Description:

The Human Genome Archive Project (HGAP) aimed to preserve the documentary heritage of the UK's contribution to the Human Genome Project (HGP) by using archival theory to develop a suitable methodology for capturing the results of modern, collaborative science. After assessing past projects and different archival theories, the HGAP used an approach based on the theory of documentation strategy to try to capture the records of a scientific project that had an influence beyond the purely scientific sphere. The HGAP was an archival survey that ran for two years. It led to ninety scientists being contacted and has, so far, led to six collections being deposited in the Wellcome Library, with additional collections being deposited in other UK repositories. In applying documentation strategy the HGAP was attempting to move away from traditional archival approaches to science, which has generally focused on retired Nobel Prize winners. It has been partially successful in this aim, having managed to secure collections from people who are not ‘big names’, but who made an important contribution to the HGP. However, the attempt to redress the gender imbalance in scientific collections and to improve record-keeping in scientific organisations has continued to be difficult to achieve. We re-conceptualize the role of science policy makers, envisioning and illustrating their move from being simple investors in scientific projects to entrepreneurs who create the conditions for entrepreneurial experiments and initiate them. We argue that reframing science policy around the notion of conducting entrepreneurial experiments – experiments that increase the diversity of technical, organizational and institutional arrangements in which scientific research is conducted – can provide policy makers with a wider repertoire of effective interventions. To illustrate the power of this approach, we analyse the Human Genome Project (HGP) as a set of successful, entrepreneurial experiments in organizational and institutional innovation. While not designed as such, the HGP was an experiment in funding a science project across a variety of organizational settings, including seven public and one private (Celera) research centers. We assess the major characteristics and differences between these organizational choices, using a mix of qualitative and econometric analyses to examine their impact on scientific progress. The planning and direction of the Human Genome Project show that policy makers can use the levers of entrepreneurial experimentation to transform scientific progress, much as entrepreneurs have transformed economic progress.

In this paper we present a detailed synthesis of the development of the Human Genome Project (HGP) from the mid-1980s through 2000, in order to test our hypothesis of “social bubbles”, which claims that strong social interactions between enthusiastic supporters weave a network of reinforcing feedbacks that lead to widespread endorsement and extraordinary commitment by those involved, beyond what would be rationalized by a standard cost-benefit analysis in the presence of extraordinary uncertainties and risks. The HGP was initiated as a public project funded by government agencies, starting at a moderate pace. The progressive introduction of different actors and the development of various interests catalysed the project, which eventually became eminent both in the public and private sectors. The competition between the public and the private sector played greatly in favour of both: the financial burdens as well as the horizon of the public project were significantly reduced; the private project(s) gained from the hype of the public project, yet had to play an active and collaborative role in order to remain in the game. This is at the core of the social bubble hypothesis. To further our argument, we present quantitative analysis of the development of the biotech sector within the financial stock market. Lastly, we point to the fact that the hypes fuelling the bubble during its growth have not been followed by real tangible outcomes over the short expected time horizons. Indeed, at the time of writing (May, 2011), the consensus of the scientific community is that it will take decades to exploit the fruits of the HGP.

With Regards
Jorifa
Journal Coordinator
Global Journal of Research and Review