| |
| GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS |
| |
| NANOBIOTECHNOLOGY: IMPLICATIONS
FOR FOOD, HEALTH AND NUTRITION SECURITY - March
11 - 13 |
| |
- Role of Nanobiotechnology
in Food, health, ecological and livelihood
security: Conceptual Clarity. There
is need for a clear identification of the
potential of Nanobiotechnology in meeting
the UN Millennium Development Goals in the
area of health and sustainable food security.
There should be a sharp focus to the R&D
programmes in this area, with a well-defined
methodology for measuring the relationship
between financial outlay and scientific and
social outcome. DBT may organize a brainstorming
session to identify thrust areas and to assess
the order of investment needed.
|
| |
- Based on the outcome of such an indepth
discussion, a National
Challenge Programme on Nanobiotechnology and
Food and Health Security may be designed
and launched. Such a National Challenge Programme
should bring together all appropriate R&D
institutions in the country (Universities,
ICAR, CSIR, ICMR, DBT and non-governmental
institutions). The National challenge programme
should have well defined goals and built-in
monitoring mechanisms. It should also provide
for public - private partnerships based on
a well-defined agreement on benefit sharing,
IPR, etc.,
|
| |
- Regulatory Mechanisms:
These have to be based both on ethical
and biosafety concerns. The proposed National
Biotechnology Regulatory Authority could have
a Standing Committee on Nano-biotechnology.
The prior approval of the Ethical Committee
of the National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority
should be obtained before a research project
is launched. The precautionary principle should
be followed in cases where the available scientific
evidence is insufficient to come to definite
conclusions on long-term social, environmental
and health impacts.
|
| |
- Capacity Building:
A few Centers of training, retraining
and retooling in the techniques and do's and
don'ts of Nanobiotechnology should be identified
and appropriately equipped. There should be
scientific manpower planning and the training
should be related to the programmes chosen
for implementation. Indiscriminate proliferation
of Nano-biotechnology Departments in Universities
and Colleges should be discouraged.
|
| |
- Public Understanding:
There is an urgent need for greater
interaction between scientists and media personnel
on the risks and benefits associated with
biotechnology and nanobiotechnology. There
should be periodic workshops in regional languages.
There is also need for Media Resource Centres
like the Hindu Media Resource Centre at MSSRF.
Well-informed media can help to bring about
a common wavelength of understanding between
scientists and society.
|
| |
- National Board for Strategic Research in
Agriculture: We welcome the following statement
in the Union Budget for 2005-06:
|
| |
| "A Task Force headed by
Dr M S Swaminathan has recommended the creation
of a National Fund for Strategic Agricultural
Research. I am happy to announce an initial provision
of Rs. 50 crores for operationalising the Fund." |
| |
- A priority item in the agenda for the National
Board for Strategic Agricultural Research
should be the launch of a National Mission
for Nanobiotechnology for Sustainable Nutrition
Security.
|
| |
- Genius Awards:
We welcome the recommendations of the M S
Swaminathan Task Force that Genius Awards
should be instituted for identifying and supporting
creative young scientists in frontier areas
of technology. For the purpose of making such
"Genius Awards" a creativity index
should be developed based on measurable and
scientifically credible criteria. We should
create an environment which can help to attract
and retain gifted young women and men in areas
of scientific research vital for national
well-being.
|
| |
| Visit : Presentations
Made...... |
| |
|