The Emerging Technology Search

Responding to the pace of innovation requires two approaches that identify new and emerging technologies and their impact on workplace safety and health. One effort would identify technologies that can improve worker safety and health. Another effort seeks to identify problems in new workplace processes, equipment, materials, and practices before they enter the workplace so they can be solved.

Identification and Surveillance Gaps

Identifying new and emerging technologies is not difficult: journals of major scientific and engineering professional societies routinely cover them (see Appendix). A cursory reading of Chemical and Engineering News, for example, would reveal new areas of nanotechnology (with many subfields), computational chemistry, biotechnology, and bioengineering. Also included are operation and product area reviews that cover emerging technologies such as fuel cells, coatings and paints, detergents and soaps, sensors, and chemical/product manufacturing. Even though these categories can be readily identified, they are large and general. In order for this data to be useful it needs to be further analyzed to determine possible effects on workers.

Researchers have developed many methods for recognizing if a technology poses a hazard to working people. Hazard identification is the evaluation of the adverse health effects of a substance(s) in animals or in humans. It relates to those aspects of a new technology that may have adverse effects on worker safety and health based on current knowledge and data. It is an attempt to forecast hazardous outcomes possibly associated with a new technology that in time could become an emerging technology. Similarly, benefit identification aims to reveal the opportunities for an emerging or expanding technology to be deployed in new ways to prevent occupational safety and health problems.

As an example, nanotechnology has emerged as a key strategic branch of science and engineering in the 21st century. The interagency working group [NNI 2004] on nanoscience, engineering, and technology stated: “The ability to image, measure, model, and manipulate matter on the nanoscale is leading to new technologies that will impact virtually every sector of our economy and our daily lives.” One entrepreneur identified nanotechnology by “browsing” the journal Science [Lenatti 2004]. He then invested time with experts to identify the areas of nanotechnology that could turn this expertise into products for existing markets. He chose an area that could revolutionize energy technology based upon new kinds of solar cells, which had the potential to be inexpensively implanted into roofing shingles and provide electricity to the residence. This approach is a cursory form of content analysis [Janowitz 1976].

While several sources exist to identify emerging technologies, the research community currently lacks a system to prioritize technologies based on the magnitude of their potential benefits or threats to worker safety and health. Nanotechnology, for example, already has applications in many industrial, commercial, and consumer products. This technology is likely to find uses in such diverse areas as materials science and catalyst development, and in products such as ceramics, electronics, advanced coating materials, pharmaceutics, and cosmetics [Pui et al. 1998; Otten et al. 2001; Fissan et al. 2002].

It is difficult to conduct research on whole technologies. A focus on applications of the technology provides a way to narrow the research agenda, for technologies have long been defined in terms of application, i.e., systematic applications of organized knowledge to practical activities, especially productive ones [Ayers 1969]. Indeed, the application view has produced success in the market that has driven the emergence of technologies [Moore 1999]. Knowledge about the consequences of prior applications of one technology can be predictive of that technology’s impact in other uses.

Figure 2. The nanoparticle-DMA (differential mobility aerosol) is a new instrument for the classification of nanosized particles in the 1-50 nm range.

Responding to Identification and Surveillance Gaps

Knowing the minimum data needed for the identification and surveillance of emerging technologies like nanotechnology is critical for the research process. Researchers need to (1) identify major areas of emerging technologies, (2) survey the current state of technology within each of these areas, and (3) continue to review the areas in order to set priorities for attention or for more concerted research. Criteria are needed for minimal information identification, and a method is needed for recording this information in one or more databases. Methods also need to be developed for the identification and systematic surveillance of emerging technologies that may lead to research of their positive or negative consequences to occupational safety and health. These methods need to include criteria as well as reporting protocols for systematic surveillance. Model approaches may be adapted from other organizations [U.S. Department of Agriculture 2003; Transportation Research Board 2003] and be built on hazard identification [NRC 1983; NRC 1993].

Addressing identification and surveillance gaps requires a range of expert perspectives. An academic expert or a team might, for example, be recruited biannually to evaluate emerging technology literature for potential negative and positive consequences on occupational safety and health. Industrial hygiene or safety professionals could then generate lists of emerging technologies and evaluate them for their potential hazards or benefits to worker safety and health and publish reports describing their potential consequences.

Methods are needed for effective early screening of emerging technologies. A matrix approach as is used in competitive technology intelligence techniques [Coburn 1999] is one strategy experts can use for translating general opportunities and concerns about emerging technologies into specific areas for surveillance.

In this method, various technology areas would be arrayed in a 2 x 2 matrix as shown in Figure 3, depicting high versus low benefits of intended use against high versus low risks to worker safety and health.

Figure 3. Matrix for setting priorities for safety and health surveillance.

Those technologies offering high benefits (e.g., the high strength and light weight of carbon nanotubes) but potentially high risks to worker safety and health (e.g., possible respiratory challenges from nano-sized particle exposures) would be identified for surveillance.

Researchers can also apply this matrix to the technology’s benefits rather than its risks to worker safety and health. For example, titanium dioxide coating on windows, a new nanotechnology, is self cleaning and may reduce a window washer’s risk of falls from scaffolding on high-rise buildings [Spice 2002].

A cross-disciplinary approach between occupational safety and health experts and new technology experts can facilitate the identification and surveillance process. There is also a need to train developers of new technologies to identify potentially valuable or risky technologies. Consortia need to be convened around priority technologies to consider their potential for application or their potential concerns regarding worker safety and health. Increased funding and awareness may be necessary to enable technology developers to appreciate the perspective of occupational safety and health experts and to encourage them to develop applications that will improve safety and health in the workplace.