Knowledge is free (unless you’re a business)
Watching the daily UK government updates during the Covid-19 pandemic, a person from the media asked whether the government was being open enough about the scientific evidence and current research on Covid-19, and questioned whether a more open approach with the public should be taken. This made me think about open knowledge and the benefits that this potentially has for society, especially in such challenging and worrying times. However in my role at the University, in business engagement, the next day I am reminded about the complexities of such openness in collaborations between academic research and business, including commercial competition. There is no doubt that all Universities and businesses across the world who are currently researching vaccines for Covid-19 are doing so for social good and ultimately to save lives. However, it is naïve to think that there is not a commercial race within industry to secure a potential significant cash windfall and increase in their value. And when this involves academic collaboration and knowledge, there is a conflict between open knowledge for all, Universities for social good and commercialisation. Although many people benefit from industry and academic collaborations, and the open knowledge that is generated including the public, policy makers, Covid-19 patients and business.
I have worked in Higher Education for over 10 years, with my current role being in business engagement. I am tasked with managing mutually beneficial relationships and collaborations between academia and industry, and helping to bridge the gap between academic knowledge and potential benefit to the business world. Industrial collaboration often battles with the notion of wholly open access to academic research. In my world, academic knowledge is valuable, has a price and is a powerful tool for negotiation. Knowledge is open but it is not free. This could be seen as contradictory to the concept of open knowledge and the view that Universities exist to create new knowledge for public and societal good. But, if Universities are to generate different sources of income to drive new research and knowledge, there is a general understanding of the need and value in collaborative research with industry. Along with the importance of translation of University research to the real world and industry collaboration being a pathway to impactful case studies.
There are complexities around Industry-Academic collaborative agreements, with industry gaining a perceived value and competitive advantage over competitors whilst utilising state aid academic knowledge which is supposed to be open for all. But if businesses were to collaborate with academia, with the understanding that all research outputs (including Intellectual property) would be open and accessible to all, including their competitors, would businesses continue to actively collaborate with academia? Would pharmaceutical companies work with academics to discover the next cancer drug, if the research and data is then open for all? On the other side of the coin, I agree with Nick Turnbull’s blog post and think that most academics support the idea of open knowledge and want their research to be available to the public and other researchers, to contribute to knowledge in their research field and their professional academic reputation. I also note and agree with Clare Canning’s blog post that a main motivation of academics to undertake research is for the benefit of society, and this is definitely echoed at The University of Manchester, with ‘Social Responsibility’ being one of the University’s three main strategic goals. There is a challenge in developing truly mutually beneficial industry and academic collaborations which balance the valuable access to industry data, systems, and professional expertise when working with industry. With the concept of generating open knowledge, academic freedom, contribution to research for social good and generating research outputs that can be utilised for further research and insight. Appropriate contracts and intellectual property agreements go some way to navigate these issues, where academics are valued, they have the freedom to publish in an open way and utilise the core research from the collaboration to lead on to further research discoveries. If the University does not have the rights to publish in an open way, the work cannot be classed as research for public good. But academic knowledge has a price.
Knowledge is costly
“If you’re good at something, never do it for free”, is a strong statement made in a compelling blog, which caught my attention and made me think about how this relates to my business engagement. Academic research is valuable, completed by highly qualified professionals who are often world leaders in their research field. Everything has a price, and academic knowledge is not an exception to the rule. Generating new knowledge costs money, University resources and academic time. Should businesses have access to this knowledge for free just because of the premise of ‘Open Knowledge’, with the potential for commercial gain for the business? But by charging a price for knowledge, are we challenging the concept of open knowledge, as in doing that we are not making it accessible to all. If businesses want to profit on the back of academic knowledge, should they pay for it?
State Aid rules dictate this to certain extent also, as state funded knowledge generation should not be utilised for direct commercial gain. Would the tax payer be happy to be contributing to the profit margins of a multi-national energy company for example? Probably not. But on the other hand, they might be happier if it was a multi-national drug development company that has developed a new drug in collaboration with a University that will save millions of cancer patients lives.
Knowledge is power
When thinking about the concept of open knowledge in business engagement and back to the Covid-19 pandemic, having already considered knowledge as costly, this also means that knowledge is powerful. It puts academic institutions in a position of power, holding the golden thread to new discoveries and world solutions. In Industry, this means that businesses need academic input, to meet a need that often does not already exist in the business and they are willing to pay for it. So should Universities look to protect this knowledge as much as possible by being less open, and then utilise the funds they receive from industrial collaborations who pay for access, to further research and societal impact?
Universities in the UK have a rich heritage of working with Industry and generally manage to balance answering both business and societal problems, without conflict between the two whilst generating new open knowledge for all. Universities have a responsibility to protect valuable academic expertise and knowledge, and I think ultimately it comes down to responsible industrial collaboration. Which have the right mix of meeting the needs of the business, whilst generating new knowledge that can be shared widely and contribute to research that is accessible and open to all for public benefit.
Knowledge is costly, knowledge is power, knowledge is free (unless you’re a business)
