set of circumstances that
creates a risk that professional judgment or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced
by a secondary interest” (Lo and Field 2009, p. 46). By statute, the NNI was established with dual
functions—promoting the development and commercialization of nanotechnology applications and
understanding and mitigating their EHS implications—and that created a set of circumstances in which
conflict of interest is almost inherent.
The current allocation of its research dollars ($105 million requested for EHS research in 2013 of
a total NNI request of $1.8 billion) is perhaps the most visible manifestation of the conflict. It is clear that
applications R&D takes priority over EHS risk research, so it is understandable that some stakeholders
may question or have concerns about the NNI's ability to pursue research on EHS implications with vigor
and integrity. The tension between the dual roles of NNI is exacerbated in that the results of EHS research
may inform regulatory decisions and affect the developers and users of nanotechnology applications.
Given the almost inherent conflict, it is critical that the NNI focus particular attention and energy
on ensuring that all stakeholders—including workers and the consuming public—trust the integrity of its
EHS research enterprise. As noted in the committee's first report, the separation of nuclear-power R&D
(assigned to the Department of Energy) from risk research and risk management (assigned to the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission) is one model for addressing the inherent conflict between the federal
government's interest in developing a new technology and managing the associated risks.
In Chapter 3, the committee assessed progress toward addressing two indicators for managing
conflicts of interest. The committee determined that little progress had been made toward “achieving a
clear separation in management and budgetary authority and accountability between the functions of
developing and promoting applications of nanotechnology and understanding and assessing its potential
health and environmental implications” (NRC 2012, p. 183), and this indicator was designated red. Some
Search WWH ::




Custom Search