Commitment to Progress Is the Key to Nano Success^1,2

Reed D. Rubinstein, J.D.
Greenberg Traurig LLP's Washington, D.C.

"Behold the turtle. He makes progress only when he sticks his neck out."
James Bryant Conant (President, Harvard University 1933-1953)

Nanotechnology's march forward in materials science, molecular manufacturing, and medicine carries the promise of social and economic progress. Progress, however, depends on the successful commercialization of nanotechnology-based consumer and industrial products.

The business risks of developing, marketing, and selling nanotechnology-based products are pedestrian and manageable. Existing laws are generally sufficient to protect proprietary technology and applications, and to ensure the efficacy and safety of nanotechnology-based drugs and medical devices. Effective measures to safeguard employee health and safety, and to manage process and product wastes in an environmentally responsible manner, are available. Liability insurance can be obtained. Most importantly, consumers appear to be responding favorably to products using the new technology.

Nevertheless, it would be unwise to underestimate potential social barriers to nanotechnology's commercialization; nanotechnology could become a focal point for those who fear the unknown and unintended consequences of technological progress. As a senior advisor in the federal Office of International Science and Technology noted during a 2003 presentation to a U.S. government inter-agency meeting on nanotechnology and the environment:

It used to be that people were generally optimistic about the contribution science made to their quality of life. . . . The benefits of any new technology were always presumed to be greater than the risks. . . . This world -- what academics call the old "diffusion of innovations" theory of technology acceptance -- is largely gone.

Technological change that threatens traditional economic and social power relationships inevitably engenders strong opposition. The Industrial Revolution's middle class came under fierce assault from two reactionary forces -- the old clerical and landed aristocracy, and Karl Marx. Nevertheless, the mainstream American and British social elites and intellectuals of the time -- the businessmen and reformers, the writers and philosophers -- held firm to their belief in the critical link between social progress and technological development. The evidence of 200 years conclusively demonstrates that those who put their faith in technology's promise were right. By any objective measure -- life expectancy, education, individual freedom, or personal wealth -- it is clear that the benefits of technological progress far outweigh its burdens and risks.

Sound science, not unfounded fear, must prevail if nanotechnology's promise is to be realized. Therefore, scientists, engineers, private industry, bureaucrats, environmentalists, consumer advocates, ethicists, and social reformers each have a critical role to play in facilitating nanotechnology's development. Each group must do the hard work needed to create regulatory and legal systems that will protect human health and the environment, preserve consumer confidence, and ensure that the private sector has free reign to make nanotechnology flower.

Reed D. Rubinstein of Greenberg Traurig LLP's Washington, D.C., office practices administrative and environmental law and litigation. He is a member of the firm's nanotechnology practice group.

¹ This commentary is related to Mr. Rubenstein's comments during a presentation at the Converging Technologies Bar Association Legal Tutorial during NanoBusiness 2006, held in New York in May.

² This article represents the opinions of the author and not those of the Center on Nanotechnology and Society or the Converging Technologies Bar Association.