Cook-Deegan Robert
Center for Genome Ethics, Law & Policy, Institute for Genome Sciences & Policy and Sanford Institute of Public Policy and Duke Medical School, Duke University, 242 North Building, Durham, NC 27708-0141 USA.
J Technol Transf. 2007;32(3):133-156. doi: 10.1007/s10961-006-9016-9. Epub 2006 Dec 7.
The "science commons," knowledge that is widely accessible at low or no cost, is a uniquely important input to scientific advance and cumulative technological innovation. It is primarily, although not exclusively, funded by government and nonprofit sources. Much of it is produced at academic research centers, although some academic science is proprietary and some privately funded R&D enters the science commons. Science in general aspires to Mertonian norms of openness, universality, objectivity, and critical inquiry. The science commons diverges from proprietary science primarily in being open and being very broadly available. These features make the science commons particularly valuable for advancing knowledge, for training innovators who will ultimately work in both public and private sectors, and in providing a common stock of knowledge upon which all players-both public and private-can draw readily. Open science plays two important roles that proprietary R&D cannot: it enables practical benefits even in the absence of profitable markets for goods and services, and its lays a shared foundation for subsequent private R&D. The history of genomics in the period 1992-2004, covering two periods when genomic startup firms attracted significant private R&D investment, illustrates these features of how a science commons contributes value. Commercial interest in genomics was intense during this period. Fierce competition between private sector and public sector genomics programs was highly visible. Seemingly anomalous behavior, such as private firms funding "open science," can be explained by unusual business dynamics between established firms wanting to preserve a robust science commons to prevent startup firms from limiting established firms' freedom to operate. Deliberate policies to create and protect a large science commons were pursued by nonprofit and government funders of genomics research, such as the Wellcome Trust and National Institutes of Health. These policies were crucial to keeping genomic data and research tools widely available at low cost.
“科学公共领域”指的是那些以低成本或零成本广泛可得的知识,它是科学进步和累积性技术创新的一种独特且重要的投入要素。它主要由政府和非营利性来源资助,不过并非仅来源于此。它大多是在学术研究中心产生的,尽管有些学术科学是专有的,且一些私人资助的研发成果也进入了科学公共领域。一般而言,科学追求默顿提出的开放性、普遍性、客观性和批判性探究的规范。科学公共领域与专有科学的主要区别在于其开放性和广泛可得性。这些特性使得科学公共领域对于推动知识进步、培养最终将在公共和私营部门工作的创新者,以及提供所有参与者(包括公共和私营部门)都能轻易获取的知识储备尤为有价值。开放科学发挥着专有研发无法起到的两个重要作用:即使在商品和服务没有盈利市场的情况下,它也能带来实际益处,并且它为后续的私人研发奠定了共同基础。1992年至2004年期间的基因组学历史,涵盖了基因组初创公司吸引大量私人研发投资的两个阶段,说明了科学公共领域是如何创造价值的这些特性。在此期间,对基因组学的商业兴趣浓厚。私营部门和公共部门的基因组学项目之间的激烈竞争显而易见。一些看似反常的行为,比如私人公司资助“开放科学”,可以通过老牌公司之间不同寻常的商业动态来解释,这些老牌公司希望维护一个强大的科学公共领域,以防止初创公司限制它们的运营自由。基因组学研究的非营利性和政府资助者,如惠康信托基金会和美国国立卫生研究院,推行了旨在创建和保护大型科学公共领域的审慎政策。这些政策对于以低成本广泛提供基因组数据和研究工具至关重要。