Report May 2009

Status Report, ICP Project

Biotechnology, Genomics, and Proteomics

General Status

• We have begun to investigate specific cases of commons-based and peer-produced resources in biotech, such as Harvard's onco-mouse
• We have made good progress examining specific cases of biotech narrative, data, and tool producers, coming up with detailed company profiles for the largest firms
• We have completed a more detailed mapping of the narratives and tools industries within biotech
• Have good idea of cost structure, competitive advantage, and attitudes towards openness and enclosure within the field

Work Completed

• https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/Data%2C_narratives_and_tools_produced_by_the_BGP_field#Tools
• http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/Give_an_overall_picture_of_the_BGP_field#What_is_the_cost_structure_of_the_field
• http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/Overview_of_Economics_of_Intellectual_Property_in_BGP#Openness_and_Publication_outputs
• http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/Give_an_overall_picture_of_the_BGP_field#Factors_Impacting_the_amount_and_speed_of_knowledge_flow
• http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/IP_in_BGP#Biotech_And_Software
• https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/edit/IP_Profile_of_Universities_working_in_BGP
• http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/Biotechnology_-_Genomic_and_Proteomics#Visualization
• http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/BGP_Company_Profiles_-_Data#NIH
• https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/IP_Profile_of_Biggest_for-profit_companies_in_BGP

Work Remaining

• Government_in_BGP
• https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/Give_an_overall_picture_of_the_BGP_field#Who_are_the_producers.2C_the_buyers.2C_and_the_users.3F
• https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/Give_an_overall_picture_of_the_BGP_field#What_is_the_structure_of_power_from_the_production_side_and_what_is_the_structure_of_power_in_the_demand_side.3F_.28E.g..2C_who_has_the_power_to_control_production_and_demand.3F_How_is_the_control_distributed.3F.29
• https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/IP_in_BGP
• https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/IP_Profile_of_non-profit_companies_in_BGP
• https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/IP_Profile_of_Universities_working_in_BGP
• https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/Commons_based_cases_in_BGP
• https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/Peer-Production_Business_models_in_BGP
• https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/commonsbasedresearch/Open_Business_models_in_BGP

Research Methodology in use

• Case studies
• Literature review
• Industry analysis
• Business reports and press releases
• University reports and press releases

Problems and Considerations

• How can the next phase of research further develop the quadrants already mapped?
• What information should we aim to obtain through new research methods (e.g., interviews)?
• How much should we focus on the largely defunct data production businesses in biotech?

Next Steps

• Continue to investigate universities, non-profits, associations, and businesses relevant to the field
• Deepen our understanding of how production and demand are controlled
• Provide further documentation for the quadrants as we have identified them so far

Educational Materials

General Status

• Between late April and early May, the EM section of the wiki has enjoyed significant expansion, while undergoing a necessary restructuring
  • The textbook market was chosen as a major focus for the current stage EM research
  • Using the textbook market as a model the Field Research Methodology questions were split between two sectors of EM: The K-12 Level and The Higher Education Level to represent the different actors and market forces that determine the trends toward regulation/deregulation, openness/closedness
  • We now have a much stronger sense of the traditional publishing business strategies as compared with OER and a variety of alternative business models
• The anecdotal mapping of actors and outputs in Higher Ed reported on in the April Report, has become clearer in our quadrant mapping tool
• We are still learning about the K-12 market and need to explore both the market and social barriers that seem to be complicating this sector even more than the Higher Ed sector
• Our extensive bibliography has grown significantly; additional contemporary research and market news continue to become available and prove enlightening
• Our list of useful contacts is still expanding as well; and new interviews have been conducted and continue to be scheduled
• Finally, the Executive Summary on EM was successfully drafted for the report to the Ford Foundation in June 2009

Work Completed

• Our research in these areas is particularly strong:
  • Overall Picture of the EM field / Overall Picture of the EM-K12 field
  • Alternative Business Models in EM / Alternative Business Models in EM-K12
  • IP Profile of Biggest for-profit companies in EM
    • Pearson
    • Cengage Learning
    • McGraw-Hill
    • Wiley
    • Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck
• Our research in these areas is growing:
  • Overview of Economics of Intellectual Property in EM

    Need to expand economic analysis beyond copying issues

  • IP Profile of Universities working in EM
  • Commons-based Cases in EM / Commons-based Cases in EM-K12

    Some examples have been found and profiled briefly but analysis needs to go as deep as for for-profit companies

Work Remaining

• Our research in these areas needs to be expanded:
  • Outputs and Products of the field: Data, narratives and tools produced by the EM field
  • IP in EM / IP in EM-K12

    Still building list of important cases of copyright and patents

  • Competitive advantages in EM / Competitive advantages in EM-K12

    Some of this material can be extracted from other sections of the wiki

  • IP Profile of non-profit companies in EM
  • IP Profile of Associations in EM / IP Profile of Associations in EM-K12

    Need to expand profiles of each associations advocacy for IP and particular business practicies

  • IP Profile of Biggest for-profit companies in EM-K12
    • McGraw-Hill (Higher Ed sector profile is strong)
    • Pearson (Higher Ed sector profile is strong)
    • Houghton Mifflin / Harcourt Education
    • Reed Elsevier

Research Methodology in use

• Literature review (ongoing)
• Business School Cases review (awaiting reply from HBS staff)
• Media review: Area Specific Blogs and News (ongoing)
• Market databases and reports review
  • MarketResearch.com has been a key resource for K-12 and College market analysis
  • The ORBIS database has been useful in profiling individual companies
• Interviews, see Contacts for EM
  • Nicole Allen, Campaign Director for Make Textbooks Affordable - followed up in May 2009
  • Ahrash Bissell, Executive Director of ccLearn - interviewed by e-mail in May 2009
  • Joel Thierstein, Executive Director Connexions - contact in April 2009

Problems and Considerations

• Having focused mainly on textbooks thus far, how broad do we extend our research?
  • Supplementary materials often blur into the textbook market through the business strategy of bundling (including educational software)
• Arguments criticizing the high cost of textbooks in the US often point toward lower prices in foreign markets (the UK particularly), is there a place for a comparative study of reasons for lower prices for identical textbooks and greater price elasticity of those markets?
• Splitting The K-12 Level and The Higher Education Level has helped analysis and organization, however we find a number of orphaned, duplicated research question-based pages; there is a need to consolidate relevant information for each sub-sector and glean superfluous pages/questions.
  • i.e.: which are valid as having specific purposes for K-12 versus Higher Education concerns?: Overview of Economics of Intellectual Property in EM-K12, Data, narratives and tools produced by the EM-K12 field, IP in EM-K12, IP Profile of Universities working in EM-K12

Next Steps

• Continue literature review
  • Expand policy analysis
  • Keep abreast of latest news and trends on OER and company blogs
• Need to better understand both the economic/political and various social barriers to innovation
  • Do professors trust certain forms of EM over others, affecting OER adoption?
  • Do state's require mandates like California's to legitimize OER and peer produced EM at the K-12 level?
• Conduct a survey of K-12 teachers and higher education professors to look at social barriers
• Use California as a potential paradigmatic case in public policy pressure on business trends
• Expand descriptive research exercise to the remainder of the EM field, as defined:
  • More on higher education upper-level course EM, including University Press practices
  • More on supplementary materials (digital and non-digital)
  • Study educational software as market vs. sub-market