Australia's current system for approving agricultural chemicals can effectively assess the safety of 'nano' products, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) says.

Nano materials are said to offer farmers major benefits like more effective, targeted use of pesticides that mean lower doses and the ability to develop better controlled-release chemicals and livestock medicines.

The APVMA's CEO Kareena Arthy said the organisation's existing criteria for assessing the safety of agricultural chemicals is adequate,

"[Under] that framework, we look at whether a product meets safety criteria and then we look at perhaps whether it needs review."

Space to play or pause, M to mute, left and right arrows to seek, up and down arrows for volume. Listen Duration: 4 minutes 40 seconds 4 m 40 s Scientists and regulators discuss nanoparticles in agriculture Download 2.1 MB

A nano-metre is one millionth of a millimetre.

Nano-tech broadly refers to the engineering of molecules up to 100 nanometres in size and is already widely used in medicine for anti-microbial treatments and also in sunscreens.

To date, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority has only received - and authorised - one request to approve a product containing nano-materials for use in Australia.

It's an anaesthetic used for treating dogs and cats, not an agricultural chemical

Ms Arthy says any agricultural or animal product it is asked to approve is assessed on safety criteria, regardless of the size or shape of the molecules it may contain.

But she concedes the rapidly-developing field may require 'tweaking.'

"Given we're talking about nano-technology - which we're still in the infancy in terms of regulating - perhaps we need to put in place standards, or different guidelines in terms of safety criteria companies may need to prove.

"We're not talking about any other form of regulatory change because the framework is there, it works."

Environmental group Friends of the Earth disagrees.

The group's emerging technology campaigner Jeremy Tager said authorities' approach is not strict enough

"New materials that go into our food and into our food systems should be assured safe before they're consumed by humans, and they're not."

The organisation believes nano-preparations of some pesticides are already being sold in Australia.

Mr Tager said his main objection isn't the materials themselves, but what he believes is a lack of testing.

"Saying that we find nano doesn't mean that its not safe.

"What it means is you don't have a regulatory system that is able to say to the public we can assure that these products are safe because we know, we've tested them."

Scientists admit there's much they don't know about nano-materials' impact on human health and the environment, but say some of the concerns are overblown.

Dr Andrew Bartholomaeus has worked as a toxicologist for both the Therapeutic Goods Administration and Food Standards Australia and New Zealand.

Dr Bartholomaeus said just because nanoparticles were smaller didn't make them more dangerous.

"Small per se is not the issue, its the increased functionality that creates the issue.

"The real focus is to say 'what is actually novel about this new approach?'

"How can that actually influence its application, exposure to people and safety?"

Professor Terry Turney is a previous director of CSIRO's nanotech centre and now sitson the board of Melbourne fertilizer company Sonic Essentials, which is working on nano-preparations for agricultural use.

He's reluctant to give details for fear of tipping-off competitors, but he gives the regulators credit for their willingness to publically discuss what's coming, and how to regulate it.

They're not out there at the moment, but they're coming and there's some very exciting prospects.

"You could be looking at improved delivery of fertilizers, targeting pesticides more effectively, decreasing the amount of pesticide loading that would be required to manage crops or indeed problems with animals."

Professor Turney also recognised the public need for long-term testing before any nano-preparations are approved for agricultural use.

"We don't want to create a problems.

"These nano-materials, I think the issue is persistence. If its not persistent, then maybe the safety issues are not that severe.

"I think if a material is persistent and is going to last there for many many years then you do need to look at it very very carefully."

The APVMA says it is adequately resourced to carry out the necessary studies and testing.