Yes, but I might disappoint you. Indeed, as far as the American system is concerned, I cannot tell you very much, because my comparative analysis really focused on the European Union and Canada. However, I am going to be working on the third aspect, no doubt starting in September, which will focus on the situation in the United States. The little that I do know leads me to believe that the legal system is more advanced than the one in Canada. That is clear. From what I have heard—and Mr. Roco may be able to confirm this—a few months ago, a bill on nanotechnology products was tabled. I think that it will be really worthwhile to follow developments in this area.
To complete what Mr. Roco was saying, generally speaking, environmental and health risks are the subject of numerous studies in the United States. I have noted that it is the United States that is carrying out 56% of the funded studies on health and environmental risks in the world. The Americans really are well ahead of everyone else in terms of the toxicity analysis of nanoparticles.
As for the more economic aspect of the question, I am not in any position to respond because it is really difficult to have an overall view of the investments made in Canada by both the private and public sectors. Indeed, there is no coordinated system for nanotechnology research. However, I do know that in Europe, only 5% of the total nanotechnology research budget is earmarked for health and safety issues. I believe that Mr. Roco talked about 8% in the case of the United States, but perhaps I misunderstood.
In a nutshell, 5% is really very little. The primary focus is the development of nanotechnologies, but the issue of toxicity is set aside. Now I believe that everyone agrees that we need to earmark more money for these issues. That is about all I can tell you on the issue.