Is Italian science declining?

The paper analyses the Italian contribution to the world scientific production, its relative citation impact, its international collaborations and scientific productivity compared with the most productive EU countries over the period 1980–2009. It shows that despite the fact that the level of funding has been dramatically low during the past decades, Italian science has been able to increase its performance up to 2007. Italian science is a “cathedral in the desert”. However, a recent reduction in the level of scientific production, the lagging behind in international scientific collaboration (highly correlated with the relative citation impact) and the great heterogeneity of researchers’ productivity (absence of correlation of number of researchers with quality and quantity of scientific production) may mark the start of a decline of Italian science. The paper concludes that the increased funding must go hand-in-hand with reform of autonomy and governance and calling for a sound system of internal quality control and performance enhancement.     

Are intellectual property rights compatible with Rawlsian principles of justice?

This paper argues that intellectual property rights are incompatible with Rawls’s principles of justice. This conclusion is based upon an analysis of the social stratification that emerges as a result of the patent mechanism which defines a marginalized group and ensure that its members remain alienated from the rights, benefits, and freedoms afforded by the patent product. This stratification is further complicated, so I argue, by the copyright mechanism that restricts and redistributes those rights already distributed by means of the patent mechanism. I argue that the positions of privilege established through both the patent and the copyright mechanisms are positions that do not “allow the most extensive liberty compatible with a like liberty for all.” They do not “benefit the least advantaged.” Nor are they “open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity.” In making this argument I critically assess the utilitarian defense of intellectual property rights and find it insufficient to respond to the injustices manifest in our current arrangement for the protection of intellectual property rights.     

Ethical control of innovation in a globalized and liberal world: Is good science still science?

The independence of science was long seen as of prime importance. This position has become less common today. The perception of scientific research as a public service has led to the opinion that it must be accountable to citizens and produce knowledge and innovation that meet their expectations. Numerous authors have voiced the need for anticipatory ethical control of innovation focusing on the scientific research process. This control is considered as the must-have guarantee for “good science.” The current article attempts to trace the ideological origins of the ethical control of innovation, examines its effectiveness against the challenge of globalization and technology-derived major threats and its compatibility with scientific methodology. It also suggests ways to both regulate the innovation process and preserve the independence of science. On the whole, we conclude that truly effective ethical regulation of innovation, i.e. one that protects the greatest number from its adverse effects, is achieved first and foremost by questioning our liberal economic model and the place given to science in our societies.     

Does science education need the history of science?

This essay argues that science education can gain from close engagement with the history of science both in the training of prospective vocational scientists and in educating the broader public about the nature of science. First it shows how historicizing science in the classroom can improve the pedagogical experience of science students and might even help them turn into more effective professional practitioners of science. Then it examines how historians of science can support the scientific education of the general public at a time when debates over "intelligent design" are raising major questions over the kind of science that ought to be available to children in their school curricula. It concludes by considering further work that might be undertaken to show how history of science could be of more general educational interest and utility, well beyond the closed academic domains in which historians of science typically operate.     

Is commercialization good or bad for science? Individual-level evidence from the Max Planck Society

Based on new data, this paper studies the invention disclosure, licensing, and spin-off activities of Max Planck Institute directors over the time period 1985-2004, analyzing their effects on the scientists’ subsequent publication and citation records. Consistent with prior findings, inventing does not adversely affect research output. Mixed results are obtained with regard to commercialization activities. The analysis suggests qualifications to earlier explanations of positive relationships between inventing and publishing.     

Is there something wrong with intellectual capital management models?

During the recent years the intellectual capital (IC) literature has produced tens of models to support the various IC management (ICM) activities, such as identification, measurement, valuation, acquisition and reporting IC. However, the practice of applying these models seems to be a fairly new issue in many organisations. The gap between research and practice (i.e. not many organisations seem to be applying ICM models) may result from several issues. This paper approaches the gap from two perspectives. First, the paper questions the applicability of ICM models. Second, although IC as a research theme is quite immature many management models that also include some of the aspects of IC have been developed within general management disciplines. Thus, this study examines whether traditional management models may also be suitable for ICM. The two questions are answered by using four single cases in which action research projects were carried out.     

The foundations of Israel’s ongoing love affair with science

During the last two decades, the history of science in Israel has attracted much scholarly attention. Historians of science, science and technology studies (STS) scholars, and Middle East/Israel studies experts have focused on specific scientific disciplines or periods, analyzing the uniqueness of science and technology in Israel. This article explores what characterized Israel’s scientific activity precisely at the time of the state’s birth, and examine how the perception of science as key to Israel’s survival was constructed and reinforced in that formative phase. The focus here is on the natural sciences, as the perception of the natural sciences’ importance and their contribution to building the state and its security differed essentially from that of other disciplines. As this article demonstrates, the challenges that the natural sciences faced during Israel’s War of Independence were far more difficult than those faced by the social sciences and the humanities. This study analyzes scientific activity that took place in one single year, beginning with the establishment of the Science Corps in March 1948, two months before Israel’s declaring independence, until the end of its War of Independence in February 1949. As this study shows, both the war effort and the civilian activities strongly influenced scientific research and implementation in the nascent state.     

History of mathematics and history of science reunited?

For some years now, the history of modern mathematics and the history of modern science have developed independently. A step toward a reunification that would benefit both disciplines could come about through a revived appreciation of mathematical practice. Detailed studies of what mathematicians actually do, whether local or broadly based, have often led in recent work to examinations of the social, cultural, and national contexts, and more can be done. Another recent approach toward a historical understanding of the abstractness of modern mathematics has been to see it as a species of modernism, and this thesis will be tested by the raft of works on the history of modern applied mathematics currently under way.     

How can history of science matter to scientists?

History of science has developed into a methodologically diverse discipline, adding greatly to our understanding of the interplay between science, society, and culture. Along the way, one original impetus for the then newly emerging discipline--what George Sarton called the perspective "from the point of view of the scientist"--dropped out of fashion. This essay shows, by means of several examples, that reclaiming this interaction between science and history of science yields interesting perspectives and new insights for both science and history of science. The authors consequently suggest that historians of science also adopt this perspective as part of their methodological repertoire.