LISTSERV - IOWA-TOPICS Archives - LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG

Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?GMW:_Firestorm_of_controversy_at_Berkeley?=
Sender: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?GM_WATCH?=" <[log in to unmask]>
From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?GM_WATCH?=" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 16:19:40 GMT
To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?thmathews@aol=2Ecom?=" <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-USER_IP: 83.105.41.30
X-Mailer: JMail 4.2.0 by Dimac
Content-Type: text/plain
X-AOL-IP: 217.206.62.66
Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>

GM WATCH daily
http://www.gmwatch.org
---
---
1.British Petroleum Spills Oil at UC Berkeley
2.Cal's biofuel deal challenged on campus
3.The promise and perils of tech transfer

EXTRACT: BP's half-billion-dollar deal is nothing less than massive greenwas=
hing by a corrupt corporation - supported by a governor eager "to keep his e=
ight Hummers running on alcohol." - Iain Boal, professor of social and envir=
onmental history in the geography department at UC Berkeley
---
---
1.British Petroleum Spills Oil at UC Berkeley
IndyMedia, Mar 4th, 2007=20
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/03/04/18372601.php [go to this link fo=
r good pics and links to videos]

Last thursday (3/1) approximately 150 people demonstrated against the $500 m=
illion agreement between British Petroleum and University of California, Ber=
keley. During the protest a mock oil spill was created in front of Californi=
a Hall, the administration building. 2 students were arrested for dumping th=
e mixture of molasses and water. Below are reposts from The Daily Cal, Berke=
ley Daily Planet, the San Francisco Chronicle and youtube.

03.02.protest.rodriguez.jpg

You Tube VIdeos from www.berkeleycitizen.org=20

from The Berkeley Daily Planet=20
Week of Arrests, Protests Challenges UC/BP Accord
By Richard Brenneman (03-02-07)

The firestorm of controversy over the $500 million pact tying UC Berkeley to=
 one of the world biggest and most criticized oil giants intensified this we=
ek, with a teach-in, a demonstration, a pointed exchange between students an=
d a key administrator and at least one arrest.

The central issue is the role BP-the company formerly known as British Petro=
leum-will play on the campus of one of the nation's premier public research=20=
universities. At the heart of the deal is a plan to genetically engineer gra=
ss and microbes to produce ethanol.

According to a UC Berkeley historian Monday night, BP's half-billion-dollar=20=
deal is nothing less than massive greenwashing by a corrupt corporation-supp=
orted by a governor eager "to keep his eight Hummers running on alcohol."

Iain Boal, professor of social and environmental history in the geography de=
partment, joined three other professors, an award-winning science writer and=
 a coalition of students for the first teach-in targeting the controversial=20=
plan revealed in a press conference last month.

The BP project has garnered an impressive collection of political endorsemen=
ts, ranging from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates to=20=
Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama=97whose own state of Illin=
ois is another beneficiary of the project.

But opposition is growing as well, with the student activists staging two ma=
jor events this week -Monday night's teach-in and a protest Thursday afterno=
on outside California Hall, the seat of campus administration and the office=
s of Chancellor Robert Birgeneau.

Students also spoke up during a closed meeting Wednesday noon with Paul Ludd=
en, dean of the College of Natural Resources, according to two participants.=
=20

Then, at 1 p.m. Thursday, demonstrators gathered outside California Hall to=20=
stage a bit of guerilla theater, and two of them, clad in white lab coats em=
blazoned with the BP logo, each dumped a yard weed sprayer tank of dark liqu=
id outside the main entrance.

Campus police, present in numbers and armed with video cameras as well as mo=
re traditional hardware, took the pair into custody, and hauled at least one=
, Ali Tonack, off to the Berkeley city lockup.=20

A series of speakers, including professors Miguel Altieri, Ignacio Chapela a=
nd Gray Brechin, joined students in denouncing the agreement. As a final ges=
ture to demonstrate the harmlessness of the liquid, Chapela pushed through p=
olice, dipped his finger in the substance, tasted it and pronounced it be mo=
lasses.=20

"It's organic, too," called out one of the students.=20

Among those who spoke was Hillary Lehr, an undergraduate in the Conservation=
 and Resource Studies program at the College of Natural Resources (CNR).=20

The day before, she had confronted Dean Paul Ludden moments after he began h=
is presentation to a group of students and faculty, asking the 50 or so pres=
ent for a show of hands [check] on whether they had serious questions about=20=
the agreement.=20

"An overwhelming majority did," said the witness, a critic of the project. "=
It was wonderful. Most were worried, and they asked questions."=20

When Ludden told faculty members they'd have ample opportunity to become inv=
olved, "he was immediately challenged by" ecosystem science Professor Andrew=
 Paul Gutierrez, who said the agreement threatened academic freedom.=20

Ludden responded that "any researcher can do anything he wants" at the unive=
rsity.=20

When students protested the commercialization of research, Professor David W=
inickoff, a faculty member who helped Ludden draft the proposal, said they s=
hould ask legislators to revise the Bayh-Dole Act, federal legislation which=
 gives universities the right to patent research and work with corporations=20=
to profit from its exploitation.

"I don't think it went the way they expected," said the witness.=20

"Their answers were very inadequate," said Maren Poitras, one of the organiz=
ers of Monday night's teach-in. "It became very clear that they weren't goin=
g to change the process."

"I asked the dean if he took the Novartis guidelines into account. He said n=
o, the university had not adopted them."

Those guidelines were drafted by researchers at Michigan State University, w=
ho were contracted to examine the university's controversial agreement with=20=
Novartis, a Swiss agro-pharmaceutical corporation which entered into an agre=
ement with the CNR to fund $25 million in research.

That deal sparked a national controversy over the increasing role played by=20=
corporations in modern universities, and drew the attention of science write=
r Jennifer Washburn. An article on Novartis she wrote for The Atlantic magaz=
ine was expanded into her book, University, Inc., She was one of the speaker=
s at Monday's teach-in.

"It's really critical that you get hold of the agreement," she told the stud=
ents who gathered into the auditorium at Morgan Hall. "I called the universi=
ty to try to obtain a copy and I was denied access to anything."=20

Kamal Kapadia, a CNR graduate student, did get a copy, reported in some deta=
il at the teach-in. The San Francisco Chronicle got a look at one and publis=
hed excerpts Tuesday.

Much of the research will be aimed at creating genetically modified organism=
s (GMOs), a highly controversial research agenda critics fear will create si=
gnificant unintended consequences, especially in lesser developed countries=20=
where they fear already threatened rain forest will be destroyed to clear gr=
ound for planting crops to fuel American cars.=20

At Monday's teach-in, Boal said oil companies are increasingly setting resea=
rch agendas for universities around the world, with the $100 million 2003 Ex=
xonMobil accord with Stanford serving as an increasingly typical example.=20

The 10-year BP agreement with Berkeley he described as part of a "massive gr=
eenwashing campaign" funded by a minuscule fraction of the fraction of corpo=
rate profits, which amounted to more than $22 billion in 2006.=20

The same firm has shown a ruthless hand in dealing with critics, he said, hi=
ring a former Central Intelligence Agency to break into the home of one crit=
ic and tap his phone, while another was targeted with a fabricated file offe=
ring specious evidence of an adulterous affair that never happened.=20

"How could a major oil company behave differently?" he asked, because of the=
 fiduciary responsibility of directors to generate the highest possible prof=
its for investors.=20

Under the corporate regime, he said, "science has become capitalism=92s way=20=
of knowing the world."=20

Washburn told students that lack of public disclosure of corporate/academic=20=
agreements has become all too common at a time when corporate funds are a st=
eadily growing part of university research budgets.=20

Even though federal coffers remain the largest source of university research=
 dollars, the corporate moneys that accounted for about 7 percent of univers=
ity research funds in 2000 influenced between 20 and 25 percent of research=20=
projects because of matching fund and cost-sharing agreements.=20

"I am not opposed to corporate/academic relationships," Washburn said. "They=
 have been an integral part of the advance of science and knowledge ... The=20=
problem is the way the relationships are organized and structured," jeopardi=
zing the university=92s core missions of education an independence.=20

Miguel Altieri, a professor of agroecology at CNR and an advocate of sustain=
able agriculture, said the corporatization of research has virtually ended r=
esearch on non-chemical means of pest control, once a strong emphasis on the=
 Berkeley campus. "The discipline has disappeared," he said.

By focusing research in fields where corporations can hope to harvest patent=
s, other field of science vanish, along with expertise.

Already, patented GMO crops occupy between 80 million and 100 million hectar=
es (one hectare is 2.47 acres), most farmed in vast tracts beyond the scale=20=
of traditional farming techniques because farmers who own less than 500 acre=
s simply can't afford the essential machinery.=20

Reliance on so-called biofuels doesn=92t make sense, Altieri charged, and wi=
ll increase energy consumption in fuel production and raise carbon dioxide e=
missions.=20

He criticized BP in particular for working with paramilitary groups in Colom=
bia who have kidnapped and murdered critics of the oil company.=20

"Will we feel satisfied when filling our cars with a mixture containing six=20=
percent of biofuels coming from the Amazon, where peasants and indigenous pe=
ople were violently displaced, leaving thousands without food security?" he=20=
asked.=20

Altieri described what he call =93the green fuel mafia,=94 a consortium of o=
il, biotech and agricultural businesses allied with car manufacturers and en=
vironmental organizations, including the World Wildlife Federation, Conserva=
tion International and the Nature Conservancy.

Civil and environmental engineering Professor Tad W. Patzek is one of the un=
iversity=92s most outspoken critics of biofuels, and worked for Shell Oil be=
fore joining the Berkeley faculty.=20

=93What troubles me is this alignment of public research with corporation go=
als,=94 he said, resulting in =93a public institution now completely aligned=
 with corporate interests.=94

Patzek=92s research has yielded evidence which he says proves that biofuels=20=
like ethanol are not viable because, when all costs are added up, including=20=
the loss of natural resources diverted to production, only red ink results.=20

The notion that research on ethanol will solve an energy crisis that stems i=
n large part from over-consumption is dangerous, =93and our complicity in th=
is delusion is dangerous and runs against my feelings about the ethics of sc=
ientists at a public institution,=94 he said.

While research has shown the productivity of techniques that don=92t require=
 GMOs, pesticides and major applications of fertilizer and irrigation water,=
 that=92s not the work that draws grants.=20

=93I personally know the chief scientist at BP and I know how things work th=
ere,=94 Patzek said, adding that he was =93quite opposed=94 to the agreement=
 =93because they don=92t know what they want,=94 while the corporation itsel=
f =93wants an increases in the value of their stock by using a public instit=
ution=94 to make it possible.=20

=93We are a public institution in dire straits in many, many ways. We are he=
re, hat in hand, begging for any donations from any source.=94=20

=93The university has been penetrated and transformed from the inside,=94 sa=
id CNR Professor Ignacio Chapela, who was denied tenure and released by the=20=
university following his outspoken criticism of the Novartis agreement.=20

Chapela told teach-in participants that the university had seen the loss of=20=
a once-strong tradition of faculty governance in Berkeley in the face of sec=
ret corporate agreements approved by trustees acting for the public. =93We a=
re losing the trust of the people,=94 he said, and the people are losing the=
ir trust in science.=20

from Daily Californian Two Arrests in Protest Over Biofuels Deal
Students Don Lab Coats, Spill Mock Oil in Rally Against BP Contract
By Vanessa Lord

Nearly 150 protesters gathered outside California Hall yesterday to rally ag=
ainst UC Berkeley=92s recent $500 million contract with energy giant BP Amoc=
o PLC.=20

The protesters from the group Stop BP wore white lab coats marked =93BP=94 a=
nd staged a mock oil spill, pouring black liquid across the front entrance o=
f California Hall and surrounding the area with caution tape.

The organizers planned to remove the spill to symbolize the need for a clean=
up of =93oil contamination=94 on campus.

Graduate student Ali Tonak and freshman Nathan Murthy were arrested on charg=
es of trespassing after spilling the liquid and hanging the caution tape.

According to UCPD Assistant Chief Mitch Celaya, the students will be release=
d with a citation.

Ignacio Chapela, an associate professor in the department of environmental s=
cience, policy and management, said it was upsetting that a student was arre=
sted for a theatrical performance.

=93The problems this deal will cause for the university are much more damagi=
ng than a mock oil spill,=94 Chapela said.

To confirm the black liquid was harmless, Chapela dipped his finger in the m=
ess and tasted it. Chapela said he believed the liquid was molasses.

According to a petition against the BP project, Stop BP is concerned about t=
he deal because of what they say is a lack of student involvement in the dec=
ision to accept the contract, the potential harms of biofuels research and t=
he risk to academic integrity that university contracts with private compani=
es pose.

=93Students have no say=97that is not democracy,=94 said senior Hillary Lehr=
, an anthropology and conservation and resource studies major. =93Even thoug=
h (the contract) looks democratic because there are forums, the fact of the=20=
matter is that it=92s not.=94

The level of student involvement in the protest was great, said alumna Nina=20=
Rizzo, a campus organizer for human rights organization Global Exchange.

=93This was definitely a great turn-out, especially because it=92s only the=20=
beginning,=94 Rizzo said.

Stop BP will continue advocating for its cause as the project unfolds, said=20=
Lee Worden, a postdoctorate researcher and protest participant.

=93This may be a long-term project, but we=92re going to get the oil contami=
nation off this campus,=94 Worden said. =93We=92ll be back.=94=20

from Berkeley Daily Planet=20
by reposts Sunday Mar 4th, 2007 5:07 PM=20

altieriandarres.jpg.jpg

A campus police officer warns Miguel Altieri, center, to step back after the=
 professor and BP agreement critic challenged the need to detain one of the=20=
two UC Berkeley students handcuffed after they dumped molasses in front of C=
alifornia Hall. A second student, Ali Tonack, was booked into Berkeley city=20=
jail. Photo by Richard Brenneman.
from Sf Chron=20
by reposts Sunday Mar 4th, 2007 5:07 PM=20

ba__bpprotest.jpg

UC Berkeley police arrest an ecology student suspected of pouring a mixture=20=
of molasses and vinegar at an entrance to California Hall on Thursday to pro=
test a proposed deal between the university and British Petroleum to develop=
 biofuels. The substance, which a protest leader called "fake oil," was part=
 of a student-led campaign to persuade Chancellor Robert Birgeneau not to si=
gn the $500 million deal. Critics say the deal would put the university on t=
he path of becoming dependent on corporate funding for research. Undergradua=
te Nathan A. Murthy, 19, and graduate student Ali B. Tonak, 24, were charged=
 with misdemeanors.
---
---
2.Cal's biofuel deal challenged on campus
Critics say energy alliance with oil giant BP endangers school's integrity,=20=
independence
Rick DelVecchio, Chronicle Staff Writer
San Francisco Chronicle (page A - 1), March 8, 2007
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=3D/c/a/2007/03/08/MNGCROHIOV1=
.DTL

Andrew Paul Gutierrez, a 67-year-old professor of ecosystems science in UC B=
erkeley's College of Natural Resources, has a word for those who believe hum=
an ingenuity and productivity are boundless.=20

He calls them "cornucopians."=20

He thinks cornucopians are misguided and prone to taking big risks that can=20=
backfire.=20

That's one of the reasons he is upset that the university where he has spent=
 his entire academic life is joining with oil giant BP in a $500 million, 10=
-year program to discover how to mass-produce clean, safe transportation fue=
ls -- such as ethanol -- from biomass in an environmentally safe and cost-ef=
fective way.=20

The Energy Biosciences Institute is to create high-tech energy farms as prod=
uctive as oil fields but without the carbon waste that adds to climate chang=
e. The harvests would be processed into sugar-based fuels for filling the ga=
s tanks of vehicles.=20

Institute scientists "will be unified and propelled by a common purpose to s=
olve a global problem of great magnitude and urgency," according to the prop=
osal written by a UC Berkeley-led team and accepted by BP.=20

The BP deal has been presented as an environmental call to arms, but Gutierr=
ez is among a loose-knit group of faculty members and students not falling i=
n line. The critics don't agree on what they disagree about but share a ferv=
or that contrasts with the administration's self-confidence at landing histo=
ry's richest academic-industry research partnership.=20

The heretics fall into three camps: those who question the science program,=20=
those who feel the deal taints the university's independence, and those who=20=
fear it conflicts with UC Berkeley's time-honored collegial process for hiri=
ng and promoting faculty.=20

They're few in number on a faculty of more than 1,500 but have been so persi=
stent since the deal's announcement five weeks ago, that time had to be set=20=
aside for everyone to speak. That time is from 4 to 6 p.m. today at a campus=
 forum sponsored by Cal's Academic Senate.=20

"These are arguments that have to be taken seriously," said Bill Drummond, a=
 journalism professor who is chairman of the Academic Senate.=20

To give the sponsors of the BP deal their due, supporters say, leaders of th=
e giant petroleum company are considering the issue of global warming in bro=
ad ecological and socioeconomic terms. No previous effort has even attempted=
 such a comprehensive approach.=20

"I've met a bunch of the VPs at BP," said Chris Somerville, a Stanford profe=
ssor who is the top candidate for the Energy Biosciences Institute's top job=
. "They're people like you and me. They're trying to do the right thing. The=
y want the right thing for their children and grandchildren."=20

Gutierrez, interviewed at his office in Mulford Hall, said he believes it's=20=
important to pursue alternative fuels but was hard put to find anything to c=
heer him up about the BP deal's approach.=20

"You'd think this proposal is exactly what we needed because it's promising=20=
a lot to reduce greenhouse gases," he said. "The problem is, how do you sepa=
rate the hype from the facts?"=20

Another reason he's upset is he thinks the deal marks a step backward for th=
e university's intellectual independence.=20

He criticized the administration for entering into a relationship in which 5=
0 corporate researchers will work hand in hand with university scientists. G=
utierrez said partnerships between individual faculty members and corporate=20=
sponsors have been common during his career, but a partnership on the instit=
utional level is something new.=20

"There used to be deals between individual professors and industry -- they w=
ould provide funding, and they could provide any kind of relationship you wa=
nted," he said. "But you didn't have people coming in from industry with all=
 the rights of a professor who's been through the academic sieve."=20

What is being introduced in the BP deal, Gutierrez said, is a public-private=
 hybrid he calls a "corporaversity."=20

BP's corporate scientists and engineers will be able to profit from what the=
y learn on campus, which is not only normal but also desirable if the resear=
ch is to have a rapid social impact, according to the sponsors. But they als=
o will be encouraged to embrace campus intellectual life, including, as the=20=
BP sponsors suggest, helping design courses, mentor students and promote sci=
ence careers to schoolkids.=20

"It's a harbinger," Gutierrez said. "As this big money starts coming in, fir=
st we'll become addicted to it, and secondly, in becoming addicted to it, th=
ey'll start demanding more things from the university in terms of what the r=
elationship is all about."=20

Gutierrez, a New Mexico cowboy's son who worked nights at a gas station to h=
elp pay his way through college and grad school, comes to his critique as an=
 expert in modeling natural systems. His recent work includes plotting the i=
mpact of climate change on the spread of the olive fly, and the ecological b=
acklash from cotton genetically modified to kill bugs.=20

During his interview with The Chronicle, he returned again and again to the=20=
theme that natural systems are all about limits. Modern human systems, on th=
e other hand, are all about consumption. So there's a battle.=20

Gutierrez does not bet on technology to win the battle. He says biological s=
ystems will strain to reach equilibrium and frustrate the cleverest of the c=
ornucopians trying to adjust them to benefit humans' insatiable consumption.=
=20

"What do you know about all the pest problems that are going to be created w=
hen you start producing these plants that are going to be different?" he ask=
ed. "Pretty soon you start making a system that starts out with good intenti=
ons but becomes more complicated.=20

"That's what happened with bioengineered crops. In some areas it simplifies=20=
the system. But in others it makes it so complicated."=20

The biofuels push has been compared with putting a man on the moon. Gutierre=
z doesn't see the connection.=20

"As a scientific adventure and quest of man and all that good stuff, it's wo=
nderful," he said, "and I recall exactly where I was when they stepped off o=
nto the moon. This is different. We're messing with the whole environment."=20

The vision of rolling Midwestern fields of bioengineered fuel crops is, Guti=
errez thinks, "nonsense."=20

He thinks of south-central Brazil, with its sugar-cane plantations in place=20=
of what had been a mix of forests and diverse croplands. The cane is harvest=
ed to make ethanol, a substitute for fossil fuels in transportation. "It's s=
ugar cane as far as the eye can see," he said. "The rivers run red with the=20=
runoff."=20

He fears more such scenes around the world.=20

"At a certain point there's a carrying capacity to the environment," he said=
. "Even if you plant the last hectare with biofuels, the demand keeps growin=
g. Then what?"=20

E-mail Rick DelVecchio at [log in to unmask]
---
---
3.The promise and perils of tech transfer
Universities mull industry partnerships
Tom Abate, Chronicle Staff Writer
San Francisco Chronicle, March 7 2007
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=3D/c/a/2007/03/07/BUGCHOGF0D1.DTL
=20
About 25 years ago, Congress encouraged universities to commercialize federa=
lly funded research by allowing both schools and scientists to profit when t=
hey patented discoveries and licensed them to private firms.=20

This week, hundreds of top university officials will gather in San Francisco=
 as the Association of University Technology Managers meets to mull the prom=
ise and perils of this process known as technology transfer.=20

To Bay Area residents, tech transfer is as familiar as the myth of Silicon V=
alley: Take knowledge, add capital and create startups.=20

"This is not only good for the country, this is good for the communities aro=
und the universities,'' said John Fraser, president of the association and d=
irector of tech transfer at Florida State University.=20

The meeting, which starts tonight and runs through Saturday, comes as the co=
ntroversy around university-industry partnerships is flaring up again, thank=
s to the proposed $500 million research partnership between the University o=
f California and British Petroleum to develop fuels.=20

"I am deeply concerned that universities are continuing to run full speed do=
wn a path that is going to destroy the university as an institution for serv=
ing the public good,'' said author Jennifer Washburn, whose book title encap=
sulates her critique -- "University Inc.: The Corporate Corruption of Higher=
 Education."=20

Even academics who favor tech transfer acknowledge that the practice carries=
 perils such as conflicts of interest. Officials from Harvard, Stanford, the=
 University of California and other top schools are issuing a white paper to=
day that boils down to this: Keep doing tech transfer, but be careful.=20

"On the one hand, we are very proud of our contributions to the Bay Area and=
 the larger economy that have resulted from Stanford research,'' said Arthur=
 Bienenstock, Stanford vice provost and dean for research and graduate polic=
y, who co-authored the white paper. "On the other hand, we have to be consta=
ntly vigilant to ensure that the education of students and high-quality rese=
arch remain the goals of the university."=20

Bayh-Dole Act crucial=20

The prod that drove the ivory tower closer to Wall Street was the Bayh-Dole=20=
Act of 1980, which the Economist magazine calls "possibly the most inspired=20=
piece of legislation to be enacted in America over the last half-century."=20

The act said that universities and other federally funded labs owned their d=
iscoveries. The law encouraged researchers to commercialize their work by le=
tting both scientists and their institutions share in any profits.=20

The result has been a burst of academic entrepreneurship that in the Bay Are=
a has spawned not merely companies, but industries. Workstations, scientific=
 visualization, biotechnology, Internet routing and search engines are among=
 the commercial developments that originated with inventions at the region's=
 three premier universities: UC Berkeley, UCSF and Stanford.=20

"People have heard of the knowledge economy -- and that sounds wonderful --=20=
but they don't know what it means in their everyday lives,'' said Fraser, ad=
ding that governors understand that university spin-offs create high-paying=20=
jobs.=20

In a booklet titled "The Better World Report," the association cataloged 100=
 products that grew out of tech transfer, including a blood-clotting agent d=
iscovered at the University of Santa Barbara now carried by Marines in Iraq;=
 drought-resistant grass developed at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln for=
 golf courses and lawns; and a process developed at UC Davis, still undergoi=
ng clinical trials, that may yield a new way to detect breast cancer.=20

But critics warn that the commercial winds blowing over academia have made r=
esearchers leery of sharing research, sparked legal battles over discoveries=
, and rewarded short-term payoffs in institutions that are supposed to take=20=
the long-term view.=20

"The university culture is supposed to be an open culture for sharing cuttin=
g-edge ideas that may not have any short-term utility,'' Washburn said, argu=
ing that science is now following the money.=20

But Regis Kelly, former UCSF executive vice chancellor, challenged "the prem=
ise that the culture of the university has changed."=20

Kelly, who heads a special research institute called QB3 based at the UCSF M=
ission Bay campus, said QB3's 150 researchers were chosen because their stud=
ies were considered commercially relevant. But getting them to pay attention=
 to tech transfer "is like pulling teeth," Kelly said.=20

Deal prompts misgivings=20

The deal that crystallized misgivings about university-industry collaboratio=
ns was the 1998 agreement between UC Berkeley and the Swiss biotechnology fi=
rm Novartis. That $25 million deal, which ended in 2003, was intended to dev=
elop genetically engineered foods. It sparked campus protests and prompted m=
any inquiries, including one commissioned by UC Berkeley's faculty and condu=
cted by independent researchers at the Michigan State University.=20

Michigan State University sociologist Larry Busch, who led that inquiry, sai=
d the same concerns about conflicts of interest and undue influence raised i=
n the Novartis deal have resurfaced with a proposed $500 million collaborati=
on with British Petroleum. Under that proposal, a consortium of universities=
 and research laboratories led by UC Berkeley will help BP develop clean, re=
newable fuels. Busch, without passing judgment on the proposal, said: "The g=
eneral concern I have is that universities over the last 25 years have been=20=
more and more squeezed; state appropriations have not kept up with costs."=20

Washburn, the critic, is blunt: "The problem now is that universities are so=
 desperate for industry money that they are allowing industry to dictate the=
 terms."=20

On the flip side, tech transfer fans complain that universities can take too=
 long to make deals and ask too high a price for their intellectual property=
.=20

"Universities have become, especially from industry's perspective, more diff=
icult to interact with,'' economist Ross DeVol of the Milken Institute told=20=
the Scientist magazine in an article titled, "The Trouble With Tech Transfer=
."=20

Public universities like UC Berkeley, subject to political oversight, are ev=
en more likely to agonize over deals -- before and after they sign on the do=
tted line -- than are the private schools like Stanford that do not face the=
 same outside scrutiny.=20

"Berkeley emerged as a lightning rod in part because it is public," said C.=20=
Judson King, director of the Center for Studies in Higher Education at UC Be=
rkeley.=20

"There is a public university role in helping the state to improve economica=
lly and socially," King said. "If we can do something with the federal gover=
nment or BP, or even with Novartis, that makes the lives of Californians bet=
ter. I think we're fulfilling our mission."=20

But Miguel Altieri, a professor of insect biology at UC Berkeley's College o=
f Natural Resources, said that when universities take big industry grants, i=
t pushes science down certain avenues of inquiry, while fields that can't ma=
ke the case for an industrial payoff are likely to wither, irrespective of m=
erit.=20

"To serve the public that can afford it, that's what these deals do,'' said=20=
Altieri, who studies ecological techniques that are not as marketable as pat=
ented technologies.=20

As the tech-transfer tribe gathers here, amidst complaints they're either wr=
iting deals too quickly or too slowly, it's easy to believe they could do th=
ings better. It's tougher to imagine them not doing such tech transfer at al=
l -- especially now that the practices of university-industry partnerships,=20=
encouraged by the Bayh-Dole Act and exemplified in Silicon Valley, are being=
 emulated by ambitious foreign competitors.=20

"When we developed this legislation, the Japanese and the Germans were eatin=
g our lunch," recalled former Indiana Sen. Birch Bayh, who is scheduled to a=
ddress the association later this week. In a telephone interview from his la=
w offices in Washington, Bayh said the incentives in the act "awakened the A=
merican genius that had been slumbering." But, he cautioned, this is no time=
 to rest on laurels.=20

"Now we have an equally clear threat on the horizon that the Indians and Chi=
nese are following the example we set and trying to make the same connection=
s between industry and research,'' Bayh said. "That's the kind of competitio=
n we have to deal with in this day and age."=20

Chronicle reporter Rick DelVecchio contributed to this report. E-mail Tom Ab=
ate at [log in to unmask]

=20
=20








----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed as [log in to unmask]
To unsubscribe simply click the link below:
http://www.gmwatch.org/unsub.asp?ID=3D1097&sec=3Dpbmhh

This message has been sent because you subscribed to the GM Watch List.
http://www.gmwatch.org

------------------------------------------------------------



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]

Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
 http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp