David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (2):491-504 (2013)
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.
|Keywords||Gender-gap Patenting Commercialization of science|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Tamsin L. Braisher, Matthew R. E. Symonds & Neil J. Gemmell (2005). Publication Success in Nature and Science is Not Gender Dependent. Bioessays 27 (8):858-859.
Baruch A. Brody (2006). Intellectual Property and Biotechnology: The U.S. Internal Experience--Part I. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 16 (1):1-37.
Howard Brody (2007). Hooked: Ethics, the Medical Profession, and the Pharmaceutical Industry. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Inmaculada de Melo-Martin (2009). How Do Disclosure Policies Fail? Let Us Count the Ways. FASEB Journal 23 (6):1638-42.
Daniel Lee Kleinman & Steven P. Vallas (2001). Science, Capitalism, and the Rise of the “Knowledge Worker”: The Changing Structure of Knowledge Production in the United States. [REVIEW] Theory and Society 30 (4):451-492.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Inmaculada de Melo-Martín (2013). Patenting and the Gender Gap: Should Women Be Encouraged to Patent More? [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (2):491-504.
Hans Radder (2004). Exploiting Abstract Possibilities: A Critique of the Concept and Practice of Product Patenting. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (3):275-291.
Sigrid Sterckx (2011). Patenting and Licensing of University Research: Promoting Innovation or Undermining Academic Values? Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (1):45-64.
Susan E. Cozzens (2008). Gender Issues in US Science and Technology Policy: Equality of What? Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3):345-356.
Rebecca S. Eisenberg (2002). How Can You Patent Genes? American Journal of Bioethics 2 (3):3 – 11.
Miriam Bentwich (2012). It's About Scientific Secrecy, Dummy: A Better Equilibrium Among Genomics Patenting, Scientific Research and Health Care. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (2):263-284.
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.
David B. Resnik (2001). DNA Patents and Scientific Discovery and Innovation: Assessing Benefits and Risks. Science and Engineering Ethics 7 (1):29-62.
Wesley Buckwalter & Stephen Stich (forthcoming). Gender and Philosophical Intuition. In Joshua Knobe & Shaun Nichols (eds.), Experimental Philosophy, Vol.2. Oxford University Press.
Anca Gheaus (2008). Basic Income, Gender Justice and the Costs of Gender-Symmetrical Lifestyles. Basic Income Studies 3 (3).
Mary Libertin (1987). The Politics of Women's Studies and Men's Studies. Hypatia 2 (2):143 - 152.
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):521-539.
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.
Added to index2012-01-03
Total downloads4 ( #267,964 of 1,102,078 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #192,057 of 1,102,078 )
How can I increase my downloads?