ABSTRACT
As authors throughout this volume have emphasised, genomic and post-genomic innovations have been surrounded by discourses of hope and hype. This has been nowhere more true than in the fields of biotechnology and the commercial exploitation of genomic science. Indeed, numerous state and other agencies have seen biotechnology as the motor for new forms of knowledge-based economy, the emergence of new industrial sectors, and the commercial development of new medical interventions. There is, of course, nothing inherently new in the commercialisation of nature, nor in
the transformation of natural forms into commodities. Since the agrarian revolution, the purposeful, large-scale modification of natural species through large-scale selective breeding has been a taken-for-granted feature of advanced economies. Likewise, the industrial-scale exploitation of foods and animal products has been the stock-in-trade of agri-business. On the other hand, new biological science and technology has conjured up yet a new revolution, based on medical applications, pharmaceutical developments, and agricultural innovations. This has led a number of commentators to suggest that we are witnessing the emer-
gence of distinctive and novel economies. These include the proposal from Waldby and Mitchell (2006) that we can identify ‘tissue economies’ as significant components in contemporary ‘late’ capitalism. Genomic and post-genomic (e.g. stem-cell) science is itself seen as a crucial aspect of many state economic strategies. Indeed, the promotion and regulation of bio-economies is not merely a matter of national self-interest, it is also a key component of foreign policy for many countries. Cooke explores some of the configurations of states, markets and networks in the
organisation of bio-economies. Knowledge-based sectors display particular kinds of complexity, not least in terms of the appropriation of knowledge that might otherwise be regarded as a public good. Moreover, the biotechnology sectors and pharmaceuticals depend on particular kinds of relationships between private and public sectors in the development of the knowledge value chain. Universities, small research enterprises and large multinational firms are interdependent. In contrast to many other – more mature – sectors, large biotechnology companies out-source research and development to universities. This in turn reflects the huge state investment in university-based research. Academics are thus constrained to be more entrepreneurial, while entrepreneurs are
dependent on academics’ research performance. This is observable in the United States and in Europe, as well as in Asian knowledge economies. Knowledge-based value chains are increasingly dependent on networks of research
collaboration. These networks link local concentrations of expertise and investment, based on university centres and private-sector firms: the creation of private enterprises for the commercial exploitation of university, publicly funded research increases the significance of geographical and intellectual proximity. Local clusters of knowledge-production are linked through global patterns of collaboration and co-publication. Martin, Hopkins, Nightingale and Kraft trace some of these developments in relation
to the pharmaceutical industry. They describe the emergence and expansion of genomics-based research, development and patenting. They sound a suitably cautious note. Notwithstanding the perceived significance of genomics, they suggest that while it has re-configured the relationship between the private and public sectors in the process of drug discovery, it is – at least – premature to conclude that it is leading to the wholesale re-organisation of the pharmaceutical industry, changes in the types of pharmaceutical products, or indeed to the transformation of healthcare. It is certainly premature to conclude that pharmacogenomics is delivering a revolution in therapeutics. The rush to commercialise genomic knowledge, derived in part from industrial-scale gene sequencing, and the enthusiasm with which private finance was invested in the sector, have not resulted in commercially successful product-development. We are certainly not witnessing the sustained development and profitability of this particular sector. The expansion of biotechnology and agri-biotechnology has been widely promoted as
a symptom and a motor for the expansion of knowledge economies. The reconfiguration of agricultural and medical activities has been – as Levidow argues in his chapter – congruent with neo-liberal ideologies. Relations between producers, consumers and other ‘stakeholders’ are cast in terms of markets. Global relations in turn imply widespread circulations of expertise, materials, and investment. The marketisation of biologically derived innovations are in turn dependent on global markets in regimes of ethical and legal regulation, as well as being protected by specific patents. Again, there is nothing specifically novel in this, but the scale and visibility of post-genomic innovation arguably make it qualitatively different from other and earlier kinds of innovation. Of course, cross-national flows of expertise and commercial investment also create the
possibility of equally international movements based on ethics and social values. Levidow’s account of the reception of genetically-modified food in Europe is especially interesting from this perspective. He discusses how the moral economy in Europe – that is the circulation of values and the calculus of risk – ran counter to the economic rationality implied in the European programme of economic competitiveness based on a knowledge economy. When economic value is based on the transformation of nature, then tensions arise between economic and moral rationalities, between moral and commercial markets. The intersection of moral economies and genomic knowledge is also illustrated in the
insurance sector. As Rothstein and Joly illustrate, the use of genetic information in calculating actuarial risks for health insurance and life assurance is contentious. The use of predictive genetic information may be no different in principle from the use of other, more traditional, bases for such calculation. But the industrial and commercial development of rapid throughput, high-volume genetic testing creates new conditions for the assessment of predispositions and risks. These in turn raise new issues for social policy, as well as for commercial interest. As Rothstein and Joly argue, while the technologies are
global – and so, indeed, are the financial markets – the moral and policy implications raised by insurance in the post-genomic age require more local political interventions. All four of the chapters in this section, therefore, display some of the complexities in
the economic implications of new genomic and genetic technologies. Public and private funding create new interdependencies and new configurations of knowledge-based economies. Global finance and networks of innovation intersect with State intervention through public funding and regulatory regimes. Moral discourse and economic interests can come into sharp conflict. We certainly cannot project an unproblematic trajectory for commercial exploitation and economic growth based on genomic knowledge. We cannot divorce economic rationality from the moral and political contexts in which it is thoroughly implicated.
