奈米標示制度:以製造階段與消費階段而論

Nano Labeling in Manufacturing Phase and Consumption Phase

姜百珊(Pai-Shan Chiang)

指導教授 ： 李素華 ； 陳仲嶙

國立清華大學/科技管理學院/科技法律研究所/碩士(2009年)

https://doi.org/10.6843/NTHU.2009.00486

摘要

摘要

奈米科技之應用帶來了奈米商機，然而，卻有科學家直指這樣的夢想無異於海市蜃樓的假象，因為在許多科學實驗中，都發現了奈米科技可能會對人體健康、環境造成傷害。一個奈米商品從製造到商品上市階段歷經兩個不同的生命周期，由於製造階段與消費階段的保護主體不同，且保護的原則亦不一致，實有區別之必要。消費階段與製造階段皆有賴資訊提供，以提升人類對於科技風險之控制感，惟資訊應否提供，或提供的程度，皆有賴現行制度予以回應。而資訊提供的途徑無非是標示制度，本文即著手研究兩個階段不同的標示目的，以建構製造階段與消費階段標示制度的模型，並就奈米物質、奈米商品於現行制度下之適用結果，提供現行制度作為奈米風險管制措施的建議。而本文得到兩個結論，其一：製造階段的標示目的係在預防風險，鑑於保護弱勢的原則，勞工有特別保護的必要，所以應由主管機關指定奈米物質為危害物；其二，消費階段則因公眾普遍欠缺對於奈米的認識，沈默標示亦可能構成誤導，所以應加強標示誤導之管制，並且在考慮是否以消費者保護法第7條第2項作為應標示義務的法律政策時，須特別注意預防原則的科學證據取信度，對商品製造人言論自由的衝擊以及消費階段是否有其他的風險預防替代措施，而以公共諮詢尋求共識是現制下最佳的方式，以避免貿然適用強制標示制度對於奈米產業造成的衝擊、及對於消費者的恐懼。

關鍵字

奈米科技 ； 風險 ； 奈米標示 ； 危害物標示 ； 商品標示 ； 標示誤導 ； 強制標示

並列摘要

Abstract

The application of nanotechnology brings “nano opportunities”, however, a few of scientists pointed out that such gold dream is no different with a mirage. Because in many scientific experiments, it is found out that nano materials could do damage to the human health and the environment. A nano product would experience two different life cycles through manufacturing phase and consumption phase. In light of the difference of the protected subject as well as the protection principles of the two phases, it is necessary to draw a clear line between them.
As a result of the humans’ dependence on the provided information to enhance their sense of control in facing the technological risks, one would require the present regulations to respond whether the information regarding risks should be provided or to which degree should such information be provided. Namely, the access to provide information is labeling. Therefore, this article focuses on the different labeling purposes of the two phases in order to build up the models of labeling system of them, and gives advice on the analysis whether the present labeling system is suitable for regulating nanotechnology risks according to the consequences of the nano material/ product applied under the present regulations.
And this article comes up to two conclusions, one is that in manufacturing phase the Administration should identify nano material as a hazard substance because the labeling purpose of the manufacturing phase is to prevent the risk, and because of the vulnerability of labors; the other is in consumption phase, the public is generally short of knowledge of nanotechnology, so in case the merchandiser chooses to give some information but to remain silent about other information, the silence part could mislead the consumers and the labeling as a whole still constitutes false labeling even if the labeled part is not misleading. So it is important to strengthen control of the regulations of nano false labeling. And in consideration of taking the compulsory nano labeling policy, specific attention must be paid to three dimensions: 1st. the credibility of the scientific evidence under precautionary principle, 2nd. the impact on the freedom of speech of a merchandiser, and 3rd. whether there exists other substitute for risk regulations in the consumption phase. Finally, it is the best strategy to seek common consensus through public consultation, in doing this, the negative consequences including nano industry to be on the decline and public fear the compulsory labeling system brings could be avoided.

並列關鍵字

nanotechnology ； risk ； nano labeling ； hazard labeling ； product labeling ； false labeling ； compulsory labeling

參考文獻

廖義男(1989)，消費者保護法之行政監督，台大法學論叢，第18卷第2期。

黄俊夫(2006)，預防原則(The Precautionary Principle)導言─節錄聯合國教育、科學及文化組織2005年3月發表，生活科技教育月刊，39卷第6期。

洪家殷(2006)，行政罰法論，五南出版公司。

林欣穎(2004)，食品安全認證標章之經濟效益分析－以我國「CAS」、「好畜圃」為例 ，台大農業經濟學研究所碩士論文。

司法院釋字第414號解釋蘇俊雄大法官不同意見書。