Kenneth Guang-Lih Huang, Engineering Systems Division, MIT, USA

24-01-2006

10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

Faculty of Engineering, Seminar Room EA-02-11, NUS

This study examines a central question in our understanding of the diffusion and accumulation of scientific knowledge ? the impact of strategic institutional decisions, specifically patenting, on that process. I use the Human Genome Project (HGP), a complex, large-scale, 13 year, $3.8 billion research effort funded and coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Institute of Health, and one of the most significant life science research projects ever undertaken as the setting for this study. The seven key genome centers, which produced almost all the output for the HGP, provide an unusually matched and well-controlled natural experiment to examine the impact of different knowledge institutions on the subsequent diffusion of scientific knowledge. The explicit goals of the HGP included genetic mapping, sequencing and the development of innovative sequencing technologies. In addition to contributing to important scientific knowledge, the HGP was designed to develop and transfer technologies to the private sector for commercialization. It was in the definition and implementation of the commercial goals of the project that controversy arose: different centers engaging in sequencing pursued distinctive policies in their approach to patenting innovations. These different policy decisions embedded similar scientific research outputs in dramatically different institutional settings ? the presence or absence of patents. Through an empirical study employing econometric modeling of output and comparative qualitative examination of documentary sources from the different genome centers, I describe the distinctive strategic decisions that these centers made in the use of patenting and publication for the dissemination, public use, and accumulation of knowledge, and the commercialization of biotechnologies. I highlight the controversial role of these different decisions as an exemplar of the distinctive views held on how to institutionalize scientific knowledge in technologically intensive systems. I then analyze the impact on diffusion of these knowledge across all seven genome centers ? MIT Whitehead Institute Center for Genome Research in Cambridge, M.A.; Washington University Genome Sequencing Center in St. Louis, MO; Baylor Human Genome Sequencing Center in Houston, TX; University of Washington Genome Center in Seattle, W.A.; Stanford Human Genome Center in Palo Alto, CA; DOE Joint Genome Institute; and the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute in Cambridgeshire, U.K. I find that the genome centers played a crucial role in knowledge diffusion and commercialization, and the decision to implement an institutional pro-patenting policy does not stifle the public use and dissemination of scientific knowledge. Furthermore, such policy, in addition to certain institutional attributes, contributes to technological innovation and has the potential to encourage the commercialization of these biotechnologies.

Kenneth Huang is a final year Ph.D. candidate in Technology, Management and Policy at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Engineering Systems Division. His advisors include Management of Technological Innovation and Entrepreneurship faculty from the Sloan School of Management and Engineering Systems Division. He obtained his M.S. in Technology and Policy from MIT in 2003 and his B.S. (with honors) in Biomedical Engineering and Electrical Engineering from the Johns Hopkins University in 2001. His current research focuses on technological systems management and innovation, technology policy and the impact of intellectual property rights on diffusion, utilization of scientific knowledge and commercialization in the life sciences. He is also studying entrepreneurial decision making and strategies in technologically intensive systems and businesses. As a teaching instructor at MIT, he has taught mid-career business executives and MBAs from the Sloan School and Harvard University, as well as Engineering Systems Master?s and Ph.D. students. He has published articles and presented in several conferences related to Management of Science and Technology, Technology Policy, Economics, Engineering Systems Management and Strategy. He also brings with him interesting consulting, start-up and high-tech industry experiences.