Public Authority Liability and the Regulation of Nanotechnology: A European Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper argues that in certain circumstances public authorities should be liable for regulating nanotechnology. Nanotechnology is an emerging field of technology that enables to control shape and size of various structures, devices and systems at nanometer scale on which one nanometer is equal to one-billionth of a meter. In spite of being a nascent field of science and technology, its scope of application – in the food, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, construction, textile, electronics, and agricultural industries – is expanding rapidly. The risks associated to nanotechnology, however, and its long-term consequences are still largely unknown, particularly in regards to its health and safety impacts on individuals. In this context of uncertainty and ambiguity surrounding this emerging technology, it is highly problematic that the current legal liability framework in the European Union for defective products under Product Liability Directive (85/374/EEC), and the public authority liability for damage caused by EU institutions or by its servants in the performance of their duties under Article 340 (2) TFEU – fails to effectively protect users of nanotechnology.\nThus, it is imperative to ensure an adequate legal response in order to protect users of nanotechnology. This piece proposes a regulatory framework that will enable users to claim compensation from public authorities in cases of incomplete or insufficient regulations in regards to nanotechnology. The proposed liability scheme is based on (a) public authority liability as a secondary claim; (b) the infringement of objective precautionary principles; (c) whereby the burden of proof rests on the public authority; and (d) the limitation period for a claim for damages starts from the time of knowledge about the cause of damage.\nFinally, this paper concludes by recommending the implementation of additional solutions to safeguard the protection of the users of nanoproducts. These include creating an innovation fund for companies to share their profits with public authorities; governmental research subsidies and programmes financed from public funds; and consumer awareness and education campaigns about risks related to nanotechnology
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".