Third, the nature and focus of our research institutions themselves could be dramatically affected by these new agreements. In hearings before my Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee, distinguished scientists expressed their concerns that these agreements could jeopardize the research priorities of institutions and place great strains upon the ethic of scientific openness that has helped to generate our greatest discoveries.

* * *

I believe that the headlong rush of private industry into relationships with universities and research institutions--if not handled carefully--could lead to an erosion of public trust in science, upon which all these enterprises depend. For example, previously, when new scientific break-throughs were announced, there was little concern that our scientists and universities were not operating candidly and in the public interest. But today, unfortunately, there may well be skepticism. When announcements of new "breakthroughs" are made today, one must always wonder whether these "discoveries" are really new or significant or whether they are simply creations of Madison Avenue designed to boost a stock offering on Wall Street. We must be sensitive to these concerns lest the public's support for scientific funding be undermined.

Of course, the best alternative would be increased public funding of research, and I support efforts to accomplish that result.

Moreover, the Federal Government should not be afraid to act, when warranted, to ensure that a balance between innovation and basic research is maintained and that the public interest is not sacrificed to commercial opportunity.

Academia's View

A Bartlett Giamatti president of Yale University.

In this century, the time lag between the creation of a new scientific concept and its general application has usually been measured in decades. Occasionally, however, the gap is compressed as a new theoretical insight moves swiftly to the stage of application and, hence, of wide, practical dissemination. We are now in the throes of such a movement in the vast field of applied research in genetic engineering.

Both university based research, concerned primarily with the advancement of fundamental knowledge, and industry-based research, concerned primarily with marketable application, should serve the general well-being of society albeit in differing ways. Since the knowledge typically developed in university based research is of a fundamental nature, it will often have a multitude of potentially useful applications. Because many of these eventual applications cannot be foreseen, it is particularly appropriate that such knowledge be disseminated as widely as possible so that all may use it if they will. While private industry pursues basic research, it does so less often, in part because it is so difficult to demonstrate adequate financial return from such long-term, risky efforts.

Universities are marketplaces where ideas are freely available; where knowledge is pursued by way of the norms of free discussion and the free access to and exchange of information; and where the freedom to publish must obtain. In contrast to the university, the commercial enterprise is appropriately animated by the profit motive. Commercial application of new knowledge typically requires a substantial investment in applied research and development, and commonly in the equipment and physical plant required by new products or methods of production. A profitmaking enterprise will undertake such an investment, and all its associated risks, only when it can reasonably expect an adequate return, a return not likely to occur if competitors are first to the marketplace. The opportunity for private profit provides the encouragement for the socially beneficial application of new technology. To realize profits from technological innovation, however, a company must strive to protect its proprietary knowledge and to prevent its exploitation by commercial competitors.

The development of theoretical concepts, born in the university, and the transformation by industry of those concepts into practical application, is often a complementary process. The complementary nature of their activities, however, simply throws into relief the basic difference between universities and industries the academic imperative to seek knowledge objectively and in share it openly and freely; and the industrial imperative to garner a profit, which frequently creates the incentive to treat knowledge as private property.

* * *

There are potential conflicts of commitment and potential conflicts of interest whenever a member of the faculty is involved with extra-university entities. Let us here-consider the specific issues surrounding the involvement of a member of the faculty with a company seeking to export university based research.

I doubt that a faculty member can ordinarily devote the time and energy the university requires and also pursue a substantial involvement in any such outside company. Such involvement necessarily demands great concentration and commitment, particularly at the outset or if business goes badly. When a faculty member becomes substantially involved in a company, the conflict in norms governing the dissemination of knowledge becomes very difficult to reconcile. The burden of maintaining a teaching program and two separate research programs, where the results of one research program are to be widely disseminated and the results of the other may be required to be kept secret in the pursuit of commercial success, is more than even the most responsible faculty member can be expected to shoulder.

Finally, such involvement risks putting one's students and research associates in ambiguous circumstances, such that the graduate or postdoctoral student would not know, when working with a professor, for whom the student was working--the university, the professor or the company. Of all members of the university community, the student especially ought to be working for himself or herself, and ought to be guided in research and trained in skills and techniques that are designed to produce a first-rate scholar, not profit for a company in the private sector.