Stewardship - who bears the responsibility for new products and product sustainability?

While stewardship relates to resource ethics and sustainability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stewardship), who actually defines what products are sustainable, which products are hazardous, causing health risks?

Let us consider two examples:

• Did nuclear science bring our society progress with regards to non-fossil energy sources, or an unresolved issue of radioactive waste disposal, or a threat from nuclear weapons of massive destruction of human populations?
• Asbestos is a natural product with excellent isolating properties. Which institutions examined, administrated and finally approved that asbestos would be a save product to market and to be used e.g. in the construction industry, while today we know the high health risks of asbestos and related fatalities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbestos)?

Both examples reflect a path in the evolution of our society. While this evolutionary process occurs over time through careful and critical scientific assessments of risks, from my personal perspective the outcome is by no means satisfactory.

It therefore makes sense to think in more detail about such evolutionary processes of our society, because it matters: what about the risks from the continued use of fossil fuels and global warming (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming), biotechnology and genetically modified organisms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biotechnology), nanotechnology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanotechnology), to mention just a few current and prominent themes of new technology developments?

A fundamental question in democracies and liberal markets systems is always how much regulation is needed? We might argue that in referring to the three pillars or triple bottom line of sustainability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainability), markets have become less liberal in what they used to be in the past decades.

Some markets are more open and liberal than others. Some are more or less regulated and controlled, some are corrupt. Some individuals on our planet have the choice, in which markets they can and want to engage, some individuals do not have such choices or liberties.

Which way to go? Building or fighting for democracies is certainly the first answer. Next, open information access and education are key elements, whether via Internet or face-to-face, from class lecturing or self-studying. It is the responsibility of each human individual, to learn about these issues, to take steps and measures, to become active and engage publicly, launch initiatives and petitions, to improve an unsustainable situation.

Science has an important role in assessing the risks of new technology. Science has an advisory role and as institution does not make decision in lieu of society. Governments and legislators have regulatory power through laws, so does the people in democracies.

To say that business corporations, consumers, environmental NGOs, grass-root activism and communities are among the major stakeholders in how new products enter the market.

To give an answer to the question at the beginning of this text, each individual and citizen, in his or her different roles in society actually defines, what is a sustainable product and what is not. This is why each individual’s opinion and voice is indeed very important and definitely matters.