Sigl Lisa, Leišytė Liudvika
1Center for Higher Education (zhb), Faculty of Business and Economics, TU Dortmund University, Vogelpothsweg 78, 44227 Dortmund, Germany.
2Research Platform Responsible Research and Innovation in Academic Practice, University of Vienna, Universitätsstrasse 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria.
Minerva. 2018;56(3):357-380. doi: 10.1007/s11024-018-9347-3. Epub 2018 Feb 13.
The ways in which societies and institutions institutionalize and practice invention management reflects not only how new ideas are valued, but also imaginaries about the role of science and technology for societal development. Often taking the US Bayh-Dole-Act as a model, many European states have recently implemented changes in how inventions at academic institutions are to be handled to optimize their societal impact. We analyze how these changes have been taken up-and made sense of-in regions with different pre-existing infrastructures, practices and semantics of invention management. For doing so, we build on a comparative analysis of continuities and changes in infrastructures, practices and semantics of invention management in North-Rhine Westphalia (NRW, a former Western state) and Saxony (a former GDR state) to reflect on how academic institutions have been handling inventions along transforming socio-political contexts. Building on document analysis and qualitative interviews with research managers, we discuss ongoing differences in practices of invention management and the semantic framing of the societal value of inventions in NRW and Saxony, and discuss how this can be understood before the background of their ideological, political and economic separation until reunification in 1990. Joining the conceptual perspectives of path dependencies and sociotechnical imaginaries, we argue that two critical incidents in the history of these states (the reunification in 1990 and a legal change in 2002) allowed for wide-ranging institutional alignments, but also allowed path dependencies in practices and semantics of invention management to prevail.
社会和机构将发明管理制度化并加以实践的方式,不仅反映了新思想是如何被重视的,还反映了关于科学技术在社会发展中作用的想象。许多欧洲国家常常以美国的《拜杜法案》为范本,最近对学术机构发明的处理方式进行了改革,以优化其社会影响。我们分析了在不同的既有发明管理基础设施、实践和语义的地区,这些变革是如何被采纳并被理解的。为此,我们基于对北莱茵-威斯特法伦州(前西德的一个州)和萨克森州(前东德的一个州)发明管理的基础设施、实践和语义的连续性与变化的比较分析,来思考学术机构在不断变化的社会政治背景下是如何处理发明的。基于文献分析以及对研究管理人员的定性访谈,我们讨论了北莱茵-威斯特法伦州和萨克森州在发明管理实践以及发明社会价值的语义框架方面持续存在的差异,并探讨在1990年统一之前它们在意识形态、政治和经济上相互分离的背景下如何理解这些差异。结合路径依赖和社会技术想象的概念视角,我们认为这两个州历史上的两个关键事件(1990年的统一和2002年的法律变革)既带来了广泛的制度调整,也使得发明管理实践和语义中的路径依赖得以延续。