• Dip coating of air purifier ceramic honeycombs with photocatalytic TiO2 nanoparticles: A case study for occupational exposure.  Koivisto J. et al. Science of the Total Environment. Volume 630, 15 July 2018, 1283-129. Click here
  • Redefining environmental nanomaterial flows: Consequences of the regulatory nanomaterial definition on the results of environmental exposure models. Wigger H.,  Wohllebenb, W.  & Nowack B. ES Nano, Volume 6, 27 April 2018. Click here
  • A Data Fusion Pipeline for Generating and Enriching Adverse Outcome Pathway Descriptions. Nymark P. et al. Toxicol Sci,  Volume 162(1), 1 March 2018, 264-275. Click here.
  • Directions in QPPR development to complement the predictive models used in risk assessment of nanomaterials. Quick, J. et al. NanoImpact, Volume 11, January 2018, 58–66. Click here
  • Nanoinformatics Roadmap 2030. Nymark P. Nanosafety Cluster, 20 November 2017. Click here
  • Value of information analysis for assessing risks and benefits of nanotechnology innovation. Zabeo et al. Environmental Sciences Volume 31(11). 12 February 2019. Click here.


  • GUIDEnano Webinar, 22 February 2018 Click here
  • Swiss Precautionary Matrix Webinar, 8 March 2018 Click here
  • Stoffenmanager and Licara Webinar, 15 March 2018 Click here
  • Next steps in environmental risk assessment of  engineered nanomaterials considering  material-specific properties. H. Wigger & B. Nowack.  Duke University. 7 September 2018. Click here.
  • Sustainable Development of Engineered Nanomaterials. K. Grieger. Carolina Science Symposium. 9 November 2019. Click here.
  • Redefining environmental nanomaterial flows: consequences of the regulatory nanomaterial definition on the results of environmental exposure models.  H. Wigger & B. Nowack. Nanosafe. 6 November 2018. Click here.
  • Value-chain case-studies with high quality conceptual information for model testing in caLIBRAte project. A.S. Fonseca et al. Nanosafe. 5 November 2018. Click here.
  • Control of worker exposure during handling of manufactured nanomaterials in fume hoods. A.S. Fonseca et al. Nanosafe. 5 November 2018. Click here.
  • Safety culture and perceptions and practice with nanomaterials in academia and industry. P. Kines. Nanosafe. 8 November 2018. Click here.
  • Safety Observer app for use in measuring safe working conditions and behaviour with nanomaterials. P. Kines. Nanosafe. 7 November 2018. Click here.
  • caLIBRAte System of Systems: An outline of the Nano Risk Governance Portal. S. Kelly. EuroNanoForum. 13 June 2019. Click here.


These webinar recordings summarise how each risk assessment tool works and how it can be applied into nanomaterials development.



  • Identifying criteria for environmental risk assessment models at different stage-gates of nanomaterial/product innovation considering requirements of various stakeholders. S. Sørensen et al. SETAC Rome. 17 May 2018. Click here.
  • Acquiring exposure data and contextual information for demonstration of system-of-systems nano risk governance platform. T. Kanerva et al. Nanosafe, 5-9 November 2018. Click here.
  • Role of composition, coating and specific surface area on the biokinetics and toxicity of orally administered nanomaterials. J.Cabellos et al.  NanoTox 2018 - 9th International Conference on Nanotoxicology, 18-21 September 2018. Click here.
  • Toxico-transcriptomics as tool to identify nano-specifc toxicity profile. M. Burkard et al. SETAC Rome, 17 May 2018. Click here.
  • The impact of copper nanoparticles on mechano- sensory based behavior of zebrafish embryos (D. rerio). M. Burkard et al. DECHEMA Nanotoxicology, Neuss, Germany, 18.09 - 21.09. Click here.
  • Sensitivity analysis of a model characterizing nanoparticle agglomeration, dispersion and deposition processes in the atmosphere. Poikkimäki M., European Aerosol Conference, 27 August - 1 September 2017, Zürich, Swizterland. Click here
  • Nanosafe 6-9 November 2018 Click here