Ac version 3 Observation 1: sq 4

Coop/Investment key

2AC Add-on Internal: Water/Disease

The US should invest in nanotech for developing countries

Lane et. al 7 (Neal Lane, professor of physics at Rice University, was director of NSF from 1993 to 1998 and science advisor to President Clinton beginning in 1998. Thomas Kalil, assistant to the chancellor for science and technology at the University of California at Berkeley, was deputy assistant to the president for technology and economic policy and deputy director of the National Economic Council during the Clinton administration, 2007, The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Present at the Creation, http://www.issues.org/21.4/lane.html)

Promote nanotechnology applications for developing countries. As the article by Peter Singer et al. in this issue points out, researchers at the University of Toronto have published a list of the 10 applications of nanotechnology with the most relevance to developing countries. Examples include inexpensive systems that purify, detoxify, and desalinate water more efficiently than conventional bacterial or viral filters; clean energy; and a “lab on a chip” for research on developing-country diseases. The United States should fund research collaborations between U.S. and developing-country researchers to explore these applications.

Coop & Info-Share Key

Cooperation key – environment, health, innovation, increase in trade, increase competitiveness

White House 12 – Executive Office of the President of the United States (“United States – Mexico High-Level Regulatory Cooperation Council Work Plan”, 2/28/2012, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/oira/irc/united-states-mexico-high-level-regulatory-cooperation-council-work-plan.pdf)//BD

Why Should We Do This? 1. Ensuring that the United States and Mexico share information regarding each other’s respective regulatory approaches to nanotechnology applications and nanomaterials at an early stage will be critical in reducing risks to environmental and human health while fostering innovation 2. Considering a joint framework to align regulatory approaches will ensure consistency for consumers and industry within and between both countries; and 3. Consistency in a regulatory approach in this area will facilitate responsible manufacturing and trading of products between the two countries, and will foster the competitiveness of the industry.

Collaboration Key

Solves Resources

Latin American collaboration key—overcomes resource hurdles

Kay et al 09-School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology; Shapira- Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, Manchester Business School, University of Manchester (Luciano, Philip, “Developing nanotechnology in Latin America”, 02/11/2009, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2988220/#__ffn_sectitle//VS)

In seeking to develop nanotechnology in Latin America, both in terms of building research activities and in influencing pathways for innovation and utilization, the level and character of research collaboration is an important factor. Since research resources are limited in all Latin American countries, collaboration can be helpful in leveraging available expertise and facilities, including providing access to equipment and instruments for researchers that lack such equipment in their home labs. Even more significantly, given the convergent nature of nanotechnology, research collaboration can be fundamental to undertaking interdisciplinary research, accessing up new sources of knowledge, and identifying and acting upon significant research problems (Heinze and Bauer 2007; Heinze et al. 2008). Research collaborations may also speed the transfer of knowledge for the deployment of nanotechnology, for example through collaboration between leading researchers in global centers and researchers in developing countries or, within a country, by teaming between academic and corporate researchers.

Solves Regulations (Brain Drain)

US-Mexican collaboration is key—solves regulations and national projects

Kay et al 09-School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology; Shapira- Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, Manchester Business School, University of Manchester (Luciano, Philip, “Developing nanotechnology in Latin America”, 02/11/2009, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2988220/#__ffn_sectitle//VS)

Mexico is second in Latin America by published nanotechnology articles (and also by population). In 2004, there were eleven nanotechnology research groups at three universities and two research institutes, working primarily in new materials development (Malsch 2004); in 2007, an external European mission identified more than a dozen institutions with active nanotechnology research programs, again with a strong presence in nanomaterials (NanoforumEULA 2007). A few companies are also commercializing nanotechnology in Mexico, although academic–industry relationships are reported as weak (Malsch 2004). An important aspect for Mexico is the link maintained with the US in terms of cooperation for high-technology development which, jointly with the geographic proximity to that country, are hoped to offer Mexico an advantage for future commercialization of nanotechnology compared with other countries of Latin America. There are already some initiatives for supplying the semiconductor and other high-tech industries. For example, the project for the Silicon Border Development Science Park started in 2006 with the goal of becoming the first high-tech park in Latin America that is specialized at the nanoscale (Foladori and Zayago2007). However, Mexico does not have a national program for developing these technologies. Indeed, until 2005 there was no federal program financing, organizing, or regulating nanotechnology (Foladori2006). Additionally, Mexico consistently faces challenges of retaining its most highly talented researchers in the face of superior research conditions and salaries in the US.

Coop Key/Modeling

US-Latin American cooperation critical—sidesteps barriers to effective nanotech and leads to US modeling

Kay et al 09-School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology; Shapira- Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, Manchester Business School, University of Manchester (Luciano, Philip, “Developing nanotechnology in Latin America”, 02/11/2009, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2988220/#__ffn_sectitle//VS)

The third strategy involves the development international research collaborations and alliances outside Latin America, particularly with leading international centers in the US, Europe, and other developed countries. Such linkages allow Latin American researchers opportunities both to tap into the frontiers of research and development and to catch-up with or replicate research done by technology leaders. At the same time, global collaborations may lead to technological developments that are more 3 with foreign rather than local interests, although in some cases developed countries maintain research programs which encourage their researchers to work with colleagues in developing countries on topics of particular relevance to the latter. Efforts toward international alliances are likely to be led by universities and research institutes (with perhaps the support of government departments, but not their management).

Computer Crimes

Nanotech will make new types of crime possible – federal government involvement key to solve

Theodore and Kunz 5 (Louis Theodore, EngScD, a professor of chemical engineering for fifty years, Robert G. Kunz, environmental engineering manager at a major industrial gas and chemical company before retiring after twenty-six years. He also worked in the petroleum industry, on plant design/construction, and for a manufacturer of air pollution control catalyst. He is currently an independent environmental consultant. Dr. Kunz earned a BChE degree in chemical engineering from Manhattan College, a PhD in chemical engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, an MS in environmental engineering from Newark College of Engineering, and an MBA from Temple University, April 22, 2005, “Nanotechnology: Environmental Implications and Solutions,” p. 10)

Then there is the matter of the criminal use of nanotechnology. The past decade¶ has already seen the growth of a new area of crime: computer crime. For example, in¶ addition to conventional theft, law enforcement agencies must now become techno-¶ logically proficient to handle computer fraud, identity theft, theft of information,¶ embezzlement, copyright violation, computer vandalism. and like activities, all¶ accomplished over the computer network under conditions such that not only is¶ the criminal hard to trace but even the crime may go undetected. The computer criminals are technologically very savvy and willing to exploit the potentials of any new¶ technology. About the only thing one can expect is that if nanotechnology provides¶ great new potentials, someone will use those potentials for criminal purposes. and¶ the laws will again be forced to play catch-up in response to the crimes, after the¶ harm has occurred.¶ These speculations presume the feasibility of such futuristic devices. And one¶ comes back to the original point that it is not known what will be feasible in 10¶ or 20 years. Not only with respect to nanotechnology but with respect to the convergence of nanotechnology with other technologies such as biotechnology, information technology, wireless technology, materials science, and quantum physics.¶ It would be prudent for those involved in nanotechnology and those involved in¶ law to interact constructively, and to share knowledge and expertise to avoid blindly¶ traveling along a road whose features and direction are yet unknown. As always. the¶ question is whether human beings will control technology for their own constructive¶ uses, and that depends upon whether people can control themselves. The alternative¶ is to be mastered by one’s own creations.

Coop key Effectiveness

International collaboration is key to nanotech effectiveness

Duda 12

Professor at Izmir University of Economics, Department of Business Administration (Neslihan Aydogan, “Making It to the Forefront: Nanotechnology‚ÄîA Developing Country Perspective”, 5/17/2012, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CDIQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.springer.com%2Fcda%2Fcontent%2Fdocument%2Fcda_downloaddocument%2F9781461415442-c1.pdf%3FSGWID%3D0-0-45-1332208-p174193175&ei=ABLwUfibMMeoqgHamIGQDA&usg=AFQjCNGa_EDrKNVQWILghrs-EKPZgTDtUg&sig2=CNqM30E8xw2xfdwRxZ6RGQ&bvm=bv.49641647,d.aWM&cad=rja//VS)

The interdisciplinary nature of nanotechnology is a given, i.e., the principles of this¶ technology finds its application in a variety of different sectors. Hence, its success¶ in terms of enabling economic growth is largely dependent as to whether such collaboration¶ at the research and development stages is promoted effectively. In fact,¶ the celebrated multiplier effect of this technology requires collaboration without¶ which the impact of nanotechnology would stand as irrelevant to the economic environment¶ it is brought in.¶ There are a variety of different approaches to cultivate this industry across different¶ countries. In the first section we first list the possible implications of nanotechnology¶ on several industries such as the agriculture and the food industry, the water management¶ industry, energy industry, solar energy industry, medicine and healthcare¶ industries, textiles, chemicals, space, construction, electronics, automobiles, computers,¶ and materials industries. In the second and third sections, respectively, we¶ exemplify as to what type of policies can help this diffusion and the resulting multiplier¶ effect. In the third section, we talk about the policy needs to advance this¶ technology so that its applications fulfill their potential.

Coop key Diffusion

Latin America key—overcomes cost and R&D hurdles

Duda 12

Professor at Izmir University of Economics, Department of Business Administration (Neslihan Aydogan, “Making It to the Forefront: Nanotechnology‚ÄîA Developing Country Perspective”, 5/17/2012, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CDIQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.springer.com%2Fcda%2Fcontent%2Fdocument%2Fcda_downloaddocument%2F9781461415442-c1.pdf%3FSGWID%3D0-0-45-1332208-p174193175&ei=ABLwUfibMMeoqgHamIGQDA&usg=AFQjCNGa_EDrKNVQWILghrs-EKPZgTDtUg&sig2=CNqM30E8xw2xfdwRxZ6RGQ&bvm=bv.49641647,d.aWM&cad=rja//VS)

In Table 2.1 we can view the countries classified as developing, transitional, and¶ developed that are involved in the nanotechnology activities.¶ There is an obvious correlation between the income levels, low levels of R&D¶ and health-care spending by governments, and efforts to invest in nanotechnology.¶ Of course as Mac Lurcan ( 2005 ) adds the weak infrastructure, low skill levels, and¶ bad policies along with the costs that are required to be incurred, weak intellectual¶ property rights, inadequate education at the academic and the public level, the brain¶ drain problem along with the trade barriers and political context are likely to create¶ barriers (though not unique to) for the advancement of the nanotechnology industry.¶ Advancement involves the diffusion of the technology across the entire economy.¶ The cost issue : It would help the reader have some perspective if we provide examples¶ as to how costly it is to set up a nanotechnology facility. In Costa Rica, for¶ example, a new nanotechnology facility, with a clean room, reportedly have costed¶ about $50,000 and to equip it will cost extra several hundred thousand dollars.¶ Rao claims an Atomic Force Microscope, a fundamental tool for characterization¶ at the nanoscale, costs approximately $1.5 million, the ETC Group puts this fi gure¶ at $175,000. Despite these fi gures, however, as Salvarezza puts it, even the developing¶ or less-developed countries can do research on nanotechnology as this research can¶ be done by using relatively cheap equipments such as computer and scanning probe¶ microscopes. In addition, Welland refutes the idea that drug research has to be capital¶ intensive. The author argues that pocket-sized, drug factories “could theoretically¶ end the control of large companies over manufacturing.”¶ These ideas are not left unchallenged as, for example, Waga argues that as scientists¶ work with matter on a smaller scale approaching the nanoscale, more sophisticated¶ and expensive equipment is required. Is the cost issue a fundamental problem¶ or not and how it should be handled is controversial. What we have in our hands is¶ an emerging technology with variety of applications—some more sophisticated than¶ others (some R&D activity involves less sophisticated powders and some complex¶ quantum computers). One has to understand that an easy access to affordable research¶ in niche application areas could be the right strategy for less-privileged countries.¶ Partnerships and access to information : Partnerships between countries are crucial¶ for successful developing country engagement in nanotechnology. The National¶ Science Foundation in the US suggests that countries can gain from pre-commercialization¶ stages of R&D in nanotechnology and argues that research groups in different¶ countries can provide complementary expertise to solve common problems.