26 research outputs found
Many are called, few are chosen: The role of science in drug development decisions
No full textPharmaceutical firms are extremely selective in deciding which patented drug candidates are taken up into clinical development, given the high costs and risks involved. We argue that the scientific base of drug candidates, and who was responsible for that scientific research, are key antecedents of take-up into clinical trials and whether the patent owner ('internal take-up') or another firm ('external take-up') leads the clinical development effort. We hypothesize that patented drug candidates that refer to scientific research are more likely to be taken up in development, and that in-house conducted scientific research is predominantly associated with internal take-up due to the ease of knowledge transfer within the firm. Examining 18,360 drug candidates patented by 136 pharmaceutical firms we find support for these hypotheses. In addition, drug candidates referring to in-house scientific research exhibit a higher probability of eventual drug development success. Our findings underline the importance of a 'rational drug design' approach that explicitly builds on scientific research. The benefits of internal scientific research in clinical development highlight the potential downside of pervasive organizational specialization in the life sciences in either scientific research or clinical development.sponsorship: AcknowledgementsThe authors received financial support from the Research Foundation Flanders grant No. G07301N and 11ZZM17N. (Research Foundation Flanders|G07301N, Research Foundation Flanders|11ZZM17N)status: Published onlin
MSI Discussion Paper MSI_2112
No full textWhile their expertise and scientific excellence make academic star scientists attractive collaboration partners for firms, this study indicates that firms face difficulties in capturing value from collaborations with academic stars. Stars are time constrained, may be less committed to
commercialization, and can be a source of undesired knowledge spillovers to other firms. The purpose of this study is to recognize the contingencies under which collaboration with star scientists is positively associated with a firm’s ability to produce valuable patents (invention
performance). We analyze a panel dataset on the collaborations in basic research(publication data) and invention performance (patent output) of 60 prominent pharmaceutical firms. We find that basic research collaboration with academic stars is on average not associated with a performance premium above the overall positive influence of collaborating with academia. We only observe this premium if the star scientist abstains from simultaneous collaboration with other firms
(‘dedication’) and extend her collaboration with the firm to involvenot only basic but also applied research (‘translation’). Extending prior work that has focused on corporate star scientists, we find that if the collaboration involves an internal firm star scientist, a translational contribution of the
academic star is no longer a prerequisite, and may even be detrimental to inventive performance. Our findings inform the literatures on industry-science links and firms’ (scientific) absorptive capacity by revealing the crucial contingencies for firms to benefit from partnering with the best
and brightest among academic scientists.
Practitioner Points:
- Intuitively we may expect that collaborating with the very top among academics benefits firms, yet collaborating with these academic star scientists also entails important challenges.
- Organizations seeking to benefit from the extraordinary expertise of academic star scientists should take into account two important conditions:
o The top academic should be a dedicated collaboration partner, and avoid simultaneous collaboration with other firms.
o The top academic should not only be involved in basic research but also in applied research collaboration with the firm, enhancing her ability to assist the firm in the translation of research into a marketable product.
- When the firm also employs a star scientist who is engaged in the collaborative research with an academic star scientist, the translation of the joint research is better performed by the internally employed star scientists instead of the academic star scientist.status: Publishe
Of good use or serious pleasure : Vitruvius Britannicus and early eighteenth century architectural discourse
No full textThe central thesis of this work is that Colen Campbell's
three volume Vitruvius Britannicus (1715-25) is not, as it has been frequently seen, a Palladian manifesto designed to change architectural practice in England (and in the process Campbell's own fortunes as an architect), but rather a publication celebrating architectural achievements, consumed by polite society.
The twentieth century view of Vitruvius Britannicus, stems from John Surnmerson's seminal work, Architecture in Britain 1530-1830. It posits Vitruvius Britannicus as a stylistic manifesto that served the particular interests of Colen Campbell and his associates as advocates of and builders in the Palladian style, and foregrounds the idea of the author. This view has been incorporated almost unquestioningly into subsequent interpretations not least
because it conforms to a powerful 'Whig' interpretation of history emphasising periodisation, style, revolution, development, and the search for origins. In contrast I argue that Vitruvius Britannicus met the demands of a market interested in architecture as a topic of polite
conversation. The subscription lists for Vitruvius Britannicus show that it was neither priced to be, nor received as, a builder's manual, nor was it a stylistic manifesto. Rather, it was a celebration of contemporary British architecture that gave pleasure and some instruction to polite society. Drawing on disciplines outside of art and architectural history, I consider
Vitruvius Britannicus as an object of consumption offering an alternative reading of the publication that highlights a number of important avenues for further research.
Chapter 1 positions the thesis within critiques of stylistic history. Chapter 2 briefly introduces
some historiographic issues, and then considers the contents and style of the publication, and
the nature of its subscribers. This highlights issues neglected in histories of Vilruvius Britannicus and challenges many of the commonly held conceptions of the publication. These conceptions are then examined in Chapter 3 in the light of evidence and issues raised in the
previous chapter. Chapter 4 considers other architectural and illustrated books and positions Campbell's work within wider publishing paradigms such as cartography and a literature of tourism. Chapter 5 outlines some of the intellectual ideas that influenced the way in which
publications such as Vitruvius Britannicus were understood. This is developed in Chapter 6 which considers the way in which Vitruvius Britannicus functioned within a contemporary
architectural discourse that codified the group identity of a polite elite
Colen Campbell and the Preparatory Drawings for Vitruvius Britannicus
No full textColen Campbell (c.1676-1729) is remembered for his contribution to English architecture in the early eighteenth century, and most notably for his authorship of three volumes of the architectural book Vitruvius Britannicus. In recent interpretations, Campbell's part in this venture has been called into question, assigning him the role of a mere draughtsman, only promoted to author due to circumstantial pressures.
This thesis aims to contribute to the existing scholarly work by taking into consideration the drawings for the production of Vitruvius Britannicus, which have hitherto remained understudied. These drawings will be used as the basis for my investigation of the production of Vitruvius Britannicus. I also supply the first catalogue raisonné of these drawings.
Across five chapters, I trace the production of Vitruvius Britannicus in the order in which it occurred. This chronology is reflected in the structure of my thesis. Chapter I sets out the provenance of the Campbell drawings and investigates their purpose and technique, both in the
categories of drawing for building and drawing for engraving. Chapter II presents the origins of the designs included by Campbell in Vitruvius Britannicus. Chapter III investigates possible origins of the book in Scotland, by looking at three disparate individuals who may have
provided Campbell with graphic material or skills needed for the production. In addition, visual material Campbell certainly utilised when in London is analysed. Chapter IV considers the accuracy of the source material which Campbell adopted, drawing on specific remaining examples. Chapter V deals with the final stage of production, the transformation of the drawings to engravings. The engraver for Vitruvius Britannicus, Henry Hulsbergh, is investigated, as is
another, unidentified, engraver who assisted in the production of volume I.
I present a challenge to the recent interpretations of Vitruvius Britannicus, and add to the existing understanding of the role which Campbell played in the production. I develop a hitherto unexplored interpretation of the genesis of the book, emphasising Campbell's own Scottish origins, and promote the view that he was instrumental in the conceptualisation of its production from the earliest stages
Multinationals or cooperatives: does it matter to farmers? A case study of the Indian dairy sector.
No full textHeterogeneidade Noética e as coisas políticas
No full textThe interpretation of Strauss's work is not easy and continues to be the subject of intense debate. A first aspect of the controversy is whether his work properly contains a philosophical or political theory. Many scholars, including the author himself, emphasize his “skepticism”, a skepticism that would not be radical, but “zetetic”.A second point of controversy is whether his work is primarily historical in nature or whether there is, behind the historical studies, a philosophical or political vision of his own. Scholars have some difficulty in summarizing the content of Strauss's teaching, which is always wrapped in historical clothing. A third point of controversy is the nature of Strauss's perspective: the authors are divided between those who emphasize that it is an apology for philosophy and those who believe that it contains a certain vision of politics. What is the author's intention? We suggest an interpretation according to which the author wishes to recover the classical tradition and defends natural right in terms of a hierarchy of goods. Therefore, the pedagogical presentation that leads Strauss to prefer to let the reader think for himself should not be an insurmountable obstacle to understanding his ideas.A interpretação da obra de Strauss não é fácil e continua a ser objeto de intenso debate. Um primeiro aspeto da controvérsia é se a sua obra contém propriamente uma teoria filosófica ou política. Muitos estudiosos, incluindo o próprio autor, sublinham o seu «ceticismo», um ceticismo que não seria radical, mas «zetético». Um segundo ponto de controvérsia é se a sua obra tem sobretudo uma natureza histórica ou se existe, por detrás dos estudos históricos, uma visão filosófica ou política própria. Os estudiosos têm alguma dificuldade em sumariar o conteúdo do ensinamento de Strauss, que está sempre envolvido numa roupagem histórica. Um terceiro ponto de controvérsia é a natureza da perspetiva de Strauss: os autores dividem-se entre os que sublinham que é uma apologia da filosofia e os que julgam que contém uma certa visão da política. Qual é a intenção do autor? Propomos uma interpretação segundo a qual o autor deseja recuperar a tradição clássica e faz uma defesa do direito natural em termos de uma hierarquia de bens. Portanto, o cuidado pedagógico que leva a que Strauss prefira deixar o leitor pensar por si mesmo não deveria ser um obstáculo insuperável à compreensão das suas ideias
Platão, dramaturgo e dramatis personae Hípias, defensor da poesia e da "cultura geral" contra as falácias de Sócrates
No full textHippiasMinor is a Platonic dialogue, whose authenticity was often questioned because Socrates appears in it as an intelligent but unscrupulous man, who defends morally repulsive theses, while his main interlocutor, Hippias, whoin other texts is presented as a sophist, that teaches for money, tries to defend the ethical position usually attributed to Plato’s dear master. In this paper we present a brief review of current academic literature on the, so called, "mouthpiece theory". We question the assumption that Socrates is only and always Plato’s voice in his dialogues, differentiating dramatis personaestatements fromthe message the author, as "dramatist", tries to convey in this text, whose subject are the lessons of Homer\u27sheroic poetry. This paper includes an interpretative essay based on a new Portuguese translation from the dialogue, and explores the ironic dimension of the conversation between Socrates and Hippias, the apologist of poetry against the fallacies that lead to famous Socratic paradoxes.O HípiasMenor é um diálogo platónico cuja autenticidade foi posta em causa porque Sócrates aparece nele como um homem habilidoso e sem escrúpulos que defende teses moralmente repugnantes, enquanto oseu interlocutor, Hípias, que em outros textos é apresentado como um sofista, tenta sem sucesso defender a posição ética que costuma caber ao mestre de Platão. Neste artigo faz-se uma breve revisão da literatura sobre a questão de quem é o "porta-voz"de Platão nos seus diálogos, procurando distinguir o que afirmam os personagens dramáticos da mensagem que o autor, como "dramaturgo", comunica no diálogo, cujo tema é o papel pedagógico da poesia heróica de Homero. O texto inclui um ensaio interpretativo baseado numa nova tradução para português deste diálogoe explora a dimensão irónica da conversa entre Sócrates e Hípias, o defensor da poesia, que é manipulado com falácias que conduzem aos famosos paradoxos socráticos
Annapolis’ conferences on natural right: a new text by Leo Strauss
No full textO manuscrito “Direito Natural” é um texto inédito de Leo Strauss. O texto destinava-
-se a ser lido em duas conferências em Annapolis, em 1946, e precede as Walgreen
Lectures com as quais ele se apresentou à Universidade de Chicago, a fonte do livro
Natural right and history. O texto destinado à comunicação oral é muito mais claro
do que é usual no autor sobre a sua própria posição acerca da permanência do
direito natural, que está na origem de recentes controvérsias académicas.The typescript “Natural Right” is an unpublished text of Leo Strauss. The text was
intended to be read at two conferences in Annapolis in 1946, and precedes the Walgreen
Lectures with which he presented himself at the University of Chicago, the
origin of Natural Right and History. The text for the oral communication is much
clearer than is usual with the author about his own position on the permanence of
natural right.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio
Reaching for the stars: The contingent performance effects of basic research collaboration between firms and university star scientists
No full text
