Anda di halaman 1dari 7

pelaksanaan dan keberlanjutan sumber kerangka needs for various purposes.

This is in sharp contrast

bioteknologi pertanian terbuka ini. to proprietary vendors that are globally profit-
5.2.2. Implikasi kebijakan untuk open source oriented with little connection to local needs [94].
Therefore, the government's policy should
recognise the importance of FOSS and address the Penyediaan pelatihan yang memadai. issues concerning the provision of right resources
Pelatihan adalah tanda hall manajemen yang efektif and allocation of budget for the development of
dan baik. Pengembangan open source open source project.
membutuhkan pelatihan yang memadai dalam Collaboration and network expansion.
berbagai aspek FOSS untuk memfasilitasi
Collaborative data sharing should be encouraged
pengenalan dan pertumbuhan bioteknologi open
among the academic communities particularly in
source di negara berkembang. Hal ini diperlukan
untuk membangun dukungan dan pelatihan teknis developed countries, as this will provide
kebijakan untuk pengembangan open source, opportunities for researchers in developing
countries to benefit. Most researchers in developing
khususnya di informasi, dan teknologi komunikasi
countries depend on scientific data and publication
(ICT). Kebijakan TIK harus menjadi bagian dari
from developed countries to advance research in
proses dan bagian dari apa yang dibutuhkan di
their areas. For example, developing countries have
negara-negara berkembang untuk mempromosikan
dan mendukung open source. Kebijakan yang created successful science policies through a two-
dijalankan harus mendukung pendidikan dan way contribution of international scientific
exchange [95]. Therefore, collaborative data
pelatihan pada tingkat yang berbeda. Karena
sharing, through open source is one approach to
rendahnya tingkat melek ICT di negara-negara
encourage scientific networking between scientists
berkembang, strategi atau kebijakan yang
dirancang untuk pelatihan harus mencerminkan in developed and developing countries. Moreover,
kemampuan dasar (misalnya pemahaman dasar collaboration based on common tools where
individual sharing of discoveries in biological
dalam IT) dan metodologi user-friendly dalam
innovation could be encouraged between
bahasa komunikasi bagi masyarakat miskin
universities and multina- tionals, paving the way
pedesaan. Misalnya, perangkat lunak FOSS
for open source biotechnology.
digunakan untuk AgriBazaar dalam
menghubungkan petani dan pembeli di Malaysia Effective policy and legislation. The
dirancang untuk melayani success of open source development requires that
effective policy and legislation be developed and
Gambar. 2. Open source bioteknologi pertanian R
implemented in developing countries. Given the
& D kerangka.
importance of political support, it can facilitate
Masyarakat dalam berbagai bahasa daerah [10]. processes and increase the adoption rate if there is a
Hal ini dapat memfasilitasi penerimaan dan high level of commitment. Therefore, government
partisipasi antara kelompok geted tar- di tingkat should formulate policies that encourage open
akar rumput. Selain itu, pelatihan harus diberikan source development and the policy should focus on
secara teratur dalam perjalanan proses evaluasi dan the following areas:
adaptasi. Jika diperlukan, pelatihan kembali harus
Support of ICT in education and the government
disediakan untuk keberlanjutan dan
kesinambungan. Penyediaan sumber daya yang memadai at all levels; Enabling an environment for the
accessibility of ICT by
dan fasilitas. Mengingat pentingnya bioteknologi
open source untuk kepentingan masyarakat, sumber citizens, business and the government;
daya yang memadai akan harus berkomitmen untuk AA Adenle et al. / Technology in Society 34 (2012)
mendukung pengembangan open source di negara 256269 266
berkembang. Terlepas dari pendidikan dan
pelatihan, fasilitas dasar seperti telekomunikasi dan Providing local professionals with adequate
listrik yang akan memfasilitasi penerapan open training and acquiring skills in relevant software
source di negara-negara berkembang harus development to remain viable in a competitive
disediakan. Dalam semua ini, open source akan market; Identifying and prioritization areas of need
memerlukan investasi keuangan yang besar dari such as local
para pemerintah. Meskipun demikian, biaya software development and IT industries;
penyediaan open source bisa relatif murah untuk Adopting open standards for storage and
software proprietary. For example, the migration of preservation of
Ugandan University to open source resulted in
significant cost reduction [91]. Other examples data.
[92,93] similarly show that open source is In addition, governments should work in
relatively inex- pensive and easily adapted to local conjunction with international agencies such as
CBD, TRIPS and UPOV to create a friendly IPRs recommendations to foster open source
system that will encourage open source development in agriculture.
development for innovative technologies in devel- The adequate provision of basic infrastructure
oping countries. This can decentralize patented
and financial resources will play a vital role in the
technologies and make them freely accessible to
adoption of open source biotechnology. Education
researchers in devel- oping countries, particularly
forms the basis through which open source
in agriculture biotechnology.
development can be promoted among the citizens, Flexible licencing policies. Open source therefore quality education on ICT programs
licencing policy should be flexible enough to allow should be provided to encourage wide participa-
interested party to use innovation under the tion from the grass-root levels. The lack of political
freedom of choice. For example, it should be support due to a low level of awareness among the
practiced under the four freedoms of choice: 1) government officials on open source in developing
Access without restriction; 2) Availability of source countries can slow down open source development.
code; 3) Improve and add to the source code; 4) Therefore, a concerted effort should be made to
Redistribute the source code and software. The educate and encourage govern- ment officials in all
availability of genomic data- bases through relevant institutions. Given the impact of IPRs in
bioinformatics provides flexibility for the terms creating a research environment for biotechnology,
chosen by the users. By contrast, biotechnology the IPRs system must be designed in a research-
research does not usually provide an avenue for friendly way, particularly with regards to protection
freedom of choice. Also, the current licencing under law that will facilitate commercialization and
policy of BiOS does not encourage freedom of technology transfer to developing countries. Added
choice due to the grant back mecha- nism [89]. to this, institutional and legal frameworks must be
BiOs allows users to refrain from the grant back established and encouraged to protect IPRs in
improvement if kept as trade secrets where it developing countries so as to enhance the economic
prevents their improvement from being disclosed to benefit of open source biotechnology products.
another users. A recent report emphasises the fact
While this article has reviewed the existing
that an enhanced open source model through a
literature with relevant information about the
trade secret could offer a flexible policy agreement
adoption of open source biotechnology in
as proposed for the HapMap project [96]. In agricultural practices, not many initiatives or
addition, a business-friendly licencing policy that organisations are advocating for open source
will maxi- mize the growth potential of open source
development for innovations that can enhance
biotechnology should be encouraged among the
sustainable agricultural development. More effort is
users. Encouraging flexible licencing policies under
required from a variety of actors including the
the open source approach could lead to the rapid
private sector, individuals, national governments
development of research tools and increased and international agencies to support and promote
economic benefits for users in developing open source biotechnology for sustainable
agricultural development in developing coun- tries.
6. Conclusion Moreover, a lot of work needs to be done in terms
The open source paradigm as applied to of further case study analysis to more fully assess
agricultural practices has the potential to the major areas where open source is being
adopted, as well as the benefits and the constraints
compensate farmers for contributing to the growth
that are associated in open source adoption in
of plant resources, and may serve as information
developing countries.
resources for farming communities [87]. While this
article discusses the complexity of IPRs in Finally, if the introduction of open source
agricultural biotechnology, it also mentions the biotech- nology is to contribute to sustainable
potential benefit and impact of open source in agriculture in developing countries, enabling
agricultural and biotechnology development. environments must be put in place that include
Addressing the three research questions posed in a policy formulation and imple- mentation for
systematic way provided insight into the establishing, supporting and providing the capacity
development of open source biotechnology in building and resources required to develop open
devel- oping countries. Most importantly, the source. Moreover, the attention and focus of open
analysis of specific case studies and initiatives led source development should not be restricted to one
to the proposal of an Open Source Biotechnology area but it should address other needs such as
Framework (OSBF) that can facilitate development health and the envi- ronment. The opportunities
of biotechnology R&D, exchange of skills and offered by open source biotechnology can make a
ideas and collaboration among agricultural research significant impact on sustain- able agricultural
insti- tutes between different countries as well as development through free access to modern
policy biotechnology techniques. Open source biotech-
nology is making slow but steady progress in
agriculture, but many issues will have to be research methods series. 3rd ed., vol. 5. Sage
addressed to enjoy the benefits of this new Publications; 2003. [12] Denzin N. Sociological
innovation in developing countries. This article has methods: a sourcebook. Aldine Transaction;
raised important concerns that will lead to further
2006. [13] Stallman R. Free software, free
debates among stakeholders including scientists
society. Boston, MA: GNU Press;
and policymakers.
2002. [14] Voas J, Miller KW, Costello T. Free
Acknowledgement and open source software. IT
The first two authors would like to acknowledge
Professional 2010;12(6):146. [15] Raymond
the support of Japan Society for the Promotion of
E. The cathedral and the bazaar: musings on linux
Science. The and open source by an accidental revolutionary.
AA Adenle et al. / Technology in Society 34 (2012) Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly Media; 1999. [16] Weber
256269 267 S. The success of open source. Cambridge MA:
authors are grateful to the three anonymous
reviewers for their comments on the article. University Press; 2004. [17] Cassier M. New
Comments and suggestions from the editor, Charla enclosures and the creation of new common
Griffy-Brown, in improving the quality of the rights in the genome and in software.
manuscript are gratefully acknowledged. Contemporary European History 2006;15(2):255
71. [18] Hope J. Open source licensing. In:
Krattiger A, Mahoney RT, Nelson L, et al., editors.
[1] Intellectual property management in health and
WorldBanK.Worlddevelopmentreport,agriculturefo agricultural innovation. A handbook of best
rdevelopment. Washington, DC: Office of the practices. Oxford, UK/Davis, USA: MIHR/PIPRA;
Publisher, the World Bank; 2008. [2] James C. 2007. [19] FSF. Free Software Foundation. Free
Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops. software definition, http://
The International Service for the Acquisition of; 2008.
Agri-biotech Applica- tions (ISAAA); 2012. Brief
[20] Hope J. The open source revolution and
43. [3] Adenle AA. Global capture of crop
biotechnology in developing world over a decade. biotechnology. Cambridge,
Journal of Genetic Engineering and Biotech- MA: Harvard University Press; 2008. [21]
nology 2011;9(2):8395. [4] Hemphill TA. Wake S, Ridley RG. Virtual drug discovery and
Preemptive patenting, human genomics and the US development for neglected diseases through public-
biotechnology sector: balancing intellectual private partnerships. Nature Review 2003:919. [22]
property rights with societal welfare. Technology OBF. Open Bioinformatics Foundation.
in Society 2003;25:33749. [5] Frisio DG, Ferrazzi ( [23] CAMBIA. Center for the
G, Ventura V, Vigani M. Public vs. private Application of Molecular Biology to Inter- national
agbiotech research in the United States and Agriculture,
European Union, 2002 2009. AgBioForum
2010;13(4):33342. [6] Gay J, Lessig L. Free 3692/2518.html; 1991. [24] Douthwaite B.
software, free society: selected essays of Richard Enabling innovation: a practical guide to
M. Stallman. Boston, MA: GNU Press, understanding fsfs/rms-
and fostering technical change. Boston, MA:
essays.pdf; 2002 [accessed April 2012]. [7] BiOS.
Zed Books; 2002. [25] Srinivas K. The case for
Biological innovation for open society, biolinuxes: and other pro-commons innovations. In: Vasudevan R, Sundaram R, Bagchi J, Narula M,
daisy/bios/2518.html; 2005. [8] Thorisson GA, Lovink G, Sengupta S, editors. Sarai reader 2002:
Smith AV, Krishnan L, Stein LD. The international the cities of everyday life. New Delhi: Center for
HapMap project web site. Genome Research the Study of Developing Socities; 2002. p. 3218.
2005. [9] Sowe SK. Free and open source software [26] Hope J. Open source biotechnology. A thesis
submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at
sustainability and innovation: lessons learnt from
The Australian National University. Available at:
Sub-Saharan African. In: Interna- tional conference
on ICT for Africa, Nigeria, March 2326, 2011;
OpenSourceBiotechnology27July2005.pdf. 2004.
2011. p. 199203. [10] Hoe NS. Breaking barriers:
the potential of free and open source software for [27] Blakeney M. Recent development in
sustainable human development; a compilation of intellectual property and power in the private sector
case studies from across the world. UNDP-APDIP; related to food and agriculture. Food Policy
2006. [11] Yin RK. Case study research: design 2011;36(Suppl. 1):S10913. Elsevier Ltd. [28]
and methods. In: Applied social Wright BD, Pardey PG, Koo B. Agricultural
innovation: investments and incentives. In:
Evenson R, Pingali P, editors. Handbook of agri- M. Genentech and the stolen gene: patent law and
cultural economics, vol. 3; 2007. p. 25378. [29] pioneer
Safrin S. Treaties in collision? The biosafety inventions. Bio-Science Law Review
protocol and the world trade organization
2003;5(6):198211. [44] Eisenberg RS. Why the
agreements. The American Journal of Interna-
gene patenting controversy persists.
tional Law 2002;96:22. [30] Moschini GC.
Intellectual property rights and the world trade Academic Medicine 2002;77(12):13817. [45]
organization: retrospect and prospects, Arora A, Merges P. Specialised supply firms,
http://www.card.iastate. property rights and firm boundaries. Industrial and
edu/faculty/profiles/giancarlo_moschini/moschini- Corporate Change 2004;13: 45175. [46] Bureth A,
trips-preprint- oct-04.pdf; 2012 [accessed Penin J, Wolff S. Entrepreneurship in
28.05.2012]. [31] Van Overwalle G. Patent biotechnology: the case of four start-ups in the
protection for plants. A comparison of American upper-Rhine biovalley. Working paper BETA,
and European approaches. The Journal of Law and no.2006-21; 2006. [47] David PA. Can 'open
Tech- nology 1999;39:14394. [32] Bocci R. Seed science' be protected from the evolving regime of
legislation and agrobiodiversity: conservation intellectual property rights protections. Journal of
varie- ties. Journal of Agriculture and Environment Theoretical and Institutional Economics
for International Development 2009;103:3149. 2004;160:126. [48] Fisher WM. The impact of
[33] Pardey PG, Alston JM, Chan-Kang C, Castello terminator gene technologies on developing
MagaIhaes E, Vosti SA. Assessing and attributing countries. Report to the United Kingdom
the benefits from varietal improvement research in department for international development.
Brazil. IFPRI Research Report. No. 136. December.
Washington, DC: International Food Policy edu/faculty/tfisher/terminator.html [accessed April
Research Insitutute; 2004. [34] Cooper HD. The 1999]. [49] ETCGroup. Ban terminator before it's
international treaty on plant genetic resources for too late. ETC News Release 5
food and agriculture. Review of European April. 2002. [50] Jefferson R. Transcending
Community & Interna- tional Environmental Law transgenics are there 'babies' in the bathwater, or
2002;11:116. [35] Rai AK, Eisenberg RS. Bayh- is that a dorsal fin? In: Pardey PG, editor. The
Dole reform and the progress of future of food; biotechnology markets and policies
biomedicine. Law & Contemporary Problems in an international setting. Washington, DC:
2003;66:289300. [36] de Janvry A, Graff G, International Food Policy Research Institute; 2001.
Sadoulet E, Zilberman D. Technological change in Ch.5. [51] Pedleton CN. The peculiar case of
agriculture and poverty reduction. Concept paper terminator technology: agri- cultural and
for WDR on Poverty and Development 2000/2001. intellectual property protection at the crossroads of
Berkeley: University of Cal- ifornia; 2000. p. 67. AA Adenle et al. / Technology in Society 34 (2012)
[37] Jefferson R. Freely sharing innovation is the 256269 268
only way to face the future. Australian Leadership
Retreat Special Report. The Australian August 31. the third green revolution. Biotechnology Law
2007. [38] Pray CE, Naseem A. Intellectual Report 2004;23: 129. [52] Eaton D, Van Tongeren
property rights on research tools: incentive or F, Louwaars N, Visser B, Van der Meer I.
barriers to innovation? Case studies of rice Economic and policy aspects of 'terminator'
genomics and plant transformation technologies. technology. Biotech- nology and Development
AgBioForum 2005;8:10817. [39] Parayil G. Monitor 2002;49:1922. [53] Swason T, Goschl T.
Mapping technological trajectories of the green Genetic use restriction technologies (GURTs):
revolu- tion and the gene revolution from impacts on developing countries. International
modernization to globalization. Research Policy Journal of Biotech- nology 2000;2(1/2/3). [54]
2003;32:97190. [40] Kryder DR, Kowalski SP, Goeschl T, Swanson T. The development impact of
Krattiger AF. The intellectual and technical genetic use restriction technologies: a forecast
property components of pro-vitamin A rice (Golden based on the hybrid crop experi- ence. Environment
Rice): a preliminary freedom-to-operate review. Di. and Development Economics 2003;8:14965. [55]
International service for the acquisition of agri- Martin MA. Biotechnology, gene flow, and
biotech applications (ISAAA) brief no. 20. ISAAA, intellectual property rights: an agricultural summit.
Ithaca, NY; 2002. [41] Isaac AG, Walter GP. On In: Proceedings of a conference held the
intellectual property rights: patents vs. free and anticommons in biomedical research September 13,
open development, chapter 18 of Colombatto, in Indian- apolis, Indiana; 2002. [56] Giovannetti
Enrico, the Elgar companion to the economics of M. The ecological risks of transgenic plants.
property rights. Aldershot, UK: Edward Elgar; Rivista Di
2004. [42] Heller MA, Eisenberg RS. Can patents Biologia 2003;96:20723. [57] Daniell H.
deter innovation? The anti- commons in biomedical Molecular strategies for gene containments in
research. Science 1998;280:698701. [43] Rimmer transgenic
crops. Nature Biotechnology 2002;20:5816. and Genetics Resource Policies; 2003. [71]
[58] Shoemaker R. Economics issues in USAID. The US Agency for International
agricultural biotechnology. Agricultural Development (USAID). Selecting mobile ICT
Information Bulletin No.762. Washington DC: Devices for agriculture services and application in
Economic Research Service, United States Sub-Saharan Africa. Briefing Paper; 2011. [72]
Department of Agricul- ture; 2001. [59] Thies JE, Pickernell DG, Christie MJ, Rowe PA, Thomas
Devare M. An ecological assessment of transgenic BC, Putterill LG, Griffith JL. Farmers in Wales:
crops. marketing the network? British Food Journal
Journal of Developmental Studies 2007;43:97 2004;106:194210. [73] Schechter M. Innovation
of the week: open source software for agriculture
129. [60] Steinbrecher RA. V-GURTs (terminator):
and Nutrition. State of the World 2011: innovations
can it be effective as a bio- logical containment
that nourish the planet.
tool? EcoNexus. CoP-MoP2, http://www.
GURTs_brief_2005.pdf; 2005 [accessed nourishingtheplanet/innovation-of-the-week-open-
30.05.2012]. [61] RF Rockefeller Foundation. source- software-for-agriculture-and-
nutrition/[accessed April 2011]. [74] FSU.
Food gains for the world's poor are being
FrontlineSMS Users (FSU). Learning more about
threatened by furor over genetically modified (GM)
FrontlineSMS users: results from our first ever
foods. Press release, Rockefeller Foundation
survey, http://www.frontlinesms.
Washington DC. 1999. [62] CGIAR. Shaping the
CGIAR's future: summary of proceedings and com/2011/04/13/learning-more-about-frontlinesms-
decisions. Consultative Group on International users-results- from-our-first-ever-survey/; 2012
[accessed 28.05.2012].
Agricultural Research (CGIAR) International
Center Week, October 26-30. Washington, DC: [75] Qiang CZ, Kuek SC, Dymond A, Esselaar S.
CGIAR Secretariat; 1998. [63] OECD. Mobile application for agriculture and rural
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and development. ICT sector unit. Washinghton DC:
Development (OECD). Intellectual property and The World Bank; 2011. [76] Rannu R, Saksing S,
competition policy in the biotechnology industry. Mahlakiv T. The mobile government: 2010 and
June, Policy Brief; 2005. [64] Thomas D, Hunt A. beyond. The white paper. European Union
Open source ecosystems. IEEE Software 2004; Regional Development Fund; 2010. [77]
21(4):8991. [65] Fitzgerald B. Open source Balasubramanian D, Lie R, Grard P. ICT and
agriculture in India: a perspective from the case
software adoption: anatomy of success and failure.
study based on the oscar project (open source
International Journal of Open Source Software &
simple computer for agriculture in rural area).
Processes 2009:123. [66] Wright BD. Public
NETCOM 2009;23(3/4):28192. [78] ETA.
germplasm development at a crossroad: biotech-
nology and intellectual property. California eTransform Africa. Agriculture sector study sector
Agriculture 1998;56:813. [67] Erbisch FH, assessment and opportunities for ICT,
Maredia KM. Intellectual property rights in
files/Readers-Digest-Agriculture.pdf; 2012
[accessed April 2012]. [79] Lander ES, Lai EH,
biotechnology. CAB International; 2004. [68] Nickerson DA, Abecasis GR, Altshuler D, Bentley
Hoekman BM, Maskus KE, Saggi K. Transfer of DR, et al. The international HapMap project.
technology to developing countries: unilateral and Nature 2003; 426:78996. [80] BiOS. BiOS
multilateral policy options. Institute of Behavioral (Biological Innovation for Open Society).
Science (IBS). University of Colorado; 2004. http://www.
Working Paper. [69] Fenton GM, Chi-Ham C,
Boettiger S. Freedom to operate: the law firms [accessed April
2012]. [81] PIPRA. PIPRA (Public Intellectual
approach and role. In: Krattiger A, Mahoney RT,
Property Resource for Agriculture).
Nelsen L, Thomson JA, Bennett AB,
Satyanarayana K, et al., editors. Intellectual[accessed April
property management in health and agricultural 2012]. [82] Boadi RY, Bokanga M. The African
innovation: a handbook of best practices. Oxford, agricultural technology founda- tion approach to IP
UK/Davis, USA: MIHR/PIPRA, http://www. management. In: Krattiger A, Mahoney RT, Nelson L, et al., editors. Intellectual property management
ok-Ch%2014% 2004%20Fenton-Chi-Ham- in health and agricultural innovation: a handbook
Boettiger%20FTO%20and%20Law%20Firm of best practices. Oxford, UK: MIHR; 2007. [83]
%20Roles.pdf; 2007 [accessed April 2012]. [70] Boetigger S, Wright BD. Open source in
Pardey PG, Wright BD, Nottenburg C, Binenbaum biotechnology: open ques-
E, Zambrano P. Intellectual property and
developing countries: freedom to operate in
agricultural biotechnology. Brief 3. Biotechnology
tions. Innovations Case Discussion: CAMBIA- of biotech- nology in sustainable agriculture and
BiOS; 2006. [84] Thomas Z. Open source climate change mitigation/adaption in developing
agricultural biotechnology. Current Science countries, particularly in Africa. He has visited and
looked into the procedures leading to the
2005;88:12123. [85] Atkinson RC, Beachy
development of biosafety regulatory frameworks
RN, Conway G, Cordova FA, Fox MA, Holbrook
across different African countries including Ghana,
KA, et al. Intellectual property rights. Public sector
Nigeria, South Africa, Kenya, Egypt and Tunisia.
collaboration for agricultural IP management.
Science 2003;301: 1745. [86] Penin J, Wack J. He is also a visiting scholar at the National
Research tool patents and free-libre biotechnology: Graduate Institute for Policy Studies (GRIPS),
Tokyo, Japan.
a suggested unified framework. Research Policy
2008;37:190921. [87] Beck RH. Farmers' rights Dr. Sulayman K. Sowe holds a PhD (summa cum
and open source licencing. Express; 2010. [88] laude) in Computer Science from Aristotle
Lemley MA, O'Brien DW. Encouraging software University, Greece (2007), MSc and Advanced
reuse. Stanford Law Diploma in Computer Science from Sichuan
University, China (1997), BEd in Science
Review 1997;49:225. [89] Feldman R. The
Education from University of Bristol, UK (1991),
open source biotechnology movements: is it patent
and a Higher Teachers Certificate (HTC) from
misuse? Minnesota Journal of Law Science &
Technology 2004;6: 11867. [90] PIPRA. PIPRA's Gambia College, the Gambia (1988). Dr. Sowe
evaluation of the BIOS license. PIPRA's summer previously worked as a senior researcher at United
Nations University of Maastricht Economic and
2006 quarter newsletter, issue 5,
social Research and training centre on Innovation PIPRA-
and Technology (UNU-MERIT), Netherlands,
Newsletter-Issue5.pdf; 2006. [91] Bruggink M.
Open source in Africa: towards informed decision- applying qualitative and quantitative data analysis
tech- niques to identify patterns of Open Source
making. IICD Research Brief-No 7; 2003. [92] Software innovation and technological
Weber S. Open source software in developing sustainability in firms and communities. He is
economies. Berkeley: University of California, currently pursuing research funded by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), at the
publications/ITST_materials/webernote2.pdf; 2012 United Nations University Institute of Advanced
[accessed 30.05. 2012]. [93] Ariyabandu R, Studies (UNU-IAS) in Yokohama, Japan. He is
Zengpei X. Free open source software for disaster also a visiting scholar at the National Graduate
management: a case study of Sahana disaster Institute for Policy Studies (GRIPS), Tokyo, Japan.
management system of Sri Lanka. ESCAP
Technical Paper; 2009. [94] Ghosh RA, Schmidt P. Professor Govindan Parayil, an Indian national,
Open source and open standards: a new Frontier for joined the United Nations University (UNU) as
Vice-Rector in August 2008, and as Director of
economic development?; 2006. Policy Brief. No 1.
United Nations University Institute of Advanced
[95] Forero-Pineda C. Convergence of research
Studies in January 2009. He currently serves as
processes, big and small scientific communities.
both Director of UNU-IAS and Vice-Rector of
Di. IIASA workshop, Laxenburg, Austria; May
1997. [96] Gitter DM. Resolving the open source UNU. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree
paradox in biotechnology: a proposal for a revised (Electrical Engineering) from the University of
Calicut (India), a Master of Science degree
open source policy for publicly funded genomic
(Science, Tech- nology and Values) from
databases. Computer Law & Security Report
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (USA), a Master
2008;24: 52939.
of Arts degree (Development Economics) from
AA Adenle et al. / Technology in Society 34 (2012) American University (USA), and a Ph.D. in
256269 269 Science and Technology Studies from Virginia
Dr. Ademola A. Adenle holds a M.Sc in Genetic Polytechnic Institute and State University (USA).
Manipulation from University of Sussex, UK and a He authored Conceptualizing Tech- nological
Ph.D. from University of Nottingham, UK. Dr. Change (1999) and edited Kerala: The
Adenle has published in several peer-reviewed Development Experience (2000) and Political
international journals including book chapters. He Economy and Information Capitalism in India
has won prestigious awards including the best (2006), and has written numerous book chapters
student prize for his PhD research presentation at and articles in international journals. His newest
the British Toxi- cology Society's Annual Congress book (co-edited with AP D'Costa) on The New
in Surrey, UK. He first authored a reviewed paper Asian Innovation Dynamics: China and India in
on spaceflight which attracted interest from UK Perspective was published in January 2009. He is
and US media respectively. His current research at active in research and advocacy work in science,
the United Nations University- Institute of technology and innovation for sustainable societies
Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS) is based on the role
Dr. Obijiofor Aginam was educated in Nigeria and
Canada. He holds a Bachelor of Laws (magna cum
laude) from University of Nigeria; Master of Laws
from Queen's University at Kingston, Canada, and
a Ph.D. from the University of British Columbia,
Canada. Before joining United Nations University
(UNU), he held a tenured academic position as
Associate Professor of Law at Carleton University,
Ottawa, Canada where he taught and researched
emerging global issues that cut across
globalization, global governance of health and
environmental issues, SouthNorth relations,
international organizations, and Third World
Approaches to International Law (TWAIL).