权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Cultivating Innovation: Agroecology, Plant Breeding and the Challenge to Intellectual Property Law

培育创新：农业生态学、植物育种和知识产权法的挑战

基本信息

批准号：
AH/L009455/1
负责人：
Gregory Radick
金额：
$ 10.12万
依托单位：
University of Leeds
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Research Grant
财政年份：
2014
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2014 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FL009455%2F1
关键词：
Cultivating Innovation Agroecology Plant Breeding

项目摘要

How has the ownership of ideas - 'intellectual property', or IP, as it is now called - shaped the development of science, technology and society? A new, synthetic framework for investigating this vital question was one of the major outcomes of the Leeds-Bristol AHRC 'Owning and Disowning Invention' project. As one of the co-Is on that project, Prof. G. Radick took the lead in developing the framework and also in extending it to reinterpreting historical shifts in the science and practice of plant breeding in Britain in the decades around 1900. It is the aim of this Follow-on Funding project to bring the insights of this research to audiences well placed to benefit from them, in a form that maximises both uptake and utility.At the core of the synthetic framework is a new distinction between IP claims narrowly construed - the familiar legal instruments of patents, trademarks and so on ('IP-narrow') - and other, broader sorts of ownership claims ('IP-broad'), notably claims to have discovered something first ('priority claims') and, on behalf of a discipline, claims that its theoretical principles explain the success of useful techniques and technologies ('productivity claims'). This recognition of intersecting, interacting narrow and broad concepts of IP - and also the potentially destructive tensions they engender - serves to illuminate a range of issues, from the troublesome classification of scientific work as 'pure' or 'applied' to the nature of the public authority of the sciences in our culture. In his own use of this expanded conception of IP in the technosciences, Radick has suggested that, far more than historians have suspected hitherto, the new Mendelian genetics of the early twentieth century depended on the carefully controlled management of the distribution and reputation of putatively Mendelian, and putatively excellent (but in fact highly problematic) plant varieties.This Follow-on project will work in collaboration with the Newbury-based Organic Research Centre (ORC) to create public-facing resources on four specific themes:i) changes in the biological understanding of heredity have coevolved with changes in the economic conditions and marketing of plant varieties. The Owning and Disowning Invention project has opened a rich body of evidence for the further exploration of these problems, which can be used throughout the collaboration with the ORC.ii) the patent regimes under which scientists in different countries operate is related to the likelihood of their producing successful innovations. Currently, the IP system operating across Europe and North America favours some plant breeding methods over others. Attention to the long-run history of IP and plant breeding can stimulate critical thinking about this status quo.iii) typically, in the context of plant breeding in particular and the biosciences in general, IP has been understood as only relating to patents. The differences between mainstream plant breeding methods deriving from the prestige science of molecular biology and alternative methods not so derived presents an ideal setting for analysis making use of the expanded conception of IP in order, again, to promote critical thinking and more creative discussion.iv) the history of plant breeding has been marked by a persistent shift in the location of breeding work, away from the farm and towards the trialling fields of private companies. Understanding these developments requires a focus upon our changed understanding of what plant breeding innovation looks like, and how it might be fostered and protected.This proposed project is modelled closely on a recently funded, Leeds-based AHRC Follow-on Funding project, 'Innovating in Combat: Telecommunications and Intellectual Property in the First World War', partnered with the Museum of the History of Science at the University of Oxford, and led by Prof. G. Gooday, who was PI on the Owning and Disowning Invention project, and Co-I here.

思想的所有权——现在被称为“知识产权”或IP——是如何塑造科学、技术和社会的发展的？利兹-布里斯托尔AHRC“拥有和否认发明”项目的主要成果之一是研究这个重要问题的一个新的综合框架。作为该项目的共同成员之一，G. Radick教授率先开发了该框架，并将其扩展到重新解释1900年左右英国植物育种科学和实践的历史转变。这个后续资助项目的目的是将这项研究的见解以一种最大化吸收和效用的形式带给有能力从中受益的受众。综合框架的核心是对狭义的知识产权要求——熟悉的专利、商标等法律工具（“狭义知识产权”）——和其他更广泛的所有权要求（“广义知识产权”）之间的新区分，特别是声称自己首先发现了什么（“优先权要求”），以及代表一门学科，声称其理论原则解释了有用的技术和技术的成功（“生产力要求”）。认识到知识产权的狭义和广义概念相互交叉、相互作用，以及它们所产生的潜在破坏性紧张关系，有助于阐明一系列问题，从将科学工作分为“纯粹”或“应用”的棘手分类，到我们文化中科学公共权威的性质。拉迪克在他自己对技术领域知识产权的扩展概念的运用中指出，20世纪初的新孟德尔遗传学依赖于对被认为是孟德尔的、被认为是优秀的（但实际上有很大问题的）植物品种的分布和声誉的精心控制管理，这比历史学家迄今所怀疑的要多得多。这个后续项目将与总部位于纽伯里的有机研究中心（ORC）合作，在四个具体主题上创造面向公众的资源：1)生物学对遗传的理解的变化与经济条件和植物品种营销的变化共同进化。拥有和否认发明项目为进一步探索这些问题提供了丰富的证据，这些证据可以在与ORC的合作中使用。Ii)不同国家的科学家所依据的专利制度与他们产生成功创新的可能性有关。目前，在欧洲和北美运作的知识产权制度有利于一些植物育种方法。关注知识产权和植物育种的长期历史可以激发对这种现状的批判性思考。通常，特别是在植物育种和一般生物科学的背景下，知识产权被理解为仅与专利有关。源自分子生物学的主流植物育种方法与非如此衍生的替代方法之间的差异，提供了一个理想的分析环境，利用扩展的知识产权概念，再次促进批判性思维和更具创造性的讨论。植物育种的历史以育种工作地点的持续转移为标志，从农场转移到私营公司的试验田。理解这些发展需要关注我们对植物育种创新的理解的变化，以及如何培育和保护它。这个提议的项目是基于最近资助的一个基于利兹的AHRC后续资助项目，“在战斗中创新：第一次世界大战中的电信和知识产权”，该项目与牛津大学科学史博物馆合作，由G. Gooday教授领导，他是拥有和放弃发明项目的PI，也是这里的共同i。