Cultivating Innovation: Agroecology, Plant Breeding and the Challenge to Intellectual Property Law

How has the ownership of ideas - 'intellectual property', or IP, as it is now called - shaped the development of science, technology and society? A new, synthetic framework for investigating this vital question was one of the major outcomes of the Leeds-Bristol AHRC 'Owning and Disowning Invention' project. As one of the co-Is on that project, Prof. G. Radick took the lead in developing the framework and also in extending it to reinterpreting historical shifts in the science and practice of plant breeding in Britain in the decades around 1900. It is the aim of this Follow-on Funding project to bring the insights of this research to audiences well placed to benefit from them, in a form that maximises both uptake and utility.

At the core of the synthetic framework is a new distinction between IP claims narrowly construed - the familiar legal instruments of patents, trademarks and so on ('IP-narrow') - and other, broader sorts of ownership claims ('IP-broad'), notably claims to have discovered something first ('priority claims') and, on behalf of a discipline, claims that its theoretical principles explain the success of useful techniques and technologies ('productivity claims'). This recognition of intersecting, interacting narrow and broad concepts of IP - and also the potentially destructive tensions they engender - serves to illuminate a range of issues, from the troublesome classification of scientific work as 'pure' or 'applied' to the nature of the public authority of the sciences in our culture. In his own use of this expanded conception of IP in the technosciences, Radick has suggested that, far more than historians have suspected hitherto, the new Mendelian genetics of the early twentieth century depended on the carefully controlled management of the distribution and reputation of putatively Mendelian, and putatively excellent (but in fact highly problematic) plant varieties.

This Follow-on project will work in collaboration with the Newbury-based Organic Research Centre (ORC) to create public-facing resources on four specific themes:
i) changes in the biological understanding of heredity have coevolved with changes in the economic conditions and marketing of plant varieties. The Owning and Disowning Invention project has opened a rich body of evidence for the further exploration of these problems, which can be used throughout the collaboration with the ORC.
ii) the patent regimes under which scientists in different countries operate is related to the likelihood of their producing successful innovations. Currently, the IP system operating across Europe and North America favours some plant breeding methods over others. Attention to the long-run history of IP and plant breeding can stimulate critical thinking about this status quo.
iii) typically, in the context of plant breeding in particular and the biosciences in general, IP has been understood as only relating to patents. The differences between mainstream plant breeding methods deriving from the prestige science of molecular biology and alternative methods not so derived presents an ideal setting for analysis making use of the expanded conception of IP in order, again, to promote critical thinking and more creative discussion.
iv) the history of plant breeding has been marked by a persistent shift in the location of breeding work, away from the farm and towards the trialling fields of private companies. Understanding these developments requires a focus upon our changed understanding of what plant breeding innovation looks like, and how it might be fostered and protected.

This proposed project is modelled closely on a recently funded, Leeds-based AHRC Follow-on Funding project, 'Innovating in Combat: Telecommunications and Intellectual Property in the First World War', partnered with the Museum of the History of Science at the University of Oxford, and led by Prof. G. Gooday, who was PI on the Owning and Disowning Invention project, and Co-I here.

There are seven principal beneficiaries:

State-funded pre-breeding centres
Organisations funded by government, often with a non-profit status, must nevertheless work within an industry in which the protection of organic innovation is the norm. Indeed, for some, the implementing of intellectual property (IP) legislation is a central component of their research output. The conference and materials produced by this Follow-on Funding project will benefit them by providing a new perspective on the role of IP in their scientific research, offering insights into the long history of state-funded biological research and the ownership of invention.

Private plant breeders
Of all the groups concerned with IP in the biosciences, this group is the most beleaguered. For some time, its members have relied upon a legislative and legalistic defence of their market activities. They will benefit from the opportunity to engage with a wider academic community. The materials made available on the conference website will provide a sound and accessible introduction to the modes of argument and reasoning that exist across the disciplines discussed above, enabling improved articulation of better formulated policies to an increasingly sceptical public.

Undergraduate and incoming A-level students
They will benefit from being able to approach the topics they study from a broader perspective, rather than seeing history and biology as two unrelated ventures. At the same time, they will be given a valuable opportunity to tackle the issues of global poverty and population growth which are set to become particularly acute over the next fifty years.

Archives relating to the history of IP in the biosciences
Some of the most important history-of-biology archives in the UK have yet to have their holdings investigated from the expanded IP perspective. Scientific centres such as the John Innes Centre, the National Institute of Agricultural Botany, and Rothamsted Research, alongside significant university historical collections (particularly those of the longest-standing agricultural science departments, in the University of Cambridge, the University of Leeds and the University of Reading) can benefit from their archives attracting greater attention and being more fully exploited.

Policy makers concerned with innovation and IP
Organisations such as the Intellectual Property Office and other governmental agencies will benefit from being able to construct their current and future policies from a more historically and sociologically informed perspective. As yet there have been few direct efforts to establish pathways to impact between IP researchers and policy makers. This project, concentrating on both the history of innovation and of IP, will create materials of value to large sections of the public policy community.

Agroecological crop breeding advocates
At present these groups have tended to base their arguments on grounds to do with the ethical implications of contemporary industrial practices. This conference will offer them new ways in which to make their case, ones focused much more on the historical development of the changes that have generated anxiety. Emphasising the diversity present in populations over which it is difficult to exercise IP rights can offer a new means of helping these advocates, and the growers they represent, meet their goals.

International agricultural development agencies and NGOs
The granting of IP rights over organic innovations has been one of the most controversial aspects of much of the work conducted in the developing world. Organisations dedicated to the expansion of the agricultural industries in this country will benefit from access to some of the most recent academic research results concerned with the development and consequences of this legislation. Exposing and discussing the problems posed by IP should help improve the effectiveness of these organisations activities.