Search Results

This chapter examines the development of a new market-logic practice in academic science, namely faculty entrepreneurship in the biosciences. It begins by reviewing the origins of this practice, then tracks its early development as well as limits to its growth and spread. It then goes on to examine policy decisions that removed these limits and replaced them with incentives, and considers how political concern with the economic impact of innovation contributed to these decisions. The chapter concludes with a look at the subsequent takeoff of this practice, followed by a discussion of the conditions that appear to have been necessary for this takeoff to occur.

Nothing has driven the growth of metro Phoenix more than the sun’s rays. For most of its residents and visitors, the chief reason for coming to the region was its 334 days of annual sunshine, yet precious little of this radiation showed up in the energy supply. Indeed, Arizona has often been held up as an object of shame for the cause of solar power. Despite the bounty of its sun cover, by 2009 the state generated only 7 watts of photovoltaic power (PV) per capita, while New Jersey, with only half the available sunlight, managed 14.6 watts per capita, and Germany, with even less, delivered 100 watts to each person. If the solar industry was to have its long-deferred day in the United States, then the Valley of the Sun had to be at, or near the top, of the location list. Surely, it should be easier to generate “clean electrons” here than almost anywhere else. Yet the dismal historical record shows that the abundance of this natural resource mattered very little in the face of a political and economic environment that has prevented the sun’s energy from being enjoyed by its liberty-loving residents, let alone developed on an industrial scale. For a metropolis in the deepest trough of the Great Recession, the prospect of developing solar industry was just about the only source of boosterism I could find among the business community. Glenn Hamer, president of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, bragged that, with the help of federal and state incentives currently available, “the cocktail is in place for Arizona to truly be a national and international leader in solar. . . . with our incredible natural advantage, we have just about the world’s best solar resource.” Someone in his position could reasonably be expected to be gung ho about any new local market for investment, but Hamer also happened to be former national director of the Solar Energy Industries Association.

This chapter explores the two main existing modes in which professional ethicists interface with the scientific, regulatory, and policymaking communities, and advocates adopting a new, third mode of interaction that is especially appropriate for synthetic biology. It analyzes the existing modes of interaction and engagement between and among the human sciences, the biosciences, ethics, and organizational forms. It examines three predominant modes of engagement: the representation of technical experts, the facilitation of “science and society,” as well as inquiry and equipment. This chapter is oriented toward understanding how potentially viable design strategies emerge, how these strategies might inform synthetic biology, and what efforts are undertaken to integrate them into a comprehensive approach to the near future.

This chapter reviews some product-directed aims of protocell research and describes which ethical issues are likely to be the most salient to the governance of protocell science. It argues that the most significant issues are the risk of destroying natural environments and threats to human lives from medical and weaponry use, familiar problems of bioscience that are already on the agenda of ethical and regulatory discourses. It then analyzes the epistemic aims of the field and the socially controversial questions to which protocell research is expected to deliver answers. This chapter suggests that serious ethical problems accompany bioscientific invention. It shows that protocell science opens the door for discussion among science, philosophy, and the general public.

Postdoctoral training is now essential for an academic career in the life sciences. As Asian research universities invest in improving their infrastructure and funding, Asian-born aspiring bioscientists now have a destination choice to make between the West and Asia for their postdoctoral training. This chapter highlights the role played by Asia-based scientists (many of whom are returned migrants from the West) in mediating their students’ understanding of the relative merits of these different destination options. Interviews with eighty-two Asian-born, Western-trained bioscientists who have since returned to Asia to work in Singapore, India, China, or Taiwan, reveal that these scientists still recommend postdoctoral training in the West, though they increasingly recommend doctoral training in Asia, leading to hybrid training pathways. These findings demonstrate the ongoing (though narrowing) gap between Western and Asian scientific research structures, particularly in terms of status, networking opportunities, and research cultures.