The 1980 Bayh-Dole Act, which enabled
universities to claim title to inventions and to license those inventions to
the private sector, is often highlighted as the quintessential example of
policies promoting the commercialization of academic knowledge, including technology transfers, university-industry research collaborations, and industry
funding for university research.
Proponents of
private–public research collaborations claim they will lead to more efficient
knowledge and technology transfers which, in turn, will lead to higher social
value. Skeptics counter
that universities and industries have distinct research cultures and that the
commercialization of university science threatens these distinct cultures.
 |
| Biotech research |
Researchers emphasize that universities tend to produce more public
goods because they are structured to
promote such outputs from their scientists. Industry scientists tend to produce private
goods because they operate in a different organizational structure
and culture The concern, then, is not that functional norms might be undermined.
Rather, the concern is that commercialization of university science is blurring distinctions between
research cultures or that the research cultures are converging Industry
representatives and international policy making bodies have raised concerns
about these trends and contend that it is socially desirable to structure and
fund universities to promote public-interest research. For example, a 2007 report states that
industries that participate in university-industry research collaborations claim that they do so
because university scientists have incentives to emphasize basic and non-proprietary research. Even when universities conduct proprietary and applied research, those university scientists may still be expected to focus in areas where industries lack adequate economic incentives. In the area of crop biotechnology, universities may be expected to focus on minor food crops, since industry lacks a profit incentive to conduct such research.
because university scientists have incentives to emphasize basic and non-proprietary research. Even when universities conduct proprietary and applied research, those university scientists may still be expected to focus in areas where industries lack adequate economic incentives. In the area of crop biotechnology, universities may be expected to focus on minor food crops, since industry lacks a profit incentive to conduct such research.
To better understand the conduct of plant and animal biotechnology
research the next six questions must be asked and answered by the researchers
themselves.
- Can university scientists be grouped by their values and orientations in regards to the appropriate focus of their research programs?
- To what extent are the scientific values of academic researchers associated with the amount of research funding they receive from industry sources?
- To what extent do the values of individual scientists influence the proprietary nature (proprietariness) of their discoveries?
- To what extent do the values of individual scientists affect how basic versus applied (basicness) their research program is?
- To what extent does industry funding affect how basic versusapplied (basicness) the scientists research program is?
- To what extent does the proprietary nature (proprietariness) of the university scientists discoveries affect how basic versus applied (basicness) the scientists research discoveries are?
Very nice post, I now know some more about the biotechnology research.
ResponderEliminarThanks, it was very helpful!