Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Concept for a European Infrastructure in Nanobiotechnology
Final report of the FP7 Support Action EuroNanoBioJanuary 2010
Content
Introduction 4
Recommendations for a European Infrastructure in nanobiotechnology 5
Concept for building a European Capacity in nanobiotechnology 6
WP1:Nanobiotechnologyresearchinfrastructures–potentialsandlimitationsofsingle-sitefacilitiesordistributedresources 13
WP2:Fromproofofconcepttomarket–Analysisofnanobiotechnology-basedindustrialactivitiesinEurope 14
WP3:Educationtowardsaknowledgebasednanobiotechnologyeconomy 15
WP4:Ancillaryfactorsofnanobiotechnology 16
Projectandpartnerdescription 18
Concept for a European Infrastructure in Nanobiotechnology
Final report of the FP7 Support Action EuroNanoBioJanuary 2010
2 3EuroBioNano Final Report|January2010
IntroductionNanobiotechnologyisessentiallydifferentinmanyaspects
fromotherareasofnanotechnologysuchasnano-elec-
tronicsornano-materials.Itiscertainlythemostcomplex
sub-areaofnanotechnology,becauseitsimultaneouslyin-
volvesverydistantscientificdisciplinessuchasphysicsand
clinicalresearch,biologyandmathematics,orengineering
andimmunology.Fromtheindustrialperspective,nanobio-
technologydoesnotyetrepresentanindustrybyitselforan
existingmarket,butmoreamanifoldofenablingtechnolo-
giestoaidexistingsectors,suchasmedicaltechnologies,
pharma,biotech,food,cosmeticsorwatermanagement
andenvironmentalapplications.Topromotesuccessful
researchandtranslateitefficientlyintoeconomicapplica-
tionsinsuchaninherentlycomplexenvironmentrequires
astructuredandefficientsharingofbothknowledgeand
equipmentamongstakeholdersfrommanyacademicdisci-
plinesandindustries.Thiscallsforanintegrationofpeople
fromdifferentbackgrounds,whohadlittleornoprevious
contactorknowledgeofeachother.Thebestwaytoachieve
thisintegrationandtoaccommodatethecomplexityof
nanobiotechnologyistosetupacoordinateddistributed
Europeaninfrastructureofregionalcompetenceclusters.
Thefollowingrecommendationsaretheresultofintensive
consultationsanddiscussionswithexpertsfromacademia,
industryandlocalandnationalauthorities.Theyprovidea
realisticconceptualframeworkandatoolboxtostructure
theEuropeancapacityinnanobiotechnology.
Adistributedinfrastructure1. To cover the large range of scientific disciplines in-
volved in nanobiotechnology and the diversity of appli-
cation areas, a European infrastructure has to be built
on regional nanobio clusters, which have world-class
facilities and expertise with high levels of engagement
between industry and academia.
2. The nanobio clusters need to be connected and coordi-
nated to share knowledge and equipment and to cover
the whole value chain in specific application areas of
nanobiotechnology such as environment or medicine,
for example.
3. A dedicated infrastructure management should im-
prove the engagement between academic disciplines,
research centres and companies inside and between
the involved clusters.
4. Clear technical roadmaps for each of the application
areas within nanobio should be defined to provide a
catalyst for collaboration between industry and aca-
demia within the infrastructure.
5. ELSA experts should be encouraged to work collab-
oratively with science departments, research institutes
and industry to help explore ethical, legal and social
aspects (ELSA) of developing nanobiotechnology
thereby enabling early decision making about the prob-
ability of commercialisation in a socially and ethically
responsible manner.
6. Set-up and upgrading of clusters will require local,
national and European political support and funding
supplemented by private investments at a later more
mature stage.
Centralservices7. A European reference centre is needed for characteriza-
tion and toxicology studies of nanoobjects, which can be
accessed by all nanoobject producers and users from
academia and companies similar to the Nanotechnology
Characterization Lab at NCI/USA.
8. A European Centre for Risk and Safety Management
should be established, which provides information and
advice about handling of nanoobjects and protection
measures to SMEs and universities, which cannot af-
ford expensive risk assessment.
9. Clusters should help especially SMEs to articulate
their needs and interests to regulatory and standardi-
sation bodies.
Communicationandpublicengagement10. The infrastructure should provide pools of experts
and professional communication tools necessary for
engagement with the public.
11. Promotion of the capabilities of nanobiotechnology to
SMEs and clinicians should be facilitated by showcas-
ing examples of successful exploitation of nanobio-
technology.
12. Engagement of the European infrastructure with
nanobio clusters and research centres outside Europe
should be encouraged.
Educationandtraining13. The highly interdisciplinary nature of nanobiotech-
nology requires the integration of dedicated nanobio
modules preferably at the MSc or PhD level.
14. Because nanobiotechnology touches on many impor-
tant wider issues, teaching an understanding of ethical
and social aspects and training in science communica-
tion and public engagement should be included at the
MSc and PhD level.
15. Due to the rapid development in nanobiotechnology,
targeted education and training programmes for in-
career training need to be developed.
RecommendationsforaEuropeanInfrastructureinnanobiotechnology
4 5EuroBioNano Final Report|January2010
Theprojecthasexaminedthestateoftheartandfuturerequirementsofthe
nanobiotechnologycapacityinEuropewithregardtoinfrastructureneeds,communication
management,educationandtraining,andthepoliticalandsocialenvironment.Infourwork
packagestheconceptofadecentralizedinfrastructurebasedondistributedEuropean
competenceclusterswasevaluatedbyexpertinterviews,analysisofexistingoremerging
clustersandintensivediscussionsattwostakeholdersmeetings.Theresultshave
corroboratedtheconceptofadistributedinfrastructureandsubstantiatedtheidealconditions
forefficientcommunication,educationandtechnologytransferinnanobiotechnology.
ConceptforbuildingaEuropeanCapacityinnanobiotechnology
AdistributedinfrastructureTheapplicationofnanotechnologiestodifferentbiologi-
calormedicalapplicationsdoesnotrequirethecreation
oflargefacilitieslikesynchrotronsorheavyandexpensive
equipmentsuchassupercomputers.Instead,itwillcom-
pletelydependonthegenerationandefficientexchangeof
knowledgebetweenscientificdisciplines,andtransferof
knowledgebetweenacademia,SMEsandlargecompanies,
becauseitisaknowledgedrivendevelopment.Therefore,
thebiggestchallengeisthecreationofanenvironment,
wherepeoplewithdifferentbackgroundcanmeetand
worktogethertodevelopacommonunderstandingofeach
other’sexpertiseandhowtouseittodevelopnewproducts
fornanobiologicalapplications.Forexample,todevelop
newnanoparticlesformolecularimagingoneneedsatleast
chemiststoproducethem,physiciststodevelopthedetec-
tors,toxicologiststoanalysetheirsafety,andcliniciansto
validateandimplementtheminclinicaluse.Furthermore,
thisprocessneedsacademiclabsforbasicresearch,SMEs
fordevelopmentofprototypesandtransfertolargecompa-
nies,whichvalidate,distributeandcommercializethewhole
systemconsistingofnanoparticlesanddetectors.
Itisobviousthatefficienttransferofknowledgerequired
forsuchcomplexvaluechainsneedsaclosecooperation
betweenexperts.Thisstudyhasconfirmedthatthespeed
ofdevelopmentisbestachievedbyclustershavingall
necessaryexpertsandfacilitiesinclosevicinity.Existing
clustersareoftenlocatedaroundleadingresearchcentres
withcorenanotechnologyfacilities,plusspinoffventures.
Theyhaveasufficientcriticalmassofscientistsoriginally
comingfromdiversedisciplineswithongoingcollaborations
withindustryandhospitals.
TheseNanobioclustersoffergreateropportunitiesfor
SMEsandmultinationalcompanies(MNCs)toengagein
mutuallybeneficialcollaborationsandtomaximisethe
synergyfrominteractionsofMNCs,SMEsandacademic
researchers.TheSMEscanleverageIPopportunitiesfrom
theMNCaswellasgaininginsightsintonewR&Dopportu-
nities,managementpractices,innovationimplementation
andgreateraccesstoexternalknowledgeandadvice.
ThroughtheaddedvalueofcloselinksofMNCswithlocal
companiesandthefacilitiesandexpertisefromacademic
researchinfrastructures,abasiscanbeformedforMNCs
toleveragenewinvestmentfromparentcompanies,andit
canalsoleadtomorecommerciallyfocussedresearchers.
ThisinturncreatesanenvironmentwithpotentialforMNCs
tobecomemoreembeddedinECcountriesthroughlocal
interactionswithnanobiotechsupplychainandmultidis-
ciplinaryR&Dcollaborations.Whilesuchclustersalready
exist,theabovedefinitionprovidesfortheinclusionofany
newnanobioclustersfromanyEUregionwhichfulfilsthe
criteria.
Recommendation 1:
To cover the large range of scientific disciplines involved in
nanobiotechnology and the diversity of application areas, a
European infrastructure has to be built on regional nanobio
clusters, which have world-class facilities and expertise
with high levels of engagement between industry and
academia.
Theanalysisofexistingclustersinthisstudyhasshown
thatnoneofthemcoverssofarthewholedevelopment
processinagivennanobioapplicationarea.Instead,allof
themfocusonacertainsub-areabasedontheirhistorical
scientificstrengthanddevelopment.Furthermore,asanex-
ample,nanoobjectssuchasnanoparticlesmightnotonlybe
usedasimagingprobesbutalsofortargeteddrugdelivery.
Thiswouldinvolvetwoverydifferentindustriesnamelydi-
agnosticsandpharmaceuticalcompanieswithverydifferent
regulatoryframeworksandvaluechains.Asinglecluster
wouldnothavethehumanandfinancialresourcesand
facilitiestocoverbothdevelopmentprocesses.
Opportunitiesforleveragingcross-disciplinaryIPopportu-
nitiescanbeoptimisedbyfacilitatingcloserlinksbetween
wellorganizedclustersandEuropeancompaniesaswellas
existingnationalandEUprojectsandframeworksinvolved
inNanobioresearch.Furthermore,exchangeofinsights
amongpharma,biotech,ICTandmedicaldevicesindustries
willleadtonewR&Dopportunities,managementpractices,
andgreateraccesstoexternalknowledgeandadviceinan
openinnovationapproach.
Recommendation 2:
The nanobio clusters need to be connected and coordinated
to share knowledge and equipment and to cover the whole
value chain in specific application areas of nanobiotechnol-
ogy such as environment or medicine, for example.
Thecooperationbetweendifferentdisciplines,academia
andindustry,andlocalauthoritiesandfinancialservicesre-
quiresastructuredanddedicatedinformationandcommu-
nicationplatform.Manyclustersanalysedinthisstudyhad
establishedaclustermanagementteamororganisation,
whichmediatesbetweenstakeholders,organisesstrategic
ConceptforbuildingaEuropeanCapacityinnanobiotechnology
6 7EuroBioNano Final Report|January2010
meetings,andpromotestheclustertotheoutside.Italso
servesasacentralnodeforgettinginformationaboutall
partners,theirprojects,papersandpatents,andR&Dfund-
inglevels.Anotherimportantobjectiveofthemanagement
agencyisthecommunicationandcoordinationwithother
clustersinsidetheEuropeaninfrastructure.
Theimplementationofmanagingagenciestofacilitate
thecooperationofstakeholdersinsideandbetweenthe
clusterswillgreatlysupporttheinnovationprocessesso
thattranslationofinnovationtomarketandclinicsbecomes
moreefficient.
Recommendation 3:
A dedicated infrastructure management should improve
the engagement between academic disciplines, research
centres and companies inside and between the involved
clusters.
Theoftenquitedivergingagendasbetweendifferentap-
plicationfieldsofthenanobioindustrycallforaclearand
definedroadmapforeachnanobiotechnologyapplication
arealikeenvironment,medicine,lifesciences,agro-food,
andenergy.Incontrasttoroadmapsfortheelectronic
industryforexample,thenanobioroadmapshavetoinclude
fundamentalresearchtargetswhichstillrepresentmajor
roadblocksforanticipatedfutureproductsinthisyoung
technology.Suchroadmapshavebeendefinedforexample
bytheETPNanomedicineforDrugdelivery,Diagnostics
andRegenerativeMedicine.
Duetotheembryonicstageofindustrialmarketsinthe
field,suchroadmapswillfostercollaborationnotonly
amongrelatedcompanieswithinsectorsofthenanobio
industryalongthevaluechain,butbycomplementing
industryrequirementscouldalsofacilitatecollaboration
betweenindustryandacademia.Throughthecreationof
acriticalmassofexpertiseandfacilitieswithinananobio
cluster,industryandacademiacanbemoreefficiently
linkedtoimplementtheroadmapsleadingtodevelopments
ofinnovativeandconvergingtechnologies.Innovationscould
bebroughttothemarketsmuchfasterbysuchconcen-
tratedcentres.
Recommendation 4:
Clear technical roadmaps for each of the application areas
within nanobio should be defined to provide a catalyst for
collaboration between industry and academia within the
infrastructure.
Theapplicationofnanotechnologytobiologicalormedical
applicationswillraisesocialandethicalquestions.Unfortu-
nately,ethicalandsocialthinkingandthefurtherdevelop-
mentoftechnologyandsciencearenotconnectedanymore
becausethecurrentqualificationsystemforscientistsdoes
notleaveroomforsuchconsiderationsinmostcountries.
Therefore,adviceonethical,socialandlegalaspectsof
researchprojectsneedstobemadeavailableforscience
andindustry.
Manyclustersanalysedinthisstudyhavepoolsof
expertsdealingwithethical,orsocialorlegal
questions,butnoneofthemcoversall
areas.Apan-Europeaninfrastructureof
clusterscanprovidetheplatformforre-
searchers,SMEandmultinational
companiestogetadviceonand
involveELSAexpertsinnanobio
developmentsrightfromthe
beginning.
Recommendation 5:
ELSA experts should be
encouraged to work collabora-
tively with science departments,
research institutes and industry to help
explore ethical, legal and social aspects (ELSA)
of developing nanobiotechnology thereby enabling early
decision making about the probability of commercialisation
in a socially and ethically responsible manner.
Theanalysisofexistingclustersinthisstudynotonly
revealedtheneedforstateoftheartexpertiseandfacilities
innanoandbioresearchinclosevicinitytocompanies,but
alsohighlightedthatmajorregionalpoliticalandfinancial
supportisnecessaryforsetting-upandupgradingacluster.
Thissupportbylocalauthoritiesiscrucialforcreating
thesuitableinfrastructuralandfinancialenvironmentfor
transferofknowledgefromresearchcentrestoindustry.
Theregionalcommitmentalsoprovidesthebasisfora
sustainabledevelopmentanddistinguishesaclusterfrom
alargebutisolatedresearchcentre.Oncetheclusterhas
reachedacriticalsizeandmasstheinitialpublicinvest-
mentiscomplementedbyprivateinvestmentsfromlarge
ormultinationalcompanies,whichwanttoleveragefrom
theR&DpotentialofthelocalresearchcentresandSMEs.
Toattracttheinvestmentofsuchlargecompanies,thecon-
nectionofclustersintoacomplementaryinfrastructurewill
beacrucialstep,becauseitwillfacilitatetherecognitionof
nanobiotechnologyinEuropeattheglobalscale.
Recommendation 6:
Set-up and upgrading of clusters will require local, national
and European political support and funding supplemented
by private investments at a later more mature stage.
CentralservicesNanoobjectsareasubstantialpartinmanynanobio
products.Thereareissuesaboutthereproducibilityand
precisionofthesynthesisprocessesofnanoobjects.There
arealsomajorchallengestobeaddressedwithrespect
tonanoobjecttoxicity.Anotherissueisthephysicaland
chemicalcharacterizationofnanoobjectsaccordingto
commonstandardsandprocedures.Combined,theissues
relatingtonanoobjectsneedamultidisciplinaryapproach
withacriticalmassofexpertiseandfacilitieswhichcanbe
logicallyprovidedinaNanobioreferencecentrewithalarge
functionalinfrastructure.Asanexample,ifstandardisation
ofnanoobjectsynthesisprocessesandcharacterization
couldbeachievedcomparabletothelevelsofsemiconduc-
torthinfilmprocessingandvalidation,thiscouldfacilitate
muchmorereproducibleoutcomesfornanoobjectap-
plications.Thischallengeshouldbesetasthekeygoalof
EuropeanNanobiodevelopment,ascurrentlynanoobject
synthesisandcharacterisationappearstobealimitingstep
forseveralnanobioproducts.
Furthermore,itisimpor-
tantwhenaddressingthe
complianceofnanoobjects
fortherapeuticpurposesorin
vivodiagnosticswiththecurrent
EuropeanregulationstoprepareSOPs
(StandardOperatingProcedures)containing
clearprotocolsofvalidationandmonitoring
ofbiocompatibilityandpotentialtoxicity.These
SOPsshouldbesharedwithinthewholenanobio
communitybetweenresearchcentresandcompaniesin
ordertoworkoncommondocuments.
Recommendation 7:
A European reference centre is needed for characteriza-
tion and toxicology studies of nanoobjects, which can be
accessed by all nanoobject producers and users from
academia and companies similar to the Nanotechnology
Characterisation Lab at NCI/USA.
Nanoproducts,beingasubstantialpartofthenanotech
fieldare“athingwithoutadefinition”becausethekindand
amountof“nano”withinaproductvarieswidely.Tomeet
theupcomingconcernsaboutthesafetyofnanotechnology,
aprecautionaryapproachofallstakeholdersisneededthat
willencouragethegenerationofmoredataandthedefini-
tionofpotentialriskcoveringthewholelifetimeofaprod-
uct.Anothersafetyissueisthecreationofasafeworkplace.
Tobalanceriskandbenefits,safetyofficersincompanies
havetobetrainedandinformedspecificallyaboutthe
propertiesofnanoobjectshandledattheirlocation.Sucha
centrewouldnotonlyprovideacentralinformationplatform
butcouldalsodrivetheharmonizationofnationalsafety
proceduresandprotocols.
8 9EuroBioNano Final Report|January2010
Recommendation 8:
A European centre for Risk and Safety Management should
be established, which provides information and advice
about handling of nanoobjects and protection measures
to SMEs and universities who cannot afford expensive risk
assessment.
Athirdareawhichneedsacentralapproachcomprises
standardisationandregulationframeworks.Bothhavenot
onlyamajorimpactonthesafetyofnanoproducts,butalso
onmarketaccess.Theyarediscussedanddecidedatthe
Europeanorgloballevelbytheexistingcommitteesand
officialbodiessuchasISO,CENorOECD.Accesstothese
committeesiscrucialforcompanies,becauseitdecides
abouttimetomarketincaseoftheregulatoryframe-
workandmarketaccessinthecaseofproductstandards.
Participationtothecommitteesistimeconsumingand
expensive,whichnormallyexcludesSMEsfromthedecision
making.ClustersshouldhelpespeciallySMEstoarticulate
theirneedsandintereststoregulatoryandstandardisation
bodies.
ThissupportforSMEswillincreasetheirchancetointro-
ducetheirinnovationstothemarket,becauseaccording
totheECNanoActionPlanespecially“standardsprovide
alevelplayingfieldformarketsandinternationaltrade
andareprerequisitesforfaircompetition,comparativerisk
assessmentsandregulatorymeasures.”Thesameistrue
forIPRrulesandagreements,whichshouldalsobeanim-
portantfieldofsupportforSMEsandresearchinstitutions
providedbyclusters.
Recommendation 9:
Clusters should help especially SMEs to articulate their
needs and interests to regulatory and standardisation bodies.
Communicationandpublicengagement
InacomplexareasuchasnanobiotechnologyCommunica-
tionisnotonlyessentialforsuccessfulinvolvementofdis-
ciplinesandstakeholdersinthedevelopmentofnanobio-
technology.Itisalsonecessarytoengagewiththepublicin
atimelymannertoexplainthetechnologyanditsrisksand
benefits,tounderstandhowcitizensseethedevelopments,
includingpotentialconcerns,andtogetacceptanceofthis
newtechnology.Howearlythisshouldbedonewilldepend
onthedevelopmentofthetechnologyandalsothesocial
context.Engagementmaytakemanydifferentforms.Many
toolsareavailable,includingfocusgroupsandcitizens
juriesorInternet-basedapproaches.Sciencecentresalso
haveanimportantroleforexamplewithinteractiveexperi-
mentsorscienceexhibits.
Recommendation 10:
The infrastructure should provide pools of experts and pro-
fessional communication tools necessary for engagement
with the public.
Uptonow,nanotechnologicaldiscoveriesaremostlymade
inacademiclaboratorieswithoutaclearideaofapossible
application.Inaddition,manynanoobjectscanbeappliedto
severalapplications,butmanypossibleusershavenoclue
aboutnewdevelopmentsinnanotechnologyandhowthey
canutilizethemfornewinnovativeproducts.Toincrease
thetranslationofnanotechnologiesintonewproductsitis
necessarytodevelopmoreefficientmatchingofnanotech-
nologydevelopersandputativeusers.
Recommendation 11:
Promotion of the capabilities of nanobio-technology to
SMEs and clinicians should be facilitated by showcasing
examples of successful exploitation of nanobiotechnology.
AEuropeaninfrastructureconsistingofcomplementary
clusterswillnotrepresentthewholecommunity,because
outsideoftheinfrastructuretherewillbeotherleading
researchcentresinEuropeandaroundtheworld.Further-
more,othernetworksorinitiativesmightexist,whichfocus
onthesameareaofnanobiotechnologyandgatherimpor-
tantstakeholders.Toexploitthefullpotentialofnanobio-
technologyitismandatorytointeractwiththesecentres
andorganisations.
ThisengagementshouldfacilitatebenchmarkingofEUre-
searchinnanobiotechnology,collaborationonthedevelop-
mentofinternationalstandards,recommendedregulatory
requirements,andalsopromoteaccesstoEUexpertise
andinfrastructurefacilitiesforclustersfromdeveloping
countries.
Recommendation 12:
Engagement of the European infrastructure with nanobio
clusters and research centres outside Europe should be
encouraged.
10 11EuroBioNano Final Report|January2010
EducationandtrainingTheinterdisciplinarynatureofnanobiotechnologyrequires
newapproachesforcrossdisciplinaryeducation.Atpres-
entthereisagreatvarietynotonlyconcerningthetypes
ofcourses,butalsointheconsiderablerangeofcurricula.
Thiscanbeattributedtothefactthatnanobiotechnology
isnotaclearly-bordereddomainbutadiverseandmulti-
disciplinaryfieldwhichcanbeconsideredasasubfieldof
nanotechnologyoranextensionofbiotechnology,aswellas
chemicalorbiologicalengineering.Astrongnecessityfora
morepreciseandcomprehensivedefinitionofthefieldwas
identifiedwhichwillhelptodefineeducationalneedsfor
nanobiotechnology(NBT).
Therequirementsandinterestsofstakeholdersvarywidely.
ThemostproductiveapproachwillbetoincorporateNBT
modulesintoalreadyexistingundergraduateandmaster
leveleducationinscienceandmedicineinsteadoffurther
investingincompleteNBTM.Sc.courses.Thereisfur-
thermoreademandforin-depthtrainingonNBT,which
canbemetbyPhDgraduateschoolprograms,butother
approacheswillalsobeneededincaseswhereaPhDdoes
notnormallyincludeformalteachingmodules.
Recommendation 13:
The highly interdisciplinary nature of nanobio-technology
requires the integration of dedicated nanobio modules pref-
erably at the MSc or PhD level.
Europeansocietiesincreasinglyexpectscientistswhoare
givenpublicmoneytobeaccountableforwhattheydowith
it.Accordingly,scientistsarerequiredtoaddressethical
questionsinresearchproposals,becausefundingagencies
willincreasinglyaskforsuchconsiderations.Especiallyin
nanotechnologyapplicationfieldssuchasmedicineorfood,
awarenessaboutethicalimplicationsiscrucialtomeetcrit-
icalsentimentsaboutthepotentialdangers.Forallthese
reasonsitisessentialtore-integrateethicalthinkinginto
scientificresearchdealingwithapplicationareassuchas
medicineorfoodtoensurearesponsibledevelopment.One
practicalapproachwouldbetoincludecoursesormodules
onethicalandsocialaspectsinengineeringorlifescience
studiesandcoursesofrelevantapplicationareas.
Recommendation 14:
Because nanobiotechnology touches on many important
wider issues, teaching an understanding of ethical and
social aspects together with training in science commu-
nication and public engagement should be included at the
MSc and PhD level.
Nanobiotechnologyisarecentandfastdevelopingarea.
Inaddition,itisanenablingtechnologyformanydifferent
industries.Tocopewiththespeedandtheimplementation
ofitinexistingindustrialprocessesitwillbenecessaryto
continuouslyeducateandtrainthetechnicalandacademic
workforce.SpecifictrainingcoursesonNBTmaybeneeded
forengineers,technicians,scientists,safetyofficersand
otherrelevantpersonnel.
Recommendation 15:
Due to the rapid development in nanobio-technology
targeted education and training programmes for in-career
training need to be developed.
ConclusionThestudyhasshownthatadistributedinfrastructurebased
onacoordinatedpanEuropeanallianceofresearchdriven
clustersisthemostefficientinstrumentforfastandef-
ficienttranslationofnanotechnologicaldiscoveriesintobio-
logicalandmedicalapplications.Thereasonsforproposing
clustersasthebuildingblocksoftheinfrastructurearethat
theyprovide
• thenecessaryclosevicinityofstateoftheartexpertise
andfacilitiesaswellasresearchcentres,SMEsandlarge
companies,
• regionalpoliticalandfinancialsupportforupgradingof
facilitiesandSMEsupport,
• adedicatedcommunicationplatformwithdifferentpools
ofexpertsandtoolsforengagementwithdifferentre-
searchcommunities,industries,investors,mediaandthe
publicatlarge,
• thecriticalmassforimplementationofnewinterdis-
ciplinaryeducationandtrainingconcepts,whichalso
includehorizontaldisciplinessuchasethicsandsocial
sciences,and
• astructuredapproachforbenchmarkingandinteraction
withothercentresorclustersaroundtheworld,espe-
ciallyindevelopingcountries.
Itwillneedaconcertedactionofregional,nationaland
Europeanauthoritiestoprovidethepoliticalandfinancial
supportfortheset-upandupgradeofsuchinfrastructures.
ThismutualinvestmentwillmakesurethatEuropestays
competitiveatthegloballevelinnanobiotechnology.
Thecurrentsituationofnanobioresearchclustersin
Europehasbeenanalysedinordertoestablishdefinitions,
identifybestpracticesandsetupevaluationcriteria,in
ordertorecommendthemostsuitablemodelforanEU
nanobioinfrastructureandassessitsimpactonresearch
anddevelopment.
Thisanalysishastakenintoaccountaspectssuchasinte-
grationofresearchactivities,theefficientuseofresources,
regulationofaccesstofacilities,private-publicpartner-
ships,alliances,entrepreneurship,andtheimplementation
ofinterdisciplinaryapproachesforthedevelopmentofap-
plicationsinmedicine,environmentand/orfoodinorderto
understandthereasonsforsuccessforthemostdeveloped
clustersintheEU.
Onechallengewastovalidatetheinput(e.g.research&
development,humanresources,researchequipments,
fundedcommonprojects)andoutput(e.g.papers,patents,
companies)ofdifferentinitiativesbecausereportsare
oftennotspecificandkeypeopleinsideclustersarehardto
identify.Nanobiotechnologyactivitiesarehiddenunderthe
termnanotechnology,becausenanobioornanomedicine
arenotwelldefined.Presently,manyclustersareabottom-
upstructure,yetlooselyorganisedandrarelymanagedby
anagency.Thehaveasufficientcriticalmassofscientists
originallycomingfromdiversedisciplineswithongoing
collaborationswithindustryandhospitals,whicharesofar
mostlyoccasional,notstructuredpartnerships.Existing
clustersareoftenlocatedaroundleadingresearchcentres
withcorenanotechnologyfacilities,plusspinoffventures.
Diversemodelshavebeenobserved,however,depending
onthetraditionandresearchcultureoftheregion(more
centralforelectronics,moredisperseforlifesciences).
Nanobioclustersneedtobemoretightlyconnectedand
organizedattheEUlevelespeciallywithregardtoregula-
toryaffairs,standardisationandaccesstoclinicaltrials.
Suchwellorganisedinterconnectionofhighqualityclusters
or“polesofexcellence”wouldcombinemultidisciplinaryre-
searchcentresthatjoinmodernnanotechnologyfacilitiesin
amultidisciplinaryway.Additionally,theimplementationof
managingagenciestofacilitatetheconnectionofclusters
wouldsupporttheinnovationprocessessothattranslation
ofinnovationtomarketandclinicsbecomesmoreefficient.
Thefirststeptoreachthis“ideal”scenarioistoensurethe
integrationofdifferentdisciplinesatalocallevelwithina
city/district/regionwiththepotentialtobecomeapoleof
excellence.Thesecondstepistheset-upofaclusterman-
agementagencywhichmediatesbetweenstakeholdersand
organisesstrategicmeetingsforacademicinstitutionsand
betweenacademiaandindustry.Acompletedirectoryof
allthepartnersandtheircollaboratorsinexistingprojects
aswellastheirpapersandpatentsandacharacterization
ofresearch&developmentfundinglevelsandoutcomes
wouldberequiredtomoveforwardintothethirdlevel,
theupgradingofindividualclustersandthenetworkasa
wholetobecomeacompetitiveEuropeaninfrastructureof
nanobioclusters.Thisinfrastructurewouldhelptobuilda
knowledgeexchangebasedcommunityandeasetheac-
cesstoothermarketsortoclinicaltrials.Furthermore,the
infrastructureprovidesacomprehensiveinformationpool
neededtoraisepublicacceptanceofnewtechnologies,to
giveadviceforregulationandstandardisationofNanobio
objects,andforastrategicplanforfundingatthenational
andEuropeanlevel.
Definitions of cluster, innovation cluster, research cluster,
and cluster management agency applied in this document:
Cluster:Concentrationingeographicalspaceofallthe
partners(R&Dcentres,universities/departments,hospitals,
industry,entrepreneurs/spinoffcompanies,techtransfer
advisers,technologicalfoundries…)whosecontributionis
requiredforinnovationtohappeninaparticular,interacting
andeffectivefashiontobringnewproducts/servicesintothe
market/hospital.Theseinteractionscanbeledand/orman-
agedbyanagencyoroffice,withdedicatedstaff.
Moreover,ananobioinnovationclusterisbuiltuparounda
nanobioresearchcluster.Thisismostlyduetoitscross-
disciplinaryprofile,characterizedbytheeffectiveinterac-
tionofscientistsandengineersfromverydiverseexper-
tise(materialsscience,microelectronics,photonics,cell
biology,molecularbiology,inorganicandorganicchemistry,
medicine…)amongeachotherandwithhigh-techSMEs
andSpin.offs.
NOTE:Geographicalsizevarieslargelyfromonetoanother.
Roughly,inmostcases,itwillimplyonelargecityanda
suburbanradiusof100kms.
Nanobiotechnologyresearchinfrastructures-Potentialsandlimitationsofsingle-sitefacilitiesordistributedresources
ANNEX
12 13EuroBioNano Final Report|January2010
Ourobjectivesweretoestablisharepresentativepanelof
toplevelindustrialmanagerswithexperienceinnanobio-
technologybasedproductandprocesscommercialisation,
andtheanalysisofcasestudiesofsuccessfultechnology
transferorexploitationofnanobiotechnology.Fromthese
studiesthecriticalneedsof,andopportunitiesfor,industry
weretobededuced,especiallyforhigh-techSMEsstrongin
nanobiotechnologyresearch.Anaccomplishedexpertsur-
veyproveddifficulttoevaluateastheincludedcompanies
differedwidelyinsize,targetmarkettypeandtheirlevelof
experienceoractivitywithnanobiotechnology.Therefore,
theresponsesvariedandtoyieldaconsensusopinionad-
ditionalexpertswererecruited.
Itwasfoundthatawell-builtnanobioinfrastructurecould
significantlyeaseaccessforlargeandsmallcompanies
toarangeofexpensiveequipment.Ingeneral,companies
wouldbewillingtopayforinfrastructureaccess,therates
dependingforexampleonwhetherworkwascarriedoutas
co-developmentoraslicensabletechnology.Sharingequip-
mentcanmakesenseespeciallyforSME´sasithelpsthem
tosavemoneyandpotentiallycanyieldnewcollaborators.
Butwhilecollaboratingwithothercompaniesisconsidered
advantageous,animportantpreconditionformostcom-
paniesisthatthesafetyofintellectualpropertyhastobe
guaranteed.
Formultinationalcompanies(MNCs)thesituationisdif-
ferentthanforSMEs.Largecompaniesgenerallypreferto
directlyfundresearch&developmentandsubsequentlyown
resultingintellectualpropertyorshareitwithanacademic
researchprovidingorganisation(RPO).Theirexpertisefor
regulatoryissuesandprotectionofintellectualpropertyis
usuallyin-house.Ontheotherhand,SMEsoftenhaveto
licenseintellectualpropertyrightsfromaresearchorgani-
sationbecauseofhighcostsinvolved,andcouldprofitfrom
theavailabilityofexternalexpertiseprovidedbyananobio
infrastructure.Ithastobementionedthatinnovationin
nanobiomuchmoretakesplaceinhightechSMEstesting
newdevelopmentsonnichemarketsthaninMNCswhichare
usuallymoreconventionalanddoingincrementalinnovation.
Future recommendations:
Therecognizedgapinnanobioexpertisecanbeclosedbya
clearanddefinedroadmapthatwouldincludeeachnano-
biotechnologyapplicationarea.Thisroadmapwouldfoster
collaborationnotonlyamongrelatedcompanieswithin
sectorsofthenanobioindustryalongthevaluechain,butby
complementingindustryrequirementscouldalsofacilitate
collaborationbetweenindustryandacademia.Throughthe
creationofacriticalmassofexpertiseandfacilitieswithin
ananobiocluster,industryandacademiacanbemore
efficientlylinkedtoimplementtheroadmap(s)leadingto
developmentsofinnovativeandconvergingtechnologies.
Innovationscouldbebroughttothemarketsmuchfasterby
suchconcentratedcentres.
Theoftenquitedivergingagendaswithindifferentapplica-
tionfieldsofthenanobioindustrycanbemetbyacollec-
tiveroadmapcomplementedwiththeparalleldevelopment
ofstandardsforexistingandemergingnanobioproducts
andprocesses.Nanoobjectsareasubstantialpartinmany
nanobioproducts.Thereareissuesaboutthereproducibility
andprecisionforthesynthesisprocessesofnanoobjects.
Therearealsomajorchallengestobeaddressedwith
respecttonanoobjecttoxicity.Thepotentialtoimprove
biocompatibilityofsomeformsofnanoobjectsmaybean
optioninsomesituations.Combined,theissuesandoppor-
tunitiesrelatingtonanoobjectneedamultidisciplinaryap-
proachwithacriticalmassofexpertiseandfacilitieswhich
canbelogicallyprovidedinananobioclusterwithalarge
functionalinfrastructure.Asanexample,ifstandardisation
ofnanoobjectsynthesisprocessescouldbeachievedcom-
parabletothelevelsofsemiconductorthinfilmprocessing,
thiscouldfacilitatemuchmorereproducibleoutcomesfor
nanoobjectapplications.Thischallengecouldbesetasthe
keygoalofEuropeannanobiodevelopment,ascurrentlyna-
noobjectsynthesisappearstobealimitingstepforseveral
nanobioproducts.
Furthermore,withthecurrentEuropeanregulations,itis
importantwhenaddressingthecomplianceofnanomateri-
alsfortherapeuticpurposesorforinvivodiagnosticsto
prepareSOPscontainingclearprotocolsofvalidationand
monitoringofbiocompatibilityandpotentialtoxicity.These
SOPsshouldbesharedbetweenresearchcentresandcom-
paniesinordertoworkoncommondocuments.
Tocreatesuchnanobioclusters,alargescaleEuropean
initiativeisrequiredthatisfocussedonselectedregions
wheretherelevantcriticalmassinresearchcapacity
andexpertisehasalreadybeenreached.Collaborations
betweenindustryandacademiashouldbelarge-scaleand
widespreadandresourcesshouldbededicatedtopromote
theseregions.Nanobiotechnologycanprovideatypeof
cementtoenablecollaborationsamongcompaniesspe-
cialisedinICT,medicaldevices,pharmaandbiotechnology.
Fromproofofconcepttomarket–Analysisofnanobiotechnology-basedindustrialactivitiesinEurope
ANNEX
Withinsuchnanobioclusters,therearegreateropportuni-
tiesforSMEsandMNCstoengageinmutuallybeneficial
collaborationsandtomaximisethesynergyfrominter-
actionsofMNCs,SMEsandacademicresearchers.The
SMEscanleverageIPopportunitiesfromtheMNCaswell
asgaininginsightsintonewR&Dopportunities,manage-
mentpractices,innovationimplementationandgreater
accesstoexternalknowledgeandadvice.Insomecases,
collaborationsmayleadtoopportunitiestorecycleIPfor
newtechnologies/applicationsleadingtoregenerationof
companies.
ThroughtheaddedvalueofcloselinksofMNCswithlocal
companiesandthefacilitiesandexpertisefromacademic
researchinfrastructures,abasiscanbeformedforMNCs
toleveragenewinvestmentfromparentcompanies,andit
canalsoleadtomorecommerciallyfocussedresearchers.
ThisinturncreatesanenvironmentwithpotentialforMNCs
tobecomemoredeeplyembeddedinECcountriesthrough
localinteractionswithnanobiotechsupplychainandmulti-
disciplinaryR&Dcollaborations.
Educationtowardsaknowledgebasednanobiotechnologyeconomy
Ourobjectivewastoidentify(1)theeducationalandtraining
methodsthatarerequiredtodistributeinformationand
awarenessaboutnanobiotechnology(NBT)inthecommu-
nitiesofinterestand(2)howtobuildaknowledge-based
economyandinfrastructure.
Atpresent,therearealreadycourseswithnanobiotechnol-
ogycontentin17Europeancountries.Thereare4master
programsthatfullyfocusonNBTbutalargernumberof
programsinnanotechnologyornanoscienceexistwhere
NBTconstitutesatrackorspecialisation.Finally,thereare
alsomasterprogramsthatteachsubfieldsofNBT(e.g.
MedicalElectronics,CellularBiotechnology,biophysics
and–informatics).Whilethetotalnumberisnothighthere
isagreatvarietynotonlyconcerningthetypesofcourses,
includingmasterdegreeprogramsaswellassummer
schoolsandcontinuingprofessionaldevelopment,butalso
intheconsiderablerangeofcurricula.Thiscanbeattrib-
utedtothefactthatnanobiotechnologyisnotaclearly-
bordereddomainbutadiverseandmultidisciplinaryfield
whichcanbeconsideredasubfieldofnanotechnologyoran
extensionofbiotechnology,aswellaschemicalorbiologi-
calengineering.Astrongnecessityforamorepreciseand
comprehensivedefinitionofthefieldwasidentifiedwhich
willhelptofurtherdefineeducationalneedsforNBT.
Doesthecurrentsituationmeettherequirementsofdiffer-
entgroupsofstakeholdersandhowcanNBTeducationbe
improved?Representativesfromindustry,academiaand
clinicswereaskedinasurveyiftheirinstitutionswouldsee
anaddedvalueeitherbythepossibilitytohireM.Sc.can-
ditatesspecialisedinNBTinsteadofinclassicalsubjects
(chemistry,biology,physics)ortotraincurrentemployees
inNBTspecificshortcourses.
Itwasquicklyevidentthattherequirementsandinterests
varywidely.IndustrystakeholdersoftenhirePhDlevel
employeestrainedinclassicalsubjectswhoareexpected
toadapttonewtechnologicaldevelopmentsandarease.g.
atconferenceswithnoneedforadditionaltraining.Onthe
otherhand,forB.Sc.trainedtechnicalstaff,theprimary
requirementisforcoursesonveryspecifictechniques.
Therefore,completeM.Sc.programsinNBTarenotjudged
tobeofaddedvalue.
Academicstakeholdersagreethatinterdisciplinaryand
theoreticalknowledgeaboutNBTshouldbepartofany
uptodatecurriculumintheclassicalsubjects–butas
amodularpartwithinexistingprogramsandascontinu-
ingprofessionaleducationcourses,notasstandalone
NBTM.Sc.courses.Themostpositiveresponsescame
fromclinicalstakeholders.Addedvalueisexpectedfrom
overviewcoursesaswellasfromspecifictrainingcourses
concentratingontheclinicalneedsthatcanbeaddressed
byNBT.
Future recommendations:
Ourconclusionisthatthemostproductiveapproach
willbetoincorporateNBTmodulesintoalreadyexisting
undergraduateandmasterleveleducationinscienceand
medicineinsteadoffurtherinvestingincompleteNBTM.Sc.
coursesThesemodulesshouldbedesignedinanindividual
waythatsuitsthecontextofthecoursetheyareembedded
in.Differenttechnologicalperspectiveshavetobeconsid-
eredaswellasthebiologicalandclinicalrelevance.
Thereisfurthermoredemandforin-depthtrainingonNBT
whichcanbemetbyPhDgraduateschoolprograms,but
14 15EuroBioNano Final Report|January2010
otherapproacheswillalsobeneededinmanycaseswhere
aPhDdoesnotnormallyincludeformalteachingmodules.
Forclinicalneeds,partnershipswithinstitutionsstrongin
researchwillbemosthelpfulfortargetededucationpro-
gramsincludingshortcoursesandcontinuousprofessional
education.SpecifictrainingcoursesonNBTmaybeneeded
forsafetyofficersandotherrelevantpersonnel.
Tomeettheeducationalrequirementsofanemergingand
rapidlygrowingfieldsuchasNBTappropriately,aclear
definitionofwhatthetermNBTactuallyencompasses,
anduniversalaccreditationcriteriathatcanbeadaptedto
coursesandmoduleswillbeofhighpriority.Furthermore,
sinceinnovationsforbiologicalormedicalapplications
oftenhaveanimpactonethical,socialandlegalissues,
trainingofstudentsintheseareasshouldbeincludedin
MasterorPhDcourses.
Ancillaryfactorsofnanobiotechnology
Differentancillaryfactorswillsignificantlyinfluencethe
successofananobiotechnologyeconomyinEurope.Impor-
tantprospectiveancillaryfactorswerefoundtobeethical,
legal and social aspects (ELSA), risk management and
safety of products and methods, technology transfer, and
communication.Afteranalysingthecurrentsituationprob-
lemsanddifficultiesconcerningthedifferentaspectswere
identifiedandrecommendationsaremadeoftheactions
necessarytoimplementtheseareasinanEUnanobiotech-
nologyinfrastructure.
Innewtechnologiesethical and social thinkingandthe
furtherdevelopmentoftechnologyandsciencearenot
connectedanymoreastheywereinthelastcenturyduring
theareaofscientistsuchasHumboldtforexample.The
situationvariesindifferentcountries,butinmostcasesthe
currentqualificationsystemforscientistsdoesnotleave
roomforsuchconsiderationsandpresentlyonlyfewnano-
biotechnologyprogramsevenincludeanyELSAactivities.
MostcountriesdonothavedesignatedprogramsforELSA
oftechnologyingeneralornanotechnologyinparticular.
Butwhyaretheseactivitiesstillimportant?
Europeansocietiesincreasinglyexpectscientistswhoare
givenpublicmoneytobeaccountableforwhattheydowith
it.Accordingly,scientistswillberequiredtoaddressethical
questionsinresearchproposals,becausefundingagencies
willincreasinglyaskforsuchconsiderations.Especiallyin
nanotechnologyapplicationfieldssuchasmedicineorfood
awarenessaboutethicalimplicationsiscrucialtomeet
criticalsentimentsaboutthepotentialdangers.Whileno
nanotechnologyspecificissueshavebeenidentified,the
developmentswhichnanotechnologyenableoftenpres-
entnewaspectsofexistingissues,orincreasethescale
oftheirimpact.Forallthesereasonsweconsiderthatit
isessentialtore-integrateethicalthinkingintoscientific
researchdealingwithapplicationareassuchasmedicine
orfoodtoensurearesponsibledevelopment.Onepractical
approachwouldbetoincludecoursesormodulesonethi-
calandsocialaspectsinengineeringorlifesciencestudies
andcoursesofrelevantapplicationareas.Inadditionwe
recommendthatdepartmentsofphilosophy,theologyand
socialsciencesareencouragedtoworkcollaborativelywith
sciencedepartments,researchinstitutesandindustryin
mutualprojects.Inthiswayadviceonethicalandsocial
aspectsofresearchprojectsneedstobemadeavailablefor
scienceandindustry,especiallytoSMEswhichwilloften
havenoinhousecapacity.
InacomplexareasuchasnanobiotechnologyCommunica-
tionisessentialforsuccessfulinvolvementofdisciplines
andstakeholdersinthedevelopmentofthisveryinterdisci-
plinaryfieldandtoengagewiththepublicinatimelyman-
nertogetacceptanceofthisnewtechnology.Engagement
withthepublicisatwo-wayprocessinwhichscientistsand
industrynotonlygiveinformationonunfamiliartechnolo-
gies,butalsolistentovaluableinsightsandperspectives
fromlaypublics.Howearlythisshouldbedonewilldepend
onthedevelopmentofthetechnologyandalsothesocial
context.Ifitisdoneafterthekeytechnologicalchoiceshave
beenmade,publicsareunlikelytoconsidertheirviewswill
betakenintoaccount.Ifitisdonetooearly,thereisarisk
ofanticipatingthewrongapplicationsorethicalquestions.
Engagementmaytakemanydifferentforms.Manytools
areavailable,includingdeliberativemethods(focusgroups
andcitizensjuries),grassrootsinitiatives(e.g.cardgames),
andinternet-basedapproaches.Sciencecentreshavean
importantroleforexamplewithinteractiveexperimentsor
scienceexhibits.Sensitiveandwellplannedeventsareusu-
allywellreceived,andcanhelppromotethedevelopment
andapplicationofnanobiotechnologyinamoretransparent
way,andhelpcreatepublictrustononesideanddevelop-
mentswhicharesensitivetopublicvaluesandattitudeson
thepartofthedevelopers
ANNEX
Usuallycommunicationbetweenscientistsiswellorganized
butinanewandextremelyinterdisciplinaryfieldsuchas
nanobiotechnologyitshouldbeimprovedamongscientific
disciplines,academiaandindustryattheregional,national
aswellastheEuropeanlevel.Thiscanbeaccomplishedby
regionalclustersthatsupporttheexchangeofideasand
informationnotonlyinsidebutmoreoverbetweenclusters.
Theconnectionofsuchclustersintoacomplementaryalli-
ancewillbeacrucialstepforpromotingtherecognitionof
nanobiotechnologyinEuropeattheglobalscale.Further-
more,suchaclusteralliancecanserveasapoolofprofes-
sionalsprovidinginformationforjournalists,politicians
andthepublic,andwhocancommunicateandengagein
awayunderstandablebynon-scientists.Thetransparency
andaccessibilityofdataandstoriescanalsohelptoattract
fundingandinvestments.
Howcanrisk managementbeimprovedandabettersafety
ofnanoproductsandresearchbeguaranteed?
Nanoproducts,beingasubstantialpartofthenanotech
fieldare“athingwithoutadefinition”becausethekindand
amountof“nano”withinaproductvarieswidely.Today,
thereisanimprovableamountofdatathatdescribesthe
hazardandmaximumlevelsofexposure(risk=hazardx
exposure).Tomeettheupcomingconcernsaboutthesafety
ofnanotechnologyaprecautionaryapproachofallstake-
holdersisneededthatwillencouragethegenerationof
moredataandthedefinitionofpotentialrisk.Tomeetthe
concernsaboutthesafetyofnanotechnology,thereneeds
toabeadynamicapproachwhichseekstodistinguishma-
terialsorapplicationswherespecialrisksareanticipated,
andwhereaprecautionaryapproachofallstakeholders
isappropriate,fromotherareaswherenospecialriskis
involved.
Tocreateasafeworkplaceandtobalanceriskandbenefits
existingsafetyofficersincompanieshavetobetrainedand
informedspecificallyaboutthepropertiesofnanoobjects
suchasnanoparticleshandledattheirlocationasitwas
doneduringtheNanoCareprojectforanumberofrelevant
substances.AEuropeancentreforriskandsafetymanage-
mentinnanobiotechnologyprovidinginformationandadvice
onexistingsafetystandardsandSOPsinEuropewould
bestservetheneedsofSME´sanduniversitieswhocannot
affordexpensiveriskassessment.Suchacentrewouldnot
onlyprovideacentralinformationplatformbutcouldalso
drivetheharmonizationofnationalsafetyproceduresand
protocols.
Tokeepupwiththespeedoftechnologydevelopmentapro-
activeregulatorypartnershipatalllevelsisnecessarycon-
nectingELSA,testing,trainingandcommunicationaspects.
Inthelongtermaclearlegalframeisinevitabledescribing
howtohandlenanoobjects.
Technology transferofnanotechnologyisachallenging
taskasnanotechnologyisatthebeginningofthevalue
chainandadditionally,universitypatentsaremostlyfora
veryearlyphaseofaproduct–ittakesalotoftimetoreach
themarket.Scientistsbecomemoreandmoreinterested
inpatents,becausepatentsarecrucialforcollaborations
ofuniversitieswithindustry,foruniversitymarketing,for
spin-offsastheirmainvalue,andprototypedevelopment.
However,thedevelopmentofprototypesoftentakestoo
muchtimesothatscientistsneededtomonitorandsupport
thedevelopmentsdropoutoftheprocess.Therefore,itisof
strategicimportancetoidentifythescientistwhoiswilling
toleavetheresearchenvironmentandispreparedtofollow
thepotentialproducttomarket.
Oneadequatewaytofacilitatetechnologytransferisto
createprofessionaltransferofficesinsideuniversitiesorre-
searchorganisationswithgoodqualitymanagementskills
andnetworksofscientists,relevantcompaniesormarket
experts.However,theseagenciescanonlybesuccessful,if
thetopmanagementoftheresearchinstitutioncreatesan
entrepreneurialspiritandstudentscanattendcourseson
businessmanagementandentrepreneurship.Thelatteris
alsocrucialforthecreationofspin-offcompanies,which
arestillthemostefficientwaytotransfertechnologyto
industry.Fordevelopmentandgrowthofsuchstart-ups
businessincubatorswithlocalfinancialsupportaremost
important.
Future recommendations:
Connectingthesefindingsitbecomesclearthattheeduca-
tionofscientistsinbothethicalandsocialimplications
ofnanobiotechnologyandalsoinsciencecommunication
andengagementiscrucialtodealwiththeincreasing
complexityofscienceandtheimpactofnanotechnologyin
areassuchasmedicine,food,cosmeticsorenvironment.
Indoingso,itwillbeimportanttodistinguishamongthe
differenttypesofnanobiotechnology,theirapplications,
andtheevaluationoftheirrelevantriskpotential.Clusters
canprovideanorganizedcommunicationplatformforboth
stakeholdersandthegeneralpublictopromoteaholistic
andproactiveapproachfortheresponsibledevelopmentof
nanobiotechnologyinatrustingenvironment
16 17EuroBioNano Final Report|January2010
Projectandpartnerdescription
ProjectEuroNanoBioisaSupportActionfundedunderthe7th
FrameworkProgrammeoftheEuropeanUnion,whichhas
exploredthedefinition,establishmentandfurtherdevelop-
mentofaEuropeanscaleinfrastructureonnanobiotech-
nologyandtheassociatedrealisticimplementationplan.
Itaimedatdefiningnotonlythekeyfeaturesofapotential
Europeaninfrastructureinnanobiotechnology,butithas
alsoestablishedthewayitshouldbedesigned.
EuroNanoBioproposesthecreationofanetworkofsome
leadingpolesofexcellencethatwillbeabletosupport
industrialactivities,inparticularbenefitinghigh-techSMEs,
education,researchanddevelopment,riskmanagement
andengagementwiththepublic.Tosubstantiatethispro-
posaltheprojectwasdividedintotwophases:
• Ananalyticalphasewheretheexistingdatawerescruti-
nisedandanalysedtoextractsomesuccessfactorstobe
usedfordefiningtheEUinfrastructureinnanobiotech-
nology.
Thisanalysiswasconductedinfourdirections
-existingtopclassinfrastructuresorclustersinsideand
outsideEurope,assessingtheirpositioningwithrespect
totheinternationalscene
-modesoftechnologytransferfromresearchtoindustry
-multidisciplinaryeducationandtraining
-ancillaryaspectsofnanobiotechnology
• Abuildingandconsensusphasewheremanydiverse
stakeholderswereinvitedtojointlydefineandadoptthe
keyfeaturesoftheinfrastructure,andthewaytobuildit.
AsaresultofthisprocessEuroNanoBioproposes15
recommendationsforadistributedEuropeaninfrastruc-
tureinnanobiotechnologyalongthefourdimensionsofthe
Europeaninfrastructure–research,education,technology
transfer,ELSA–targetedatawiderangeofstakeholders
amongwhicharepolicymakers,clustermanagers,univer-
sities,techtransferoffices,andresearchorganisations.
ThemajorexpectedimpactofEuroNanoBioistoinitiatethe
emergenceofaEuropeancapacityinnanobiotechnology,
whichshouldsupportthedevelopmentofnewnanobiotech-
nology-basedproductsandindustrialprocessesandfoster
theirreliability,safetyandfuturecommercialisationonthe
globalmarket.
TheimplementationplanprovidedbyEuroNanoBiomeets
therequirementsoftheEuropeanCommission’sAction
PlanforNanotechnology2005-2009,whichproposes:
“World-class R&D infrastructures and ‘poles of excel-
lence’ are essential for the EU to remain competitive in
N&N. Europe needs an appropriate, diverse but coher-
ent system of infrastructure that comprises both ‘single
sited’ (in one location) and ‘distributed’ (networked)
facilities.”.Furthermore,theconsortiumwasinfrequent
contactandalignmentwithtwoleadingprojectsorinitia-
tivesnamelytheFP7projectNanoMedRoundTable–
www.nanomedroundtable.org–andtheEuropeanTechnolo-
gyPlatformonNanomedicine–www.etp-nanomedicine.eu
toadapttheimplementationplantothespecialrequire-
mentsofnanomedicine,oneofthemostimportantsub-
areasofnanobiotechnology.
PartnersTheEuroNanoBiopartnersarehighlyexperiencedinEUin-
tegrationinnanobiotechnologyingeneralaswellasinspe-
cificaspectsstudiedinthisSupportActionbybeinginvolved
inprojectssuchastwolargeFP6networksofexcellencein
nanobiotechnology-Nano2LifeandFrontiers–theEuro-
peanTechnologyPlatformonNanomedicineandsimilar
nationalPlatformsinNanomedicineinSpain,Franceand
Romania,andtheFP7SupportActionNanomedRound
Table,whichfocusesontheancillaryfactorsofnanomedi-
cinesuchasELSA,economicsandpatient’sinterest.They
usetheirunrivalledaccesstoawidepanelofstakeholders
ingovernments,industry,andacademiatocreatearealistic
implementationplanfortheconstructionofaEuropean
infrastructureinnanobiotechnology.
CEAwww.leti.fr
Bioanalytik-muensterwww.bioanalytik-muenster.de
Tyndall National Institutewww.tyndall.ie
MESA+ Institute for Nanotechnologywww.mesaplus.utwente.nl
Fondazione Don Gnocchiwww.dongnocchi.it
Institute for Bioengineering of Cataloniawww.ibecbarcelona.eu
National Institute of Microtechnologywww.imt.ro
3
1
24
5
6
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
18 19EuroBioNano Final Report|January2010
SupportedbyFP7oftheEuropeanCommission
Publisher: EuroNanoBio Editors: Dr. Klaus-Michael Weltring Design: conImago, Münster, Germany Pictures: iStockphoto, CEA Print: Thiekötter Druck, Münster, Germanywww.euronanobio.eu