A Basis for Action - Commission de l'Ã©thique de la science et de la ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Position Statement of the Commission de l'éthique de la science et de la technologie power—to the detriment of the rest of the world. However, the possibility of conceiving and developing nanotechnological innovations that benefit developing countries should not be dismissed out of hand. Governments, businesses, foundations, and nongovernment organizations are or could be called on in various capacities to help manage nanotechnology development. For these various stakeholders, this is an opportunity to pool efforts to maximize reflection and act together in solidarity with those who are less fortunate. COMMENTARY OF THE COMMISSION In the same vein, the Commission suggests that universities, granting agencies, and developing countries increase or develop their collaborative relationships. The organizations involved should consider taking steps with the specific goal of meeting developing countries’ nanotechnology needs, such as creating nanotechnology research partnerships, organizing exchanges of students and professors between universities, and establishing funding programs. Possessing nanotechnology expertise In general, whoever controls R&D also controls the means of production and the supply of products and services. In establishing research priorities, the needs of developing countries should be taken into account, and the growth of local industries should be encouraged so that they create sustainable wealth. Partnerships should be encouraged between those who wield the knowledge and capital, on the one hand, and those who provide market access, on the other, as long as such partnerships entail an equal and fair division of the benefits and responsibilities. This is a matter of respect and solidarity. 305 COMMENTARY OF THE COMMISSION Given that human solidarity finds expression mainly in collaborative acts and the sharing of wealth, the Commission encourages support for researcher training and the implementation of R&D infrastructure in emerging and developing countries, with a view to promoting the acquisition of industrial expertise in these countries and to avoiding any deepening of the technological divide. Intellectual property and patent management Management of patents and intellectual property may be viewed as a great source of innovation, but it can also hinder access to the knowledge and tools required for R&D. While recognizing that this issue is not exclusive to the field of nanotechnology and that it falls under federal jurisdiction, the Commission finds it useful to touch on it in this position statement, because current practices may have an impact on fundamental research and technological innovation in this field. 305 A number of forums have already begun considering new types of partnerships. For example, participants at a workshop organized in June 2004 on the international dialog on responsible nanotechnology R&D suggested that ongoing international dialog and cooperation would help developing countries take part in nanotechnology R&D. MERIDIAN INSTITUTE and NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION, op. cit., p. 8; See also p. 19 on the possible contribution of the private sector. 76 Ethics and Nanotechnology: A Basis for Action
Position Statement of the Commission de l'éthique de la science et de la technologie Although holding patents is considered an economic advantage, experience in scientific fields other than nanotechnology has demonstrated that patents that are too broad or that do not strictly meet the criteria of novelty and non-obviousness can work against the public good. 306 To that effect, the following problems are generally raised about holding patents: difficulty obtaining the required licenses due to the large number of patent holders in a given field of research or for an application in particular, the refusal of patent holders to grant licenses to a third party—which can be legal in some countries like the United States—and the exorbitant licensing fees that certain patent holders demand in exchange for using their technology. 307 In such conditions, acquiring knowledge is a major challenge and can even be a source of iniquity. However, part of the problem surrounding intellectual property and patent management is people’s misunderstanding of how the system works. Brazilian chemist Galembeck maintains that a large portion of scientists from non G7 countries (now G8) do not read patents or think to file patents for their discoveries. This situation has two harmful consequences. First, a number of scientific efforts are conducted in vain, because the research objectives may have already been met by other teams who already hold the related patents. Second, scientists who work in emerging countries are contributing more and more to scientific publication, but without protecting the results of their work. “This new information will be finally transformed into products and processes that will be imported into the country, bringing in modernity but also unemployment and pressures on the economy.” 308 Some questions are also raised about public versus private control of intellectual property. In a sector like nanotechnology where new technology also furthers basic knowledge in physics, chemistry, and other fields, shouldn’t efforts be made to prevent the fact that research has been both publicly and privately funded from imposing limits on knowledge development as a result of the intellectual protection system currently in force? Einsiedel and Goldenberg hold that knowing who owns knowledge engendered by initiatives involving both public universities and private corporations remains a very problematic issue. Research by Baber [holder of the Canada Research Chair in Science, Technology, and Social Change] demonstrates that funding conditions for university researchers in Japan and Singapore have reduced their resistance to directly translating into monetary value any knowledge derived from research. A large portion of what is referred to as nanotechnology concerns the acquisition of new knowledge in basic science and quantum processes, which poses a serious challenge in terms of existing approaches to ownership rights. 309 306 See, among others, THE ROYAL SOCIETY & THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING (United Kingdom), op. cit., p. 53 and Edna F. EINSIEDEL and Linda GOLDENBERG, op. cit., p. 30. 307 David B. RESNIK, “A Biotechnology Patent Pool: An Idea Whose Time Has Come?” The Journal of Philosophy, Science & Law, vol. 3, January 2003 [online] http://www6.miami.edu/ethics/jpsl/archives/papers/ biotechPatent.html. 308 Fernando GALEMBECK, “Ethical issues of nanotechnology” speech given at the 3rd session of COMEST, December 1–4, 2003, Rio de Janeiro, UNESCO, p. 129 of Proceedings [online] http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0013/001343/134391e.pdf. 309 Edna F.EINSIEDEL and Linda GOLDENBERG, op. cit., p. 30. Chapter 3 – Nanotechnology: Ethical Concerns 77
Page 1:
COMMISSION DE L’ÉTHIQUE DE LA SC
Page 4 and 5:
Commission de l’éthique de la sc
Page 7 and 8:
TABLE OF CONTENTS List of acronyms.
Page 9:
Position Statement of the Commissio
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53: Position Statement of the Commissio
Page 111 and 112: CONCLUSION It is with great curiosi
Page 113 and 114: GLOSSARY ∗ Atomic force microscop
Page 121 and 122: BIBLIOGRAPHY ∗ Sources cited: ABE
Page 143: Position Statement of the Commissio
Page 151 and 152: APPENDIX 2 Summary of applications
Page 153 and 154:
APPENDIX 3 Proposed taxonomy of the
Page 155 and 156:
The Consultation and Information Ac
Page 157 and 158:
MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION DE L’É
show all

A Basis for Action - Commission de l'Ã©thique de la science et de la ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?