Please login first
Ineke Malsch   Dr.  President, CEO or Director 
Timeline See timeline
Ineke Malsch published an article in February 2018.
Top co-authors See all
Alex Zabeo

27 shared publications

Igor Linkov

14 shared publications

Vrishali Subramanian

12 shared publications

Danail Hristozov

9 shared publications

Department of Environmental Sciences, Informatics and Statistics, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, Mestre-Venezia, Italy

Elena Semenzin

7 shared publications

Department of Environmental Sciences, Informatics and Statistics, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, Mestre-Venezia, Italy

6
Publications
9
Reads
0
Downloads
10
Citations
Publication Record
Distribution of Articles published per year 
(2012 - 2018)
Total number of journals
published in
 
4
 
Publications
Article 1 Read 1 Citation Decision Support for International Agreements Regulating Nanomaterials Ineke Malsch, Martin MULLINS, Elena Semenzin, Alex Zabeo, Da... Published: 27 February 2018
NanoEthics, doi: 10.1007/s11569-018-0312-2
DOI See at publisher website
ABS Show/hide abstract
Nanomaterials are handled in global value chains for many different products, albeit not always recognisable as nanoproducts. The global market for nanomaterials faces an uncertain future, as the international dialogue on regulating nanomaterials is still ongoing and risk assessment data are being collected. At the same time, regulators and civil society organisations complain about a lack of transparency about the presence of nanomaterials on the market. In the project on Sustainable Nanotechnologies (SUN, www.sun-fp7.eu ), a Decision Support System (SUNDS) has been developed, primarily for confidential use by risk and sustainability managers inside a company or consortium. In this article, we formulate a scenario concerning a potential role for an open access decision support system in negotiations on international agreements regulating trade in nanomaterials. The scenario includes design rules for decision support systems as well as procedures for use of such a system in stakeholder dialogue and policy-making on governance of these and other emerging technologies. This article incorporates analysis of results of stakeholder engagement on nanomaterials as well as literature and internet sources suggested by these stakeholders.
Article 2 Reads 1 Citation Comparing mental models of prospective users of the sustainable nanotechnology decision support system Ineke Malsch, Vrishali Subramanian, Elena Semenzin, Alex Zab... Published: 17 June 2017
Environment Systems and Decisions, doi: 10.1007/s10669-017-9648-3
DOI See at publisher website
ABS Show/hide abstract
Mental modelling analysis can be a valuable tool in understanding and bridging cognitive values in multi-stakeholders’ communities. It is especially true in situation of emerging risks where significant uncertainty and competing objectives could result in significant difference in stakeholder perspective on the use of new materials and technologies. This paper presents a mental modelling study performed among prospective users of an innovative decision support system for safe and sustainable development of nano-enabled products. These users included representatives of industry and regulators, as well as several insurance specialists and researchers. We present methodology and tools for comparing stakeholder views and objectives in the context of developing a decision support system.
BOOK-CHAPTER 2 Reads 0 Citations International Cooperation on Nanosafety Between Europe and Latin America Ineke Malsch, Martina Lindorfer, Isabella Wagner, Maria Lima... Published: 01 January 2016
Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-32392-3_5
DOI See at publisher website
Article 1 Read 0 Citations Communitarian and Subsidiarity Perspectives on Responsible Innovation at a Global Level Ineke Malsch Published: 01 August 2015
NanoEthics, doi: 10.1007/s11569-015-0234-1
DOI See at publisher website
ABS Show/hide abstract
All stakeholders agree publicly that innovation and governance of emerging technologies should be done responsibly. However, the international debate on who should do what to contribute to this lofty goal is nowhere near a solution. The starting point of this paper is the issue of how and for which reason to engage stakeholders in addition to governments in the international governance of nanotechnology. This article examines the mainly North-American communitarian criticism of political liberalism and the related (mainly European) concept of subsidiarity in order to shed new light on this discussion. The central research question is: Can a communitarian-subsidiarity perspective on the roles of governments, companies and civil society actors that hold a stake in emerging technologies clarify the grounds on which each actor should be expected to contribute to responsible research and innovation at the international level? After selecting some relevant aspects of a communitarian-subsidiarity model for a dialogue society, an analytical framework is proposed. This framework is then applied to the recent international dialogue on responsible governance of nanotechnology. The outcomes of the analysis are compared to the OECD planning guide on public engagement and outreach in nanotechnology, and indicators for monitoring progress in responsible global innovation are suggested. The main contribution of the selected communitarian-subsidiarity perspective is that it offers philosophical grounds for a return of citizens to the driving seat in cooperative international responsible innovation.
Article 1 Read 4 Citations Governing Nanotechnology in a Multi-Stakeholder World Ineke Malsch Published: 20 December 2012
NanoEthics, doi: 10.1007/s11569-012-0163-1
DOI See at publisher website
ABS Show/hide abstract
This article contributes to the debate on governance of emerging technologies, focusing in particular on the international level and taking into account the fact that these technologies are developed through a common effort of different stakeholders including governments, research communities, industry and civil society actors. These issues are explored from the perspective of communitarian ethical criticism of liberal social contract thinking, in order to enhance visibility of the influence collective non-state actors exercise on the development of these technologies. In particular, the effect of different values in the discussion on emerging technologies on the perceived governance options is explored. A paradigm shift from defensive values such as security, risk and human rights to more optimistic values like peace, justice and integrity of creation is proposed and discussed.
Article 2 Reads 5 Citations The Just War Theory and the Ethical Governance of Research Ineke Malsch Published: 28 February 2012
Science and Engineering Ethics, doi: 10.1007/s11948-012-9357-8
DOI See at publisher website
PubMed View at PubMed
ABS Show/hide abstract
This article analyses current trends in and future expectations of nanotechnology and other key enabling technologies for security as well as dual use nanotechnology from the perspective of the ethical Just War Theory (JWT), interpreted as an instrument to increase the threshold for using armed force for solving conflicts. The aim is to investigate the relevance of the JWT to the ethical governance of research. The analysis gives rise to the following results. From the perspective of the JWT, military research should be evaluated with different criteria than research for civil or civil security applications. From a technological perspective, the boundaries between technologies for civil and military applications are fuzzy. Therefore the JWT offers theoretical grounds for making clear distinctions between research for military, civil security and other applications that are not obvious from a purely technological perspective. Different actors bear responsibility for development of the technology than for resorting to armed force for solving conflicts or for use of weapons and military technologies in combat. Different criteria should be used for moral judgment of decisions made by each type of actor in each context. In addition to evaluation of potential consequences of future use of the weapons or military technologies under development, the JWT also prescribes ethical evaluation of the inherent intent and other foreseeable consequences of the development itself of new military technologies.