Science and Engineering Ethics (Browse Results) (forthcoming)
|Abstract||Abstract The commercialization of academic science has come to be understood as economically desirable for institutions, individual researchers, and the public. Not surprisingly, commercial activity, particularly that which results from patenting, appears to be producing changes in the standards used to evaluate scientists’ performance and contributions. In this context, concerns about a gender gap in patenting activity have arisen and some have argued for the need to encourage women to seek more patents. They believe that because academic advancement is mainly dependent on productivity (Stuart and Ding in American Journal of Sociology 112:97–144, 2006 ; Azoulay et al. in Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 63:599–623, 2007 ), differences in research output have the power to negatively impact women’s careers. Moreover, in the case of patenting activity, they claim that the gender gap also has the potential to negatively affect society. This is so because scientific and technological advancement and innovation play a crucial role in contemporary societies. Thus, women’s more limited involvement in the commercialization of science and technology can also be detrimental to innovation itself. Nevertheless, calls to encourage women to patent on grounds that such activity is likely to play a significant role in the betterment of both women’s careers and society seem to be based on two problematic assumptions: (1) that the methods to determine women’s productivity in patenting activities are an appropriate way to measure their research efforts and the impact of their work, and (2) that patenting, particularly in academia, benefits society. The purpose of this paper is to call into question these two assumptions. Content Type Journal Article Category Original Pages 1-14 DOI 10.1007/s11948-011-9344-5 Authors Inmaculada de Melo-Martín, Department of Public Health, Division of Medical Ethics, Weill Cornell Medical College, 402 E. 67th Street, LA-211, New York, NY 10065, USA Journal Science and Engineering Ethics Online ISSN 1471-5546 Print ISSN 1353-3452|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Inmaculada Melo-Martín (forthcoming). Patenting and the Gender Gap: Should Women Be Encouraged to Patent More? Science and Engineering Ethics.
Inmaculada de Melo-Martín (2012). Through a Glass, Darkly. Metascience 21 (2):367-370.
Hans Radder (2004). Exploiting Abstract Possibilities: A Critique of the Concept and Practice of Product Patenting. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (3):275-291.
Sigrid Sterckx (forthcoming). Patenting and Licensing of University Research: Promoting Innovation or Undermining Academic Values? Science and Engineering Ethics.
Susan E. Cozzens (2008). Gender Issues in US Science and Technology Policy: Equality of What? Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3).
Miriam Bentwich (2012). It's About Scientific Secrecy, Dummy: A Better Equilibrium Among Genomics Patenting, Scientific Research and Health Care. Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (2):263-284.
Robyn Bluhm (2013). New Research, Old Problems: Methodological and Ethical Issues in fMRI Research Examining Sex/Gender Differences in Emotion Processing. Neuroethics 6 (2):319-330.
David B. Resnik (2001). DNA Patents and Scientific Discovery and Innovation: Assessing Benefits and Risks. Science and Engineering Ethics 7 (1):29-62.
Rebecca S. Eisenberg (2002). How Can You Patent Genes? American Journal of Bioethics 2 (3):3 – 11.
Christoph Baumgartner (2006). Exclusion by Inclusion? On Difficulties with Regard to an Effective Ethical Assessment of Patenting in the Field of Agricultural Bio-Technology. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (6).
Stephen E. Wear, William H. Coles, Anthony H. Szczygiel, Adrianne McEvoy & Carl C. Pegels (1998). Patenting Medical and Surgical Techniques: An Ethical-Legal Analysis. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 23 (1):75 – 97.
Paul Davis & Charlene Weaving (eds.) (2010). Philosophical Perspectives on Gender in Sport and Phyiscal Activity. Routledge.
Molly Paxton, Carrie Figdor & Valerie Tiberius (2012). Quantifying the Gender Gap: An Empirical Study of the Underrepresentation of Women in Philosophy. Hypatia 27 (4):949-957.
R. Stephen Crespi (2000). An Analysis of Moral Issues Affecting Patenting Inventions in the Life Sciences: A European Perspective. Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (2):157-180.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-01-05
Total downloads1 ( #274,982 of 549,198 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?