Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
harm culture
Science, along with the innovation it generates, is a vast enterprise: commercial and
pro-bono, public and private, industrial and educational, amateur and professional.
It permeates our lives and shapes the world. Some say it is a defining characteristic
of humanity, stimulating and harnessing our innate curiosity and, more than any
other endeavour, shaping our world and, increasingly, ourselves.
For many reasons, some of which are set Statement of the problem
out below, it is increasingly important to Science is a rapidly growing industry. Beyond The initial meetings of the Manchester
consider the question of “Who Owns basic research, the commercialisation of Manifesto Group in 2008-2009 established
Science?”. The answer to this question technologies and development of new products that the current method of managing
will have broad-ranging implications: for from bench top to marketplace is a complex innovation (and perhaps in particular IP in its
scientific progress, for equity of access to process. In asking “Who Owns Science?”, we present form), whilst deeply embedded in
scientific knowledge and its fruits and for are concerned with all aspects of this process: current practice and hence of practical
the fair distribution of the benefits and scientific discovery, development, application importance, also has significant drawbacks in
the burdens of science and innovation – in and distribution; and the interactions between terms of its effects on science and economic
short, for global justice and human each aspect. The way in which this is managed, efficiency, and raises ethical issues because of
progress. and in particular the way in which access to its (often adverse) effects on people and
technologies is facilitated and controlled, is populations.
having and will inevitably have an increasing
Our approach impact on the course of science-based The Manchester Manifesto Group considered
technological innovation. the core goals of science and identified various
The Manchester Manifesto Group brings
issues and problems with the current system of
together international experts from relevant
An important component of the innovation ownership and management of science and
disciplines to address the question of “Who
process has been the idea of “ownership” in innovation, highlighting elements that hinder
Owns Science?” Led by two research institutes
science and technology. This concept has or obstruct achievement of these goals.
at The University of Manchester, the Institute
arisen partly in the context of profiting from Reflecting on these problems, we were able to
for Science, Ethics and Innovation and the
research and development, but also has articulate some broad principles and policy
Brooks World Poverty Institute, chaired by John
implications for much broader issues such as considerations to guide any investigation or
Sulston and Joseph Stiglitz, respectively, the
control of and access to scientific information evaluation of alternative systems of innovation.
Group represents a critical mass of research
and products that result from research, in Finally, we outlined some questions that must
expertise that are ideally equipped to meet the
terms of both the private and socio-political be addressed if we are to move towards
challenges and problems outlined above. The
dimensions of ownership. solutions to the problems identified by the
Group’s members are drawn from a broad
group. We call for further research in these
range of academic disciplines and relevant To manage the ownership of science and the areas as a matter of great importance, in order
sectors, including economics, science, fruits of research, an intricate system of to answer the question not only of “Who
innovation, law, philosophy, ethics and public intellectual property (IP) law has developed. Owns Science?”, but of who ought to own
policy. Our goal has been not only to The justifications for IP law as it exists at science and how the goals of science can best
investigate the question of “Who Owns present include the idea that it is required in be fulfilled.
Science?” but to present and apply our order to facilitate scientific and economic
findings to maximum effect in order to make a benefit from innovation, and that it provides a
difference in the real world as to how science is fair and morally justifiable way of rewarding
used, and hence to “build a better future for those who invest in the process of discovery
humanity”. and regulating access to these benefits.
www.manchester.ac.uk/isei 3
Broader Issues
Effect on innovation Scientific progress There are also broader issues resulting from the
dominant model of innovation which should be
Current models can hinder innovation because: • Restrictions on access to information at any
given consideration.
stage of the innovative process obstruct the
• Certain licensing practices can have flow of scientific information and thereby • Improving systems of innovation may not be
restrictive effects on innovation. These impede scientific progress. Such restrictions enough in itself to promote human welfare;
include, for example, use of very narrow or are also contrary to the needs of scientific there is also the problem of insufficient
exclusive licence terms. inquiry and are inimical to openness and capacity, particularly in many developing
transparency. countries, to access scientific information,
• The increasingly common incidence of
requiring multiple licences for the use of a operate and navigate innovation systems,
• Information sharing among the scientific
single technology or research tool and achieve access to innovative products
community can be reduced or suffer from
complicates access, making it more costly e.g. because of weak health infrastructure.
delays as a result of patent requirements
and time-consuming. (e.g. that information must not be in the • The transition from basic science to product
public domain at time of filing). in the clinic or marketplace is not always
• Perceptions of accessibility problems can
lead to enterprises deciding not to attempt linear and unidirectional. The relationship
• The complexity of the system creates
to apply for licences. between ‘pure’ and ‘applied’ research,
uncertainty, for example over researchers’
science, technology and innovation is a
ability to obtain necessary licences, which
• New business entry into innovative industries complex and multi-faceted one, with
can discourage investment in research and
is very difficult due to the high transaction interactions between actors at all stages
development.
costs involved in operating in an arena of influencing the process. The effects of
multiple intellectual property rights, reducing • These access restrictions have particularly action/regulation in one area may have
competition and allowing large companies severe effects on public, not-for-profit, small implications extending across other aspects,
to dominate markets. and developing country enterprises, which and each area may have unique issues and
cannot afford the expense of licences and/or problems associated with its management.
• Navigation and implementation of the
the expertise required to navigate the patent
patent system, negotiation, bargaining and • Within this process, actors can have multiple
system. This can obstruct, delay, or entirely
litigation require costly expertise. roles, creating potential conflicts of interest.
shut-down valuable lines of research and
For example, a single individual may have
• The operation of the current system often innovation.
both scientific and commercial interests at
prevents the holders of IP rights themselves stake; governments may face a conflict
Overall, the current patent system is self-
from realising the full benefits of these between stimulating economic development
reinforcing, encouraging proliferation of
rights, for example because of the costs through rewarding private investment in
patents and multiplying these problems.
involved in asserting them. research and optimising the public benefits
of science.
Global Dynamics
While states have the sovereign right to adopt Additional problems occur at the
their own rules, laws and procedures, they international level:
need to operate within the bounds of a variety
of international rules and norms and with • Diverse national regulation of innovation
awareness of international dynamics. For creates complexity in compliance. This can
management of innovation, these include: increase costs to innovators, pushing publicly Alternative models
funded, not-for-profit and developing need to be promoted
“
• Permeable national boundaries creating high country enterprises out of international
mobility of knowledge, materials, and markets. and existing
personnel, and meaning that the impacts of flexibilities fully
national policies may be widely felt in other • International regulation can have the effect
states. of privileging the interests of wealthy states explored to ensure
over general human needs due to power innovation can meet
• In areas which lack harmonised international imbalances.
regulation, innovative activities can migrate
welfare goals.
to territories in which regulatory regimes are • International regulation currently remains
weak or non-existent. state focused and often reinforces state
sovereign rights. It can therefore be of
• Frequent prioritisation of national interest limited effect on transnational actors (e.g.
and economic competitiveness by states in corporations) and often promotes national
”
their international relations. interest above that of local communities.
• Wide disparities between rich and poor • Bilateral agreements and ‘free trade areas’
within and between states, in terms of are being used to impose excessive and
income, opportunities, health, education, inappropriate standards on less developed
and access to science, technology and the countries.
products of innovation.
The effect of the current international rules,
International regulation has advantages in its which set minimum standards for intellectual
ability to harmonise national policies, providing property protection, is that a single model of
clarity and reducing the costs of compliance. It intellectual property protection dominates, and
must be recognised, however, that at the same time is operative in many national
international regulation also has disadvantages. systems. This dominant model is intended to
Powerful states have greater influence in rule- promote scientific and economic development,
setting and less to fear in regard to the but can be radically flawed in this respect.
consequences of non-compliance. Alternative models need to be promoted and
Commitments to capacity-building for existing flexibilities fully explored to ensure
developing states are inadequately fulfilled and innovation can meet welfare goals.
enforcement is problematic.
6 The Manchester Manifesto
We recognise that innovation has an essential role in economic development, but its use for the
pursuit of profit should not override, and ideally should not conflict with, achievement of
welfare goals and scientific progress. Scientific information, freely and openly communicated,
adds to the body of knowledge and understanding upon which the progress of humanity
depends. Information must remain available to science and this depends on open
communication and dissemination of information, including that used in innovation.
We have considered the question of “Who We call for further research towards achieving “public” and “private” science, in both the
Owns Science” in the context of what we more equitable innovation and enabling greater practical and the normative sense.
believe to be the purposes of science and fulfilment of the goals of science as we see them.
Members of the Manchester Manifesto
innovation and evaluated the way in which
Modified and alternative models of innovation Group have been actively pursuing
ownership of science currently operates
have the potential to address problems inherent research initiatives in these important
with respect to these purposes. It is clear
in the current system. An investigation and areas; and the Group remains the base for
that the dominant existing model of
evaluation of these models is required in order practical discussion and ongoing
innovation, while serving some necessary
to determine whether they are likely to be more investigations. We hope that the
purposes for the current operation of
successful in facilitating the goals of science and Manchester Manifesto will serve as a
innovation, also impedes achievement of
innovation identified above, and if so how they starting point for discussion, reflection and
core scientific goals in a number of ways.
may be deployed. Greater cooperation further research on these issues amongst
In many cases it restricts access to scientific
between all actors is required; alongside all those concerned and involved with
knowledge and products, thereby limiting
development of theory, there is a clear need for science and innovation.
the public benefits of science; it can restrict
practical engagement with actors at all stages
the flow of information, thereby inhibiting
of the innovation process.
the progress of science; and it may hinder
innovation through the costly and The scope of this document is largely concerned
complicated nature of the system. Limited with science that is in the public interest. More
improvements may be achieved through thought must be given to how we characterise
modification of the current IP system, but what sort of science is in the public interest,
consideration of alternative models is and how we draw the boundaries between
urgently required.