The US National Nanotechnology Initiative has just released its 2009 budget projections, and a new line item, or as its termed in the summary, “Program Component Area”, that addresses Environment, Health and Safety (EHS) has been added.
Last year’s 2008 budget summary provided only a Program Component Area entitled “Societal Dimensions”.
But in the breakdown of the new 2009 budget, the EHS program has been retroactively plugged in for 2007 and 2008, representing $48.3 and $58.6 million, respectively for each year. But this year the EHS program has received an increase over 30% from last year to the tune $76.4 million.
These figures compare somewhat favorably to European Commission spending on health issues related to nanoparticles, which amounted to €28 million between 1998 to 2006. It’s not exactly clear how much the EC will dedicate to EHS studies for nanotechnology under the new FP7 Programme, but a rundown of the research projects into nanosafety within Europe can be found here.
The US NNI while being one of the most, if not the most, transparent government nanotechnology funding organizations in the world has come under criticism for its perceived failure to adequately address the nanotechnology hazard question.
Despite this increased funding for EHS research, the criticism will likely not go away as long as there is a vested interested in some NGOs to keep the pressure on to ensure their own necessity to the process as this blog has noted before.
If the NNI really wants to silence the critics, they might allocate some of their budget to hiring these critics as part-time consultants because they have certainly already handled the funding aspect.
Comments (2)
The NNI Program Component Areas (PCAs) are NOT line items at all. NNI money is allocated to more than a dozen agencies as part of their regular allocations. The PCAs report how much many they choose to spend on nanotechnology research, and break it down into related areas. The 2007 NNI Strategic Plan (available from www.nano.gov) separated out money reported as being spent on environmental, health, and safety issues from the broader category were it was previously reported. In fact the old "Societal Dimensions" category had been subdivided in the last few NNI Supplements to the President's budget, since there was heightened interest in knowing how much is invested in EHS research. The new plan codifies that practice and makes it a little more transparent.
Posted by Philip Lippel | February 15, 2008 12:50 PM
Posted on February 15, 2008 12:50
Dear Mr. Lippel,
You seem to object to the term "line item". And perhaps it is used incorrectly in its usage as an accounting term.
I was merely pointing out that in the budget of 2008 the Program Component Area (PCA) of "Societal Dimensions" included EHS spending, as the link I provided in the blog entry indicates. This year, EHS is its own PCA while maintaining the Societal Dimensions PCA.
I see nothing sinister in this, and as I point out the US nanotechnology budget is one of the most transparent, and clear, national budgets for nanotechnology funding...and I commend the organizations involved for making this so.
My concern is that while the US government is trying to be earnest in its attempt to address concerns over EHS of nanotechnology by allocating funds to solving any issue, some NGOs will never be satisfied until they are inside the process of finding a solution.
Posted by Dexter Johnson | February 18, 2008 5:33 AM
Posted on February 18, 2008 05:33