Full text
| |
| Author(s): |
Maria Ester Soares Dal Poz
Total Authors: 1
|
| Document type: | Doctoral Thesis |
| Press: | Campinas, SP. |
| Institution: | Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP). Instituto de Geociências |
| Defense date: | 2006-08-22 |
| Examining board members: |
Sandra de Negraes Brisolla;
Wilson Suzigan;
Leda Maria Caira Gitahy;
José Maria Ferreira Jardim da Silveira;
Ana Celia Castro
|
| Advisor: | Ceso Luiz Salgueiro Lage; Sandra de Negraes Brisolla |
| Abstract | |
The objective of this work, considering the research on biotechnology and genes, is to show that certain countries, such as Brazil, produce science, but few of them have absorptive capacity, transforming the knowledge into technological innovation. The main hypothesis is that there is a political economy on TRIPS -Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights Agreements of the World Trade Organization. The appropriation of the genomic biotechnologies in developing countries, such as Brazil, depends on an innovative environment that can shape S&T policies, as well as on the organization of research within the context of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR¿s). The IPR¿s international system, in the TRIPS domains, is a factor of asymmetry of technological appropriation, which presents a strong correlation with the level of economical development of the countries. The diversity of national legislations as regards IPR¿s, within a harmonizing scenario provided by the TRIPS, constitutes a factor that increases that asymmetry even though, by definition, those agreements are created to enhance the conditions of competitiveness of the world trade. The systemic appropriation of biotechnologies derived from genomics depends on the integration of characteristic dynamics of certain National Systems of Innovation, on a set of political devices regarding Science and Technology, and on the activity of institutions that that carry out research and development. Those activities influence the standards of patenting, licensing and commercialization of genomic biotechnologies, and depend on legal regulatory landmarks in terms of the IPR¿s. Learning to acquire knowledge generated by the innovation system itself, or outside it, is one of the core points of appropriation. It is conditioned by the awareness of the uneven relation between the countries in the dispute of the TRIPS agreements, and by the possibility of devising a strategy which can overcome that disparity. The economic supremacy of some countries is used as a tool to press for new legal standards of IPR to be spread out. It is about understanding the strengthening process of the IPR¿s within the economy based on knowledge facing the asymmetry in the development of countries.Within this context, this work aims at clarifying the dynamics in the generation of scientific research as regards the organization of the genomic science. It explores the appropriation of genomic agrobiotechnologies (GAB) incorporated in patents of United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).The field study consists of mapping citation patterns of one patent instead of other or others, and the relations between the GAB patent holders, who comprise an innovation network. Such net, from the perspective of the social community in science, is explored by showing that the appropriation geography matters and that the net has defined frontiers. In order to do so, we created and applied S&T and net dynamics indicators. This procedure concerns to be a foresight tool for biotechnology markets.Few actors in the net were able to acquire genomic knowledge and transform it into innovation, although it was available in international DNA databanks that receive input from the whole international scientific community. This condition shows that there is some sort of administration in the innovation of these nets whose basis is not always the system of information broadcast, but rather one of differential appropriation. Such diagnosis is used in the prescription of actions that aim at improving the Brazilian performance in terms of research development and its relations with biotechnological appropriation (AU) | |