Bibliography (Annotated)

Abbot, Andrew "Professional Ethics." American Journal of Sociology 88 (1983): 855-885.

The author outline five basic properties of professional ethics: 1) their almost universal distribution among professions 2) correlation with intraprofessional status as signifiers of qualification and inclusion 3) enforcement being dependent on the public visibility of the offence 4) focus on individual conduct rather than the profession as a whole 5) emphasis on obligations to colleagues. Functionalists see professional ethics as required by fiduciary character of the professional activity. Monopolists, on the other hand, see professional ethics as a form of economic control to mediates and restricts the market of approved providers. The author posits professional ethics as a signifier intra- and extraprofessional status, which defines profession as important and allies its members with one another. The author readily admits that informal controls are more important than the formalized codes, but he considers the codes to be indicative of the nature of professional control. The major alternative to such control are various combinations of internal and external informal and formal surveillance.

Anderson, Melissa. "The Complex Relations Between Academy and Industry." The Journal of Higher Education 72 (2001): 226-246

Melissa Anderson reviews three books as a starting point in exploring academy-industry relations (AIR). She consideres AIR’s to extend well beyond research relationships to encompass the entirety of “academic capitalism”. After briefly reviewing the conconceptions, misconceptions, advanagrages, disadavantages and complications, Anderson identifies the challenges. The first is the balancing of research with other aspects of the university mission, especially in the area of instruction quality. Second is the balancing of basic and applied research. Third is issue of balancing public and private interest. Fourth is balancing the needs for adopting and maintaining norms of academic institutions. Anderson concludes. that institutions have to take a much more active role in developing their missions and she concedes that most of the research she has reviewed lacks focus on the concrete management systems required for such leadership. She sees the development and implementation of policy to be the next, but untaken step.

Auster, Carol J., and Jonathan Knight. "Faculty Conduct." The Journal of Higher Education 70 (1999): 188-210

This inquiry about ethical activism revolves around the likelihood that a professor who is told that another faculty member may have engaged in unprofessional behavior will take up the matter with the accused or with an administrator. Those who are most likely to have heard a complaint have served on a campus ethics committee, have tenure, have long service in their profession or at the institution. Further characteristics include familiarity and concern with the university ethics policy as well as youth. Faculty members likely to act on the complaints were older, male, in senior positions, and familiar with the ethics code. Seriousness of the complaint had no appreciable effect on the response. Of those who acted, a little over half contacted an administrator. Few of those who informed an administrator were personally involved in the violation and their impression of the administrative response is that, for the most part, not much happened.

Barnes, Mark, Patrick Florencio, and Michael M. Johns. "Restoring Balance toIndustry-Academia Relationships in an Era of Instititutional Conflicts ofInterest." Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 289 (2003):741-746.

The article focuses specifically on the problem of institutional conflicts of interest, which present significantly more problems than individual conflicts. Such conflicts can create bias in the research project through pressure from above or bias in the review process, such as that carried out by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). Institutional conflicts can be broken down into two distinct types. IRB members, administrators and institutional decisionmakers may have their own personal interests in companies with whom the researcher is working. The authors suggest a zero tolerance policy for such conflicts because they are without justification. The institution itself, however, will also have conflicts when its researchers work on projects that stem from corporate funding of the university or are related to corporations/spin offs/patents in which the university has a pecuniary interest. To remedy this latter issue, the authors suggest strict separation between researchers and those charged with furthering the relationship with industry. Furthermore, they recommend that Conflicts of Interest committees carefully review institutional conflicts in the same way they review personal financial conflicts.

Blumberg, Peter D. "From 'Publish or Perish' to 'Profit or Perish'." Penn. Law Review vol. 145 pg. 89 (1996)

A superb law review article on the tax exempt status of universities. The author argues that not only could universities be taxed on their profits from their relationships with industry under the Unrelated Business Income Tax (UBIT), but they should be. He reviews the definitions and rationales for public interest tax exemption. On the scientific front, university-industry ties are unrelated to the public interest by their treatment of licensing and publishing. In terms of education, the research orientation removes the focus on pedagogy while academic freedom is imperiled by pecuniary agenda setting. The movement away from the public interest is reflected by the internal reward structures of institution themselves as well as the priorities and bias of the researchers. The author concludes by arguing for two distinct types of licensing agreements: taxable and nontaxable. In order to maintain their tax exempt status the licensing agreements would have to meet requirements regarding exclusivity, publication restrictions, disclosure and classroom minimums.

Blumenstyk, Goldie. "Greening the World or 'Greenwashing' a Reputation."The Chronicle of Higher Education 10 Jan. 2003: 22.

Stanford’s Global Climate and Energy Project is $225 million, 10 year project whose main sponsor is Exxon Mobil. Stanford was chosen specifically because it has a reputation for “working with industry.” The article contains details of other sponsors and ends with a synopsis of similar big money programs at other institutions.

Positives: 1) Huge influx of money the school wouldn’t have otherwise had. 2) Sponsor a multitude of broad based, international research projects 3) Exxon will be loathe to exert too much control or cut off Stanford because it would make for bad publicity 4) Makes Stanford a leading player in climate change research
Negatives: 1) Accusations that Stanford is selling its reputation to Exxon for ‘greenwashing’: Exxon has a history of disputing accepted climate change theories; the 10 yr. timetable may act as an excuse to not act now 2) Companies will have authority to approve research topics, all of which are to focus on commercially viable technologies. Furthermore, there are indications that all the research will be related to fossil fuels and eschew topics such as solar power and fuel cells. 3) A number of Stanford’s leading professor had to agree to “change their career directions” 4) Stanford had to make huge licensing concessions for any profitable technological breakthroughs.

Blumenstyk, Goldie. "A New Web Site Details the Corporate Ties of SomeResearchers." The Chronicle of Higher Education 01 June 2001

The site, IntegrityinScience.org, is maintained by the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The database of scientists with corporate ties is meant to act as a reference and safeguard. Critics object that it unnecessarily sullies the name of researchers without proof of misconduct. The Center contends that it is simply a resource and will aid in objectivity rather than destroy it.

Bok, Derek. Beyond the Ivory Tower. Cambridge: Harvard University Press (1982).

The core of the book deals with universities and social responsibility. Bok discusses the general perceptions of universities in the early 80’s. Being a lecturer at the Kennedy School, however, he is preoccupied with government, its problems and its involvement in higher education. He sees corporate partnerships as a way around the complications that accompany accepting government fundings.

Bok, Derek The Marketing of Higher Education Cambridge: Harvard University Press (2003).

Universities in the Marketplace is probably the most oft cited book on the subject of the commercialization of higher education. Bok is no longer enchanted with the idea of corporate partnerships. He ascribes the trend towards greater commercialization mainly to the insatiable financial needs of institutions. These needs engender myopia and an ad hoc approach to for-profit ventures. A lack of clear guidelines compounds the difficulty faced by institutions as they weigh tangible benefits against abstract costs. For Bok, the costs, though theoretical, are very real. He uses the myriad of problems associated with intercollegiate athletics to illustrate how illusory benefits can lead to numerous compromises of the academic mission and result in deeply entrenched, almost irreversible, issues. Bok readily admits that some commercialization is a fait accompli and even delves into the ways the it may help remedy some of the shortcomings of contemporary research institutions. Bok calls on trustees and faculty to help university leaders resist the more pernicious parts of commercialization and support a renewed focus on pedagogy. Moreover, he extols the need for agreement among universities to avoid a race to the bottom.

Bradley, Gaylen. "Institutional Conflict of Interest." Journal of ResearchAdministration (2002)

A very brief survey of how to manage institutional conflicts of interest. The authors are primarily concerned with how institutions deal with equity in companies: avoid it, create separate research foundations, directly develop or market intellectual property created by faculty members. The authors main suggestion is the inclusion of disinterested members of the public in the conflict of interest review process. As they note, institutional conflicts of interest have received much less attention than individual researcher conflicts. The article is brief and necessarily limited. It leaves unanswered the serious questions about institutional conflicts and their relation to the advancement/funding/prestige pressures on individual researchers.

Braxton, John M. and Alan E. Bayer “Perceptions of Research Misconduct and an Analysis of Their Correlates” Journal of Higher Education 65 (1994): 351-372

The study views academics as essentially self-regulating. The assumption of self-regulation is what grants academics their relative autonomy from oversight. It is an assumption that is being eroded by increased perceptions of research misconduct. Central to these perceptions is the belief that the academic culture discourages ethical activism. The authors are interested in what shapes these attitudes and beliefs. Their conclusion is that greater individual achievement and professional status increase the likelihood of an individual acting to correct another’s research misconduct. Even given such insulation, however, professional solidarity, pressure for external grants and department cohesion act as countervailing forces. Thus, even for the most accomplished researchers, ambivalence rules.

Brooks, Nancy R. "Digging For Oil on Campus." Los Angeles Times 14 Dec.2003, sec. C: 1.

The LA Times coverage of the USC-Chevron Texaco deal. Interesting in the sequence that it is presented with opening paragraphs documenting the problems of sponsored research. Particularly moving are charges that companies want to hijack the curriculum, the statistics from a Yale study that shows research bias and quotes from an academic about chemical companies using university research to protect them from regulation. The second half of the article takes a more pragmatic view of USC’s specific project: overall corporate funding being a small percentage of the research budget, USC’s conflict of interest policies, advantages for students seeking jobs and practical experience. Overall, the article is balanced, but headline skimmers and anyone who stops after a few paragraphs would come away with a very negative view of USC

Campbell, Daza, Teresa Isabelle, and Shelia Slaughter. "Faculty andAdministrators’ Attitudes Toward Potential Conflicts of Interest, Commitment,and Equity in University-Industry Relationships ." The Journal of HigherEducation 70 (1999): 309-352

The study set out to determine how university-industry ties amplify existing tensions. The authors used resource dependence theory to conceptualize incentives and professionalization theory to devise their hypotheses: 1) Views towards potential conflicts topics will differ on issues related to control over their relationships with industry, such that faculty will seek to control their relationships with industry, at the same time administrators will try to maintain control over faculty participation 2) Administrators and faculty involved in university-industry activity will respond to potential conflict topics in a manner that suggests they are more willing to expand the activity than those not involved 3) Faculty not involved in university-industry activity will be less supportive than involved faculty of inequities across disciplines that might arise out of collaborative activity. The general conclusions were that industry relationships intensify the tension between faculty and administrators as to the nature of their relationship: collaborating professionals or employee/manager. Collaborations also increased divisions between involved and non-involved faculty, especially over the issues of salary, workload and public service. The data, although confirming the hypotheses, belied the great deal of ambiguity the researchers discovered in the individual response. For the authors, this ambiguity militates towards decisive policy intervention before attitudes become entrenched.

Cole, Juan. Informed Comment. 07 July 2004. University of Michigan.

Cole is an expert on Shia Islam. His weblog is one of the best English language sources on the Iraqi conflict. One of his many complaints is that influential people, especially in the Bush Administration, get their information and theories from individuals, like Laurie Mylroie, who actually knows very little about the Middle East in general and Iraq in particular. Wrong, deeply entrenched ideas often do more damage than ignorance.

Committee on Professional Standards and Responsibility "Ethical Problems of Academic Political Scientists." PS 1 (1968): 3-29

This final report came out in 1968. It is dated, especially visible in its preoccupation with the CIA and covert operations. Still, most of the section on academic integrity is cogent and relevant. The report identifies research freedom and integrity to be the paramount ethical concern. The authors conclude that the problems do not tend to arise from direct influence, but because the scholar may, wittingly or unwittingly, condition their manuscript to the assumed or divined values. It is an issue is further complicated where the mere receipt of funds from a particular source introduces the specter of influence. The report recognizes the necessity of disclosure, but raises several questions: is disclosure always enough or are some sources too tainted? what if a sponsor wants to remain anonymous for innocent reasons? how much disclosure is sufficient (source, amount, nature, involvement)?

Cong. Patent and Trademarks Law Amendment Act. US 96th Cong. PL 96-517. 12Dec. 1980. 01 July 2004

The full text of the law, which has been amended both by Congress and Presidential Memomorandum. It contains guidelines for patents developed from federal funds and the specific rights retained by the government.

Council on Governmental Relations. The Bayh-Dole Act: A Guideto the Law and Implementing Regulation. 1999. 01 July 2004.

A government written introduction to the law and the complex compliance regime. There are provisions for researchers reaping some of the profits and for mandatory reinvestment into university research.

Dangerfield, Anthony, and James Engell. "The Market-Model University."Harvard Magazine Forum. 1998

Sponsored research is one of many factors that have brought about The Age of Money. Most explicitly, it is the third of three criteria (none met by the Humanities) for an educational field to thrive: (1) A Promise of Money; (2) A Knowledge of Money; (3) A Source of Money (the field receives significant external money, i.e., research contracts, federal grants or funding support, or corporate underwriting) Sponsored research is also the source what the authors call the Feel-Good Funding Myth. They argue that outside funding sources do not necessarily benefit the whole university. Economically, there is no evidence that the increased funds for one department make funds available for other departments. Moreover, when that funding source dries up, the cuts come from the university as a whole, meaning even less money for the already underfunded Humanities. Finally, they do not accept that imputed prestige is enough to compensate for serial neglect. Bias is outside the scope of the study. It is important to note, however, that their presentation of the faculty v. administration dynamic is of fundamental importance when demarcating between personal/research bias and institutional bias.

Desruisseaux, Paul. "Canadian Professors Decry Power of Companies in CampusResearch." The Chronicle of Higher Education 12 Nov. 1999: A59.

Canadian academics are very angry over the increase in corporate sponsorship. Administrators are much more sympathetic. The trend is the result of a 33% decrease in research costs born by the federal government. Much of the funding that the government does provide comes with corporate partnership requirements. Academics complain that the corporations shape the research agenda and forsake basic research for applied research to the point that scholars are being turned into entrepreneurs. They are particularly upset by the strings that come attached to corporate funding and the secrecy that surrounds those contracts.

Dunn, Richard, and Joshua Newberg. "Keeping Secrets in the Campus Lab."American Business Law Journal 39 (2002)

A comprehensive article that focuses specific attention on the problem of protecting confidential information within industry-university research collaborations. The authors fundamental question is whether the tension between academic openness and corporate secrecy can be resolved. Answering in the affirmative, they review the four common structure of IURC: technology licensing, sponsored research, spin-off companies and idea labs. They end the analysis with a case study of Maryland’s Net Lab. The article is generally dismissive of charges about agenda setting and compromising values.

Evans, Gillian. "Politics and Profit: Scholars at Risk." UNESCO Courier01 Nov. 2001: 16.

Essentially a call to arms by UNESCO decrying the decline of academic freedom and the commercialization of the university. Interesting in how it contextualizes the fight against corporate control of the research agenda as part of multi-century battle for academic independence.

Fossum, Donna et al. "Vital Assets." The Federal Research and DevelopmentPortfolio RAND Corp. (2004).

Between 1996 and 2002, total federal R&D funds going to universities and colleges grew from $12.8 billion to $21.4 billion, for an overall increase of 45.7 percent. By far the most striking finding of this analysis was the discovery that, in 2002, 45 percent of all federal R&D funds provided to universities and colleges by HHS and all other federal agencies went directly to medical schools. The profile of federally funded R&D at universities and colleges that emerges from this analysis raises issues of proportionality. Specifically, in the current funding profile, approximately two-thirds of the federal funds going to universities and colleges for the conduct of R&D is focused on only one field of science—life science—and federal R&D funding is concentrated at only a few research universities. These findings raise questions about whether other critical national needs that have substantial R&D components (such as environment, energy, homeland security, and education) are receiving the investment they require and whether the concentration of dollars at a few institutions is shortchanging science students at institutions that receive little or no federal R&D funding.

Frank, Grace. "UF Crimonology Profs Work Faces Scrutiny." The TampaTribune 20 Mar. 1999, Final Edition ed., sec. Florida/Metro: 6.

Charles Thomas is often referred to as a harbinger. Most press accounts paint him as the very model of bad research. He may very well be. On the other hand, no one has proved everything. It is unclear whether he became a privatization promoter because of the consulting fees or he was sought out by companies because he pushed privatization. The one thing that is clear is that his research funding was cut off and his reputation ruined.

General Accounting Office. Technology Transfer: Reporting Requirements For Federally Sponsored Research Need Revision. 1999.

Federal agencies and their contractors and grantees are not complying with provisions on the disclosure, reporting, retention, and licensing of federally sponsored inventions under the regulations implementing the Bayh-Dole Act and Executive Order 12591. The databases for recording the government’s royalty-free licenses are inaccurate, incomplete, and inconsistent and some inventions are not being recorded at all. As a result, the government is not always aware of federally sponsored inventions to which it has royalty-free rights.

Gordon, Mark L. "University Controlled or Owned Technology." Journal of College andUniversity Law Vol. 30 pg. 641 (2004)

Mainly a technical paper on policies surrounding commercialization. The author does cover some of the associated problems, but only in the context of them being policy related. More practical than theoretical.

Gross, Cary P., Bekelman E. Justin, and Yan Li. "Scope and Impact of FinancialConflicts of Interest." Journal of the American Medical Association 289(2003): 454-465.

An empirical take on the fact that financial relationships among industry, scientific investigators, and academic institutions are widespread. Findings: 1) Approximately one fourth of investigators have industry affiliations, and roughly two thirds of academic institutions hold equity in start-ups that sponsor research performed at the same institutions. 2) A statistically significant association between industry sponsorship and pro-industry conclusions. 3) Industry sponsorship was also associated with restrictions on publication and data sharing. 4) The approach to managing financial conflicts varied substantially across academic institutions and peer-reviewed journals.

Harrington, Peter J. “Faculty Conflicts of Interest in Age of Academic Entrepreneurialism” Journal of College and University Law 27 (2001): 775

A comprehensive review of conflict-of-interest policies that begins with the standard history, but follows with a thorough analysis of the empirical research done to date and a sampling of policies from around the country. The author provides a thorough explanation of the varying definitions of “conflicts of interest”, while concentrating on outside sources of income for faculty. He posits that conflicts and the responding policy are in a nascent stage. He promotes vigilance, flexibility and empirical research. Ten separate policies are tacked on to the end.

Heller, Michael A. and Rebecca S. Eisenberg “Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research” Science 1 May 1998: 698-701

According to the authors, privatization and competing intellectual property regime will lead to an underutizilation of new technologies. The biomedical community is not situated to overcome the combination of transaction costs, strategic behaviors, and cognitive bias. Overall the authors urge caution and reform in moving forward.

Hochhauser, Mark. "Conflict of Interest." Applied Clinical Trials. vol. 10 pg. 58(2001)

Although specifically about clinical trials, the article explores some important points about conflict of interest and bias. The author identifies several important psychological factors that a conflicts can engender: desire for success, confirmation bias, fixation, overconfidence and belief perseverance. These factors can manifest first in the experiment design. Alternatively, they can effect the way data is analyzed. The author details several pitfalls of data analysis including: developing the methodology after the data has been collected, failing to report negative findings, overemphasis on incidental data that is also positive, reanalyzing original data to get a more favorable results, running several different tests until a favorable outcome is achieved, fudging.

The Harris Poll Mar. 2004

A poll of American confidence in the leaders of major institutions. Decreased confidence in the White House and Supreme Court moved the overall number down a little bit. Academic institutions, however, recovered from a recent dip to garner a 36 rating. By comparison, confidence in 1966 was 61 and the most trusted institution, the military, is currently at 62. Confidence has improved markedly, however, since the early 90’s in the wake of the Congressional hearings. At that time, the rating was in the low 20’s.

Katz, Stanley “The Pathbreaking, Fractionalized, Uncertain World of Knowledge.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. 20 Sept. 2002: 7

Katz is director of Princeton’s Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies and president emeritus of the American Council of Learned Societies. He posits the way Americans think about universities has changed because of the rise of research institutions. The necessity of specialization has meant that the knowledge produced is no longer for mass public consumption. “I think the public (and public officials) have come to see research universities as self-aggrandizing money machines populated by professors who have lost interest both in teaching and in creating immediately useful knowledge.” There has also been a decline in the intellectual atmosphere because of: ideological divides, lack of institutional loyalty, and an overwhelming focus on research. He thinks neo-liberal economic strategies have privileged academic units with the greatest access to external funding, and to punish those more traditional departments. “A more profound effect is to lessen the communal sense of the institution, to reward individual departmental initiative rather than commitment to general university purposes.”

Kirp, David L. Shakespeare, Einstein and the Bottom Line. Cambridge:Harvard UP, 2003. 110-129, 216-220.

David L. Kirp is the former Dean of the Goldman School of Public Policy at Berkeley. “Seminal” might be the best adjective to describe Kirp’s review of modern education in the corporate world. He uses case studies to shed light on the disparate forces at play in the university system. Rather than treating higher education as a monolithic whole, Kirp goes great lengths to focus on all the different players from research universities to small liberal arts colleges, from university presidents to adjunct professors. The resulting book is an enthralling introduction to ivory tower with all its conflicts, politics, and challenges. Kirp’s focus is on bringing to light the different issues that face contemporary institutions and the various ways different individuals have attempted to solve them. There are some clear success stories and more than a few failures, but most of the case studies present a mixed bag that forces the reader to come to terms with trade-off inherent in educational decision making.

King Jr., Ralph T. "Journals Rarely Disclose Researchers’ Ties." The WallStreet Journal 2 Feb. 1999, sec. B: 1

Presents a research study by Tufts professor Sheldon Krimsky, one of leading authorities on science and conflicts of interest. Even with disclosure policies at all the journals, the record is dismal. Krimsky is an advocate of such disclosure, but does not see it is as a panacea. His answer: shame.

LaFollette, Marcel “The Politics of Research Misconduct.” Journal of Higher Education 65 (1994): 261-285

This paper explains the evolution of Congressional oversight of science. The paper concludes that such oversight, which has grown exponentially in the last two decades, is likely only to increase. The underlying criticism is not of Congress, but of the research community’s hubris. Congress, for the most part, is framed as a responsive body. Traditionally, they focused on what scientists were producing and left largely unasked questions on integrity, honesty or accuracy. Their focus has always been on applied research. In the 1980’s, they began to feel pressure from a disgusted electorate. The scientific community largely ignored Congress, regarding themselves as above messy democratic politics and not bound to conform to rules imposed by non-scientists with whom they disagreed. A watershed came the late 80’s when the Baltimore case demonstrated that scientific immunity had finally evaporated because, as proved in the Breuning case, science was not always self-correcting. The author identifies several criticisms of Congress that are either wrong or overly simplistic: there is too much oversight; political ambition and showmanship fuels the system; only scientists understand science policy; staff really control oversight; special interests drive oversight; committees only react to external stimuli. One criticism he finds valid is that committees neglect the long view. He combines this fact with scientific hostility to oversight to posit the need for cultural adjustments on both sides of the issue

Lind, Michael Up From Conservatism Free Press (1997).

Lind is a former warrior for movement conservative. An editor of several magazines, he was closely affiliated with William Buckley, Jr. and the like. Having broken from the right because of their catering to the pseudopopulism of fundamentalist Christians and anarchistic militia movements, he is trying to establish a “radical center” of the Truman-FDR school. Particularly fascinating is his insider account of the rise of the foundation funded ideological think tanks. He spends an entire chapter lambasting both Charles Murray and D’nesh D’souza and their part in a “New Social Darwinism”.

Marshall, Eliot. "Secretiveness Found Widespread in Life Sciences." Science 25 Apr. 1997: 523-525.

The survey conducted by a health-policy group led by David Blumenthal at the Massachusetts General Hospital, found that almost 20% of the 2167 academic life scientists who responded to a questionnaire said they had delayed publication of data by more than 6 months. Their reasons were often linked to commercial stakes: 46% said they needed time to prepare patent applications, 33% said they had to protect intellectual property in some other way, 31% were trying to keep ahead of competitors, and 28% reported they had to "slow dissemination of undesired results." When the survey writers drafted this last question, Blumenthal says, "we had in mind something like the thyroid-study event," in which a company sought to block the release of data (see next story). But the question was left vague to cover self-censorship as well as sponsor-imposed delays.

Munro, Neil “The New Nexus.” The National Journal 22 Feb. 2003; Vol. 35. No. 8

A mostly positive article, it sees academic entrepreneurs as being driving forces in the modern economy. The article links this economic clout to increasing political influence for research universities. One SUNY director, who considers “conflicts of interest” to be “confluence of interest” even refers to corporatization as a second academic revolution that combines research and teaching (the first revolution) with commerce. The article outlines the usual criticisms, and even quotes Alan Greenspan about liberal arts curriculum being swamped by science-technology research. His stance is given credence by a statistic: Since 1973 the number of researchers in the university system has increased by 50% while teachers have declined steadily. Finally, an interesting point is that as professors become increasingly representative of commercial interests, their ability to act as neutral policy advisors is imperiled.

Nadis, Steve. "US Concern Grows Over Secrecy Clauses." Nature 01 Apr.1999: 359.

The story of Professor David Kern. A Brown University professor he did consultation work for textile manufacturer, Microfibres. His research turned up a new form of cancer, flock worker’s lung. The company tried to enforce a secrecy clause in an attempt to keep him from releasing his data. The University sided with the company and eventually terminated his contract. Kern came forward with the data. The company did not sue from fear of the PR fallout.

Slaughter, Shelia and Larry Leslie, Academic Capitalism. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (1997)

The most rigorously academic book on the subject. The authors link the
commercialization of the university to the larger forces of globalization and
post-industrial economics. The comparative analysis of public institutions of
higher learning in the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada
supports the systemic nature of the changes. The book is loaded with empirical
data, taxonomies and calls for further analysis. The book concludes that the
systemic revamping of higher education is inevitable.

Slaughter, Shelia, Scott Thomas, and Cindy S. Volk. "Models of Institutional Resource Allocation." Journal of Higher Education 72 (2001): 387-413.

The study is aimed at criticizing traditional models of studying institutional resource allocation. The authors see studies as re;ying too much on individuals or broad fields of study as the units of analysis. This framework has produced two competing theories of allocation: rational/political and critical/political. Rational/political theory highlights the role of a small number of decision makers at the apex of the institution and emphasize the functional use of resources to maintain and enhance institutional efficiency and effectiveness with a sensitivity to the politics of the internal budgetary processes. Critical/political theory sees resource allocation as shaped by gender, race, power and service to external constituencies dominant in the broader political economy. The authors use both theories and their respective variables to analyze a public research university. Different patterns emerge. Numerous findings, however, fit neither model. This incongruence, as well as the difference between “fat cat” departments such as astronomy and chemistry and “cash cow” departments such as psychology and journalism confirm the need for a more department centered perspective. The authors also call for further studies that are reconceptualized around divisions among lower-division teaching, upper-division teaching and graduate education.

Stuart, James “The Academic-Industrial Complex” University of Colorado Law Review vol. 75, pg. 1011 (2004).

The author feels that most of literature glosses over the fundamental differences in values between academia and corporate America. He is willing to ask the question whether the relationship should exist at all, that is, can the tensions be reconciled. He worries that universities have struck an essentially Faustian bargain. The author casts a very astute and very critical eye.

"University-Corporate Research Partnerships." Marketplace. NPR. KPPC, Los Angeles. 04 May 2004.

Not so flattering coverage of USC Engineering’s partnership with ChevronTexaco. The report sees SC as rolling out the red carpet and allowing the oil giant to set-up an office on campus with unprecedented control over research. Dean Nikias is made to seem naively optimistic at best and money hungry at worst.

Vandantam, Shankar. "Drugmakers Prefer Silence on Test Data." The WashingtonPost 06 July 2004, sec. A: 1.

A newspaper article on the federal database for drug trials. Most companies are breaking law by not registering all of the trials they run. This cherry picking stifles scientific understanding and has negative consequences for the consuming public.

Wadman, Meredith. "$100m Payout After Drug Data Withheld." Nature 21 Aug.1997: 703.

The Betty Dong affair was widely publicized and the maker of Synthroid was sued by its customers, who had paid a premium for no actual benefit. The company eventually settled for $100 million, only a fraction of the additional profits it made by suppressing the study. The company’s only defense is that the study would not existed, had they not funded it.

Washburn, Jennifer. "The Kept University." The Atlantic Monthly 01 Mar.2000: 39-54.

‘The article’ on commercializaition. It begins with the Berkley-Norvatis deal, but expands into the entire realm of corporate influence. The article stresses the common theme of the tension between academic openneness and corporate confidentiality. The article argues that universities and professors are not just bowing to industry pressure, but the institutions themselves are behaving more like for-profit enterprises, especially in the area of intellectual property. The trend not only negatively impacts the sharing of information, but also creates a much different environment for students. The decline in the humanities is also dealt with. The authors look at the decline in degrees, the relative low salaries of professors and the decrease in instructors (as opposed to the increase in researchers). Conversely, the humanities are creating interest as commodities in the burgeoning area of distance learning. The authors view this is a further decline in the role of the university. The article ends with a thoughtful reflection on the mission of the university vis-a-vie society. The authors contrast the good workers/marketable goods ethos with the critical thinkers/create knowledge paradigm. Their best insight has to do with the ineffectiveness of market forces in pursuing revolutionary ideas. The rational actor model of investment eschews the unpredictable.