基因组公地的商业根源

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Social Studies of Science Pub Date : 2025-01-18 DOI:10.1177/03063127241310122
Steve Sturdy
{"title":"基因组公地的商业根源","authors":"Steve Sturdy","doi":"10.1177/03063127241310122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Accounts of the origins of the genomic commons typically focus on the development of public repositories and data-sharing agreements. This article tells a different story. During the 1990s in the United States, efforts of private companies to prevent the patenting of certain kinds of DNA sequences were essentially a conservative response to shifts in the sociotechnical constitution of the pharmaceutical innovation system, and to the operation of intellectual property as one of the key knowledge control regimes that regulate that system. In this context, the idea of ‘the commons’ was rehabilitated from earlier tragic theorizations to argue that industry’s ability to deliver new pharmaceutical products would be better served if certain kinds of intellectual property were left in the public domain. The genomic commons is not a neutral space of disinterested scientific research that naturally aligns with some abstract ‘public good’, but is part of an innovation system that has evolved to serve the interests of a range of stakeholders, among which the big pharmaceutical companies enjoy a dominant position.","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The commercial roots of the genomic commons\",\"authors\":\"Steve Sturdy\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/03063127241310122\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Accounts of the origins of the genomic commons typically focus on the development of public repositories and data-sharing agreements. This article tells a different story. During the 1990s in the United States, efforts of private companies to prevent the patenting of certain kinds of DNA sequences were essentially a conservative response to shifts in the sociotechnical constitution of the pharmaceutical innovation system, and to the operation of intellectual property as one of the key knowledge control regimes that regulate that system. In this context, the idea of ‘the commons’ was rehabilitated from earlier tragic theorizations to argue that industry’s ability to deliver new pharmaceutical products would be better served if certain kinds of intellectual property were left in the public domain. The genomic commons is not a neutral space of disinterested scientific research that naturally aligns with some abstract ‘public good’, but is part of an innovation system that has evolved to serve the interests of a range of stakeholders, among which the big pharmaceutical companies enjoy a dominant position.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Studies of Science\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Studies of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127241310122\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies of Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127241310122","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对基因组公地起源的描述通常集中在公共存储库和数据共享协议的发展上。这篇文章讲述了一个不同的故事。在20世纪90年代的美国,私营公司努力阻止某些种类的DNA序列的专利实质上是对制药创新系统的社会技术构成的转变的保守反应,以及对知识产权作为规范该系统的关键知识控制制度之一的运作的保守反应。在这种背景下,“公地”的概念从早期的悲剧性理论中恢复过来,认为如果某些类型的知识产权留在公共领域,工业提供新药品的能力将得到更好的服务。基因组公地不是一个无私的科学研究的中立空间,自然地与一些抽象的“公共利益”保持一致,而是一个创新系统的一部分,它已经演变为服务于一系列利益相关者的利益,其中大型制药公司享有主导地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The commercial roots of the genomic commons
Accounts of the origins of the genomic commons typically focus on the development of public repositories and data-sharing agreements. This article tells a different story. During the 1990s in the United States, efforts of private companies to prevent the patenting of certain kinds of DNA sequences were essentially a conservative response to shifts in the sociotechnical constitution of the pharmaceutical innovation system, and to the operation of intellectual property as one of the key knowledge control regimes that regulate that system. In this context, the idea of ‘the commons’ was rehabilitated from earlier tragic theorizations to argue that industry’s ability to deliver new pharmaceutical products would be better served if certain kinds of intellectual property were left in the public domain. The genomic commons is not a neutral space of disinterested scientific research that naturally aligns with some abstract ‘public good’, but is part of an innovation system that has evolved to serve the interests of a range of stakeholders, among which the big pharmaceutical companies enjoy a dominant position.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Studies of Science
Social Studies of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Studies of Science is an international peer reviewed journal that encourages submissions of original research on science, technology and medicine. The journal is multidisciplinary, publishing work from a range of fields including: political science, sociology, economics, history, philosophy, psychology social anthropology, legal and educational disciplines. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
Virtual diversity and the value-ladenness of science Silence of the labs. The commercial roots of the genomic commons From the bench to public policy: Enhancing public trust in science. Making expert advice public in a time of emergency: Independent SAGE and the contestation of science during the Covid pandemic in the UK.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1