more easily dissolved in water, more stable, optimally tar­get pests and be completely absorbed in the plant's system (ETC Group, 2004). Some of these pesticides are emulsions containing   nanoscale    droplets   and   microencapsulated formulations.
     The convergence of nanotechnologies with information and communication technologies also has wide applications in agriculture. One of these applications is precision farm­ing, the site-specific farm management involving a bundle of new information technologies applied to the management of large-scale, commercial agriculture (ETC Group, 2004). The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) is developing a "Smart Field System" that automatically detects, locates, reports and applies water, fertilizers and pesticides through nanotechnologies. Companies and the public sector in the US are experimenting on the potential of "smart dust," which involves the development of autonomous matchhead-size sensors with the ability to detect light, temperature and vibration, communicate with other sensors or "motes" in the vicinity and self-organize into ad hoc computer net­works capable of relaying data using wireless technology (ETC Group, 2004). Smart dust or nanosensor technology is already being applied in engineering and microclimate sensing. Other emerging nanotechnology applications with long-term implications for AKST include the development of nanowater which involves the use of nanotubes to filter pollutants and saline particles from water for human con­sumption and agricultural uses.
     Despite the fact that some products of nanotechnology have already reached the commercial stage, there are few studies on the potential health and environmental impacts of nanotechnologies. Nanoparticles can be inhaled, ingested or pass through the skin. Once in the bloodstream, there are concerns that nanoparticles can elude the body's immune system and penetrate the blood-brain barrier (ETC Group, 2002). The increased reactivity of nanoparticles could harm living tissue, perhaps by giving rise to "free radicals" that may cause inflammation, tissue damage or tumors (ETC Group, 2005).
     Buckyballs (precursor of nanotubes) can cause rapid on­set of brain damage in fish (Oberdörster, 2004). Researchers at the US National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA) reported that when injecting commercially avail­able carbon nanotubes into the lungs of rats caused signifi­cant damage (Raloff, 2005). In other studies, researchers reported substantial DNA damage to hearts and aortic ar­teries of mice exposed to carbon nanotubes and increased susceptibility to blood clotting in rabbits inhaling nanotech buckyballs (ETC Group, 2004). Buckyballs clump together in water to form soluble nanoparticles and even in very low concentrations can harm soil bacteria, raising concerns about how these carbon molecules will interact with natu­ral ecosystems (ETC Group, 2004). In recognition of the knowledge gaps and the health concerns arising from avail­able toxicological studies, factories and research laborato­ries should treat manufactured nanoparticles and nanotubes as if they were hazardous and reduce them in waste streams. The use of free nanoparticles may need to be prohibited in environmental applications such as groundwater remedia­tion (UK Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering, 2004).

5.3.5.1   Impact
Research and development in nanotechnologies have been receiving substantial investments from both the public and private sectors. Most of the world's major seed and agro-chemical companies have a substantive stake in nanotech research   and   development.   The  European   Commission estimates the current global investments in nanotechnolo­gies at around €5 billion, with 40% from the private sec­tor (UK Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering, 2004).  Civil  society groups  monitoring  development in nanotechnologies have placed the combined investments of the public and private sectors in 2004 at $10 x 109 (ETC Group, 2004). The projected value of nanotech products by 2011-2015 is estimated at around US$1 trillion. Patents involving nanotechnologies have jumped from 521 in 1995 to 1,976 in 2001 (UK Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering, 2004). In the ESAP region, Japan, China and India are the leading investors in nanotechnology. Ja­pan invested US$800 million on the technology in 2003, while India has allocated US$22.8 million under its current 5 year plan (Barker et al., 2005). The substantial financial and technological investments required in nanotechnology applications limit the capacity of many developing countries in the region to tap its potentials in agriculture.
     Some nanotechnology applications such as the devel­opment of nanowater have great potential to improve wa­ter for human and agricultural uses. The Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) is about to commercialize its nanofil-ter technology in water purification at the household level, while US universities and the International Water Manage­ment Institute (IWMI) are advancing research to remove ar­senic from groundwater in Bangladesh to render it potable (Barker et al., 2005). Future developments in the search for cheaper and renewable energy sources through the use of nanotechnologies may also have strategic implications on AKST in the region.

5.3.5.2   Challenges
An imminent concern over nanotechnology for the ESAP region is its impact on trade in agricultural commodities. Nanotech products in the global market such as synthetic textiles and nanotech rubbers are projected to provide stiff competition and affect world prices, posing a threat to cot­ton and rubber industries and the livelihoods of millions of farming families in the region.
     Most of the social and ethical concerns surrounding nanotechnologies revolve around control, transparency and governance. While governments in industrial countries have substantially invested financial resources in nanotechnology research and development, the private sector has a signifi­cant advantage through products already in the market and/ or the pipeline. More policy attention is required on regula­tion and standards at the national and international levels and on controversial social and ethical issues such as their role in the modification or production of living material.
     ESAP governments that decide to adopt nanotechnology for agricultural development will need to take into account its potential risks to human, animal and environmental health, as well as its socioeconomic and ethical implica­tions. Adequate precautionary measures will need to be put in place, from the production process to commercialization