Pettersson Ingemar
Department of Economic History, Science and Technology Studies Center, Uppsala University, Box 513, 751 20 Uppsala, Sweden.
Minerva. 2018;56(3):381-403. doi: 10.1007/s11024-018-9348-2. Epub 2018 Feb 19.
The paper examines the introduction of the so-called professor's privilege in Sweden in the 1940s and shows how this legal principle for university patents emerged out of reforms of techno-science and the patent law around World War II. These political processes prompted questions concerning the nature and functions of university research: How is academic science different than other forms of knowledge production? What are the contributions of universities for economy and welfare? Who is the rightful owner of scientific findings? Is academic science "work"? By following the introduction of the professor's privilege, the paper shows how spokespersons for the academic profession addressed such questions and contributed to a new definition of university science through boundary-setting, normative descriptions, and by producing symbolic relationships between science and the economy. The totality of those positions is here referred to as a "nomos" - that is: a generic and durable set of seemingly axiomatic claims about universities. This Swedish nomos, as it took shape in the 1940s, amalgamated classical notions of academic science as exceptional and autonomous with emerging ideas of inventiveness and close connections between academics and business. Crucially, though, the academic-industrial relations embedded in this nomos were private and individual, thus in sharp conflict with the ideas of entrepreneurial universities evolving globally by the end of the 20th century.
本文考察了20世纪40年代瑞典所谓“教授特权”的引入,并展示了这一大学专利法律原则是如何在二战前后的技术科学和专利法改革中产生的。这些政治进程引发了关于大学研究的性质和功能的问题:学术科学与其他知识生产形式有何不同?大学对经济和福利有哪些贡献?科学发现的合法所有者是谁?学术科学是“工作”吗?通过追溯教授特权的引入,本文展示了学术职业的代言人是如何处理这些问题的,并通过划定界限、进行规范性描述以及在科学与经济之间建立象征性联系,为大学科学的新定义做出贡献。这些立场的总体在这里被称为“法则”——也就是说:一套关于大学的看似公理的一般性和持久性主张。这种在20世纪40年代形成的瑞典法则,将学术科学作为特殊和自主的经典观念与新兴的创造性观念以及学者与商业之间的紧密联系融合在一起。然而,至关重要的是,这个法则中所包含的学术-产业关系是私人的和个体的,因此与20世纪末全球范围内不断发展的创业型大学理念形成了尖锐冲突。