The commercialization of university-based research: Balancing risks and benefits

BMC Medical Ethics

Ubaka Ogbogu¹  Timothy Caulfield² 

[1]431 Law Centre, University of Alberta, 111 St and 89 Ave, Edmonton T6G 2H5, AB, Canada

[2]461 Law Centre, University of Alberta, 111 St and 89 Ave, Edmonton T6G 2H5, AB, Canada

关键词: Science funding;    University research;    Science policy;    Ethics;    Science hype;    Risks versus benefits;    Knowledge translation;    Applied research;    Pressure to commercialize;    Commercialization;   

Others  :  1229735
DOI  :  10.1186/s12910-015-0064-2

 received in 2015-04-16, accepted in 2015-09-22,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

The increasing push to commercialize university research has emerged as a significant science policy challenge. While the socio-economic benefits of increased and rapid research commercialization are often emphasized in policy statements and discussions, there is less mention or discussion of potential risks. In this paper, we highlight such potential risks and call for a more balanced assessment of the commercialization ethos and trends.

Discussion

There is growing evidence that the pressure to commercialize is directly or indirectly associated with adverse impacts on the research environment, science hype, premature implementation or translation of research results, loss of public trust in the university research enterprise, research policy conflicts and confusion, and damage to the long-term contributions of university research.

Summary

The growing emphasis on commercialization of university research may be exerting unfounded pressure on researchers and misrepresenting scientific research realities, prospects and outcomes. While more research is needed to verify the potential risks outlined in this paper, policy discussions should, at a minimum, acknowledge them.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Caulfield and Ogbogu.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Ogbogu U, Caulfield T. “Science powers commerce”: mapping the language, justifications, and perceptions of the drive to commercialize in the context of Canadian research. Canadian Journal of Comparative and Contemporary Law. 2015; 1:137-158.
• [2]Hand E, Mole B, Morello L, Tollefson J, Wadman M, Witze A. A back seat for basic science. Nature. 2013; 496:277-279.
• [3]Caulfield T. Talking science - commercialization creep. Policy Options. 2012;20–23.
• [4]Macilwain C. Science economics: what science is really worth. Nature. 2010; 465:682-684.
• [5]Rasmussen E. Government instruments to support the commercialization of university research: lessons from Canada. Technovation. 2008; 28:506-517.
• [6]Downie J, Herder M. Reflections on the commercialization of research conducted in public institutions in Canada. McGill Health Law Publication. 2007; 1:23-44.
• [7]Remarks by the President in State of the Union Address, Jan 20, 2015 [https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/20/remarks-president-state-union-address-january-20-2015]. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [8]President Barack Obama’s State of the Union Address, Jan 28, 2014 [https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/01/28/president-barack-obamas-state-union-address]. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [9]Remarks by the President on Precision Medicine, Jan 30, 2015 [https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/30/remarks-president-precision-medicine]. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [10]Remarks by the President in State of the Union Address, Jan 25, 2011 [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/25/remarks-president-state-union-address]. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [11]PM speech on life sciences and opening up the NHS, Dec 6, 2011 [https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-speech-on-life-sciences-and-opening-up-the-nhs]. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [12]PM announces Banting Postdoctoral Fellowships, support for Next Einstein Initiative, July 6, 2010 [http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2010/07/06/pm-announces-banting-postdoctoral-fellowships-support-next-einstein-initiative-0]. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [13]Petersen A, Krisjansen I. Assembling “the bioeconomy”: exploiting the power of the promissory life sciences. Journal of Sociology. 2015; 51:28-46.
• [14]Philpott K, Dooley L, O’Reilly C, Lupton G. The entrepreneurial university: examining the underlying academic tensions. Technovation. 2011; 31:161-170.
• [15]Simons P: Budget attacks intellectual independence and academic autonomy of post-secondary schools. Edmonton Journal. 2015 [http://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/simons-budget-attacks-intellectual-independence-and-academic-autonomy-of-post-secondary-schools]. Access date October 8, 2015.
• [16]Caulfield T. Stem cell research and economic promises. J Law Med Ethics. 2010; 38:303-313.
• [17]Budget 2015 Speech: A balanced direction for Alberta’s future [http://alberta.ca/release.cfm?xID=3795878522DC8-90B7-14E0-E1976AFFEC3D773C]. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [18]Romanow RJ, Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada: Building on Values: The Future of Health Care in Canada. [Saskatoon, Sask.]: Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada; 2002. http://publications. gc.ca/collections/Collection/CP32-85-2002E.pdf webcite
• [19]Ogbogu U. A review of pressing ethical issues relevant to stem cell translational research. Health Law Review. 2006; 14:39-43.
• [20]Unknown quantities. Nature. 2010;465:665–666. doi:10.1038/465665bhttp://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v465/n7299/full/465665b.html. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [21]Mowery DC, Ziedonis AA. Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayh–Dole act in the United States. Research Policy. 2002; 31:399-418.
• [22]Siegel DS, Wright M, Lockett A. The rise of entrepreneurial activity at universities: organizational and societal implications. Ind Corp Chang. 2007; 16:489-504.
• [23]Etzkowitz H. Innovation in Innovation: The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Soc Sci Inf. 2003; 42:293-337.
• [24]Geist M: Commercialization of IP in Canadian universities: barely better than break even. 2010. [http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2010/08/ip-commercialization-in-can-uni/]. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [25]Jordan BR, Tsai DFC. Whole-genome association studies for multigenic diseases: ethical dilemmas arising from commercialization—the case of genetic testing for autism. J Med Ethics. 2010; 36:440-444.
• [26]Mangematin V, O’Reilly P, Cunningham J. PIs as boundary spanners, science and market shapers. J Technol Transf. 2012.
• [27]Webster PC. CIHR’s commitment to basic research questioned. CMAJ. 2015;187:484. doi:10.1503/cmaj.109-5029 http://www.cmaj.ca/content/187/7/484.full. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [28]Pew Research Center: Report: Public and scientists’ views on science and society, Jan 29, 2015 [http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/29/appendix-b-about-the-aaas-scientists-survey/]. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [29]Jung HJ, Lee“Jay” J. The impacts of science and technology policy interventions on university research: evidence from the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative. Res Policy. 2014; 43:74-91.
• [30]Blumenthal D, Campbell EG, Anderson MS, Causino N, Louis KS. Withholding research results in academic life science. evidence from a national survey of faculty. JAMA. 1997; 277:1224-1228.
• [31]Blumenthal D, Campbell EG, Gokhale M, Yucel R, Clarridge B, Hilgartner S et al.. Data withholding in genetics and the other life sciences: prevalences and predictors. Acad Med. 2006; 81:137-145.
• [32]Campbell EG, Clarridge BR, Gokhale M, Birenbaum L, Hilgartner S, Holtzman NA et al.. Data withholding in academic genetics: evidence from a national survey. JAMA. 2002; 287:473.
• [33]Bubela T, Strotmann A, Adams R, Morrison S. Commercialization and collaboration: competing policies in publicly funded stem cell research? Cell Stem Cell. 2010; 7:25-30.
• [34]Powers JB, Campbell EG. Technology commercialization effects on the conduct of research in higher education. Res high educ. 2011; 52:245-260.
• [35]Puniewska M. Scientists have a sharing problem. The Atlantic. 2014 [http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/12/scientists-have-a-sharing-problem/383061/]. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [36]Harmon SH, Caulfield T, Joly Y. Commercialization versus open science: making sense of the message (s) in the bottle. Medical Law International. 2012; 12:3-10.
• [37]Caulfield T, Harmon SH, Joly Y. Open science versus commercialization: a modern research conflict. Genome medicine. 2012; 4:17. BioMed Central Full Text
• [38]Yavchitz A, Boutron I, Bafeta A, Marroun I, Charles P, Mantz J et al.. Misrepresentation of randomized controlled trials in press releases and news coverage: a cohort study. PLoS Med. 2012; 9:e1001308.
• [39]Sumner P, Vivian-Griffiths S, Boivin J, Williams A, Venetis CA, Davies A, et al. The association between exaggeration in health related science news and academic press releases: retrospective observational study. BMJ. 2014;349:g7015–5.
• [40]Kamenova K, Caulfield T. Stem cell hype: media portrayal of therapy translation. Sci Transl Med. 2015; 7:278ps4.
• [41]Caulfield T, Condit C. Science and the sources of hype. Public Health Genomics. 2012; 15:209-217.
• [42]Bubela T, Li MD, Hafez M, Bieber M, Atkins H. Is belief larger than fact: expectations, optimism and reality for translational stem cell research. BMC Med. 2012; 10:133. BioMed Central Full Text
• [43]Cao C, Appelbaum RP, Parker R. “Research is high and the market is far away”: commercialization of nanotechnology in China. Technol Soc. 2013; 35:55-64.
• [44]Master Z, Resnik DB. Hype and public trust in science. Sci Eng Ethics. 2013;1–15.
• [45]Hanney SR, Castle-Clarke S, Grant J, Guthrie S, Henshall C, Mestre-Ferrandiz J et al.. How long does biomedical research take? Studying the time taken between biomedical and health research and its translation into products, policy, and practice. Health Res Policy Syst. 2015; 13:1. BioMed Central Full Text
• [46]Medical Research: What’s it worth? Estimating the economic benefits from medical research in the UK. UK Evaluation Forum, London; 2008.
• [47]Bubela TM, Caulfield T. Role and reality: technology transfer at Canadian universities. Trends Biotechnol. 2010; 28:447-451.
• [48]Juengst ET, Fishman JR, McGowan ML, Settersten RA. Serving epigenetics before its time. Trends Genet. 2014; 30:427-429.
• [49]Wilson JM. Lessons learned from the gene therapy trial for ornithine transcarbamylase deficiency. Mol Genet Metab. 2009; 96:151-157.
• [50]Lau D, Ogbogu U, Taylor B, Stafinski T, Menon D, Caulfield T. Stem cell clinics online: the direct-to-consumer portrayal of stem cell medicine. Cell Stem Cell. 2008; 3:591-594.
• [51]Lindvall O, Hyun I. Medical innovation versus stem cell tourism. Science. 2009; 324:1664-1665.
• [52]Master Z, Ogbogu U. Stem cell tourism in the era of personalized medicine: what we know, and what we need to know. Curr Pharmacogenomics Pers Med. 2012; 10:106-110.
• [53]Ogbogu U, Rachul C, Caulfield T. Reassessing direct-to-consumer portrayals of unproven stem cell therapies: is it getting better? Regen Med. 2013; 8:361-369.
• [54]Ryan KA, Sanders AN, Wang DD, Levine AD. Tracking the rise of stem cell tourism. Regen Med. 2010; 5:27-33.
• [55]von Tigerstrom B. The Food and Drug Administration, regenerative sciences, and the regulation of autologous stem cell therapies. Food Drug Law J. 2011; 66:479-506.
• [56]Lysaght T, Campbell AV. Regulating autologous adult stem cells: the FDA steps up. Cell Stem Cell. 2011; 9:393-396.
• [57]Cyranoski D. FDA challenges stem-cell clinic. Nature. 2010; 466:909.
• [58]Consumer Updates: FDA warns about stem cell claims [http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm286155.htm#top]. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [59]Critchley CR, Bruce G, Farrugia M. The impact of commercialisation on public perceptions of stem cell research: exploring differences across the use of induced pluripotent cells, human and animal embryos. Stem Cell Rev Rep. 2013;1–14.
• [60]Critchley CR, Nicol D. Understanding the impact of commercialization on public support for scientific research: is it about the funding source or the organization conducting the research? Public Underst Sci. 2011; 20:347-366.
• [61]Critchley CR. Public opinion and trust in scientists: the role of the research context, and the perceived motivation of stem cell researchers. Public Underst Sci. 2008; 17:309.
• [62]Ogbogu U, Zarzeczny A. Ethical, legal and social implications of translational stem cell research: effects of commercialization on public opinion and trust of stem cell research. In Translational Stem Cell Research Springer. 2011;341–363.
• [63]Caulfield T, Rachul C, Nelson E. Biobanking, consent, and control: a survey of Albertans on key research ethics issues. Biopreserv Biobank. 2012; 10:433-438.
• [64]Sharp RR, Yarborough M. Informed trust and the financing of biomedical research. J Law Med Ethics. 2006; 34:460-464.
• [65]Achenbach J. The age of disbelief. Natl Geogr. 2015; 227:30.
• [66]James JE. Personalised medicine, disease prevention, and the inverse care law: more harm than benefit? Eur J Epidemiol. 2014; 29:383-390.
• [67]Caulfield T. The obesity gene and the (misplaced) search for a personalized approach to our weight gain problems. Wake Forest Journal of Law & Policy. 2015; 5:125-145.
• [68]Penders B, Goven J. Nutrigenomics and the stewardship of scientific promises. Biotechnol J. 2010; 5:909-912.
• [69]Calitz C, Pollack KM, Millard C, Yach D. National Institutes of Health funding for behavioral interventions to prevent chronic diseases. Am J Prev Med. 2015; 48:462-471.
• [70]Pearl RL, Lebowitz MS. Beyond personal responsibility: effects of causal attributions for overweight and obesity on weight-related beliefs, stigma, and policy support. Psychol Health. 2014; 29:1176-1191.
• [71]Barry CL, Brescoll VL, Brownell KD, Schlesinger M. Obesity metaphors: how beliefs about the causes of obesity affect support for public policy. Milbank Q. 2009; 87:7-47.
• [72]Polaris JJZ, Katz JN. “Appropriate” diagnostic testing: supporting diagnostics with evidence-based medicine and shared decision making. BMC Res Notes. 2014; 7:922. BioMed Central Full Text
• [73]Shane S: Stop pushing universities to license more inventions. Business Week. 2012 [http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-02-29/stop-pushing-universities-to-license-more-inventions]. Access date: October 8, 2015.
• [74]Jensen RA, Thursby JG, Thursby MC. Disclosure and licensing of university inventions: “The best we can do with the s**t we get to work with.”. Int J Ind Organ. 2003; 21:1271-1300.
• [75]Galushko V, Sagynbekov K. Commercialization of university research in Canada: what can we do better? International Journal of Business Administration. 2014;5.