In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

N O T E S ONE: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 1. Some years ago Max Black (1962) noted the important role that metaphor plays in the sciences. In an empirical study of a lab, Knorr-Cetina (1981) observed that metaphorical reasoning was central to the creation of research results. Countless others have observed the importance of metaphors in both opening and closing certain avenues of scholarship. See, for example, Hacking (1999), Lakoff and Johnson (1980), Ricoeur (1977), Turbayne (1970), and Wheelwright (1954). 2. In fairness to Hobbes (1991 [1651]), it should be noted that he was quite aware of how gender roles were created by society and not by nature. TWO: THE CHANGING WORLD OF UNIVERSITIES 1. UC manages three Department of Energy (DOE) laboratories—each with its own ties to the Department of Defense: Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). R&D expenditures at the DOE labs fell more than 40 percent between 1988 and 1996 (Jaffe and Lerner 2001). 2. Universities have often been viewed as unique institutions that provide a place where scientists can carry out their work unfettered by outside interference. Like Merton’s (1973) conception of science, they were often considered “above” society. 3. A striking difference between analyses of UIR and most contemporary science studies is the realist flavor of the former and the constructivist tendencies of the latter. Some of this derives from the organizational and economic sociological foundations of most UIR research, foundations that contrast with the more politicized and ethnographic traditions of technoscienti fic analyses. The former group focuses on the changing or problematic institutional structures of and setting for university-based scientific and technological development and the latter on the practice of university science and technological development. N O T E S T O C H A P T E R T H R E E 210 THREE: LAND GRANT UNIVERSITIES, AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE, AND UC BERKELEY 1. For discussions of the history, structure, and content of shared governance at Berkeley , including a discussion of its alteration and intensification with the expansion from one to nine UC campuses, see Clark (1998) and Douglass (2002). 2. There are a few exceptions, where disciplines themselves are divided between the two kinds of research, most notably rural sociology and entomology (Buttel 1985). 3. It should be noted that the reorganization of biology at UCB was part and parcel of changes taking place in the organization of the biological sciences across all major U.S. universities at the time. The biological sciences have been largely reorganized from taxon-oriented divisions , such as zoology and botany, to divisions by level of analysis (i.e., molecule, cell, organism, ecosystem) (Roush 1997). FOUR: A CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS 1. The chronology is summarized in Table 4.1. 2. Important, here, is that the predominant vision embedded within these efforts was one concerned with medical and other nonplant—much less agricultural—applications. 3. That office issued guidelines that stated, “faculty members are encouraged to engage in appropriate outside professional relationships with private industry” (University of California , Office of the President 1989, 1). In addition, a UC president’s retreat took place in Los Angeles , January 30–31, 1997, on university relations with industry in research and technology transfer that addressed further ways of supporting UIR. 4. It is important to note that already by 1998 the level of economic concentration in the agricultural biotechnology industry was substantial. A handful of firms, including Monsanto, Syngenta, Dow, and DuPont, dominated the fledgling agricultural biotechnology industry. Through buying seed companies and small biotechnology firms and cross-licensing patents among each other to permit freedom to operate (Barton 2002), they had already effectively established themselves as the trendsetters in the industry. 5. In 1997 DuPont purchased 20 percent of Pioneer Hi-Bred, the nation’s leading producer of hybrid corn seed. It purchased the remaining shares in 1999. 6. LaPorte (2000, 67) argued that the other bids “were considered predatory and not at all in the spirit of the design; these bids were rejected, almost out of hand.” 7. Novartis supports numerous “in-house” foundations. According to the company website , the Novartis Research Foundation “supports scientific research projects, particularly highrisk projects in areas of new technologies, that are compatible with the long-term interests of Novartis and its partner organizations” (Novartis 2004). 8. The UCB-N Advisory Committee was a six-member committee charged with managing the relationship between UCB and NADI, except...

pdf

Additional Information

ISBN
9781592135356
Related ISBN
9781592135349
MARC Record
OCLC
184903524
Launched on MUSE
2012-01-01
Language
English
Open Access
No
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.