Open Pharma: Collective Action to Common Pharmaceutical Knowledge
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Access to medicines is a critical ongoing challenge to advancing goals of health equity. Recent changes in the political economic and technoscientific domains of pharmaceuticals beg a reexamination of shifting processes in this space, especially emergent forms of collective action to address structural conditions for making new and old drugs. In particular, two trends in science—open science and community biology—have created the social and technical conditions through which new alternative imaginaries have emerged to research, develop, and make medicines. This dissertation offers an ethnographic account of these actions to common pharmaceutical knowledge through open science and lay participation in drug research. I examine two sites: the first site is a diffuse network of academic and nonprofit initiatives applying open science to drug research and development; the second site is a citizen science initiative, Open Insulin, leveraging a direct social action approach to make insulin in a community lab.Drawing on 29 in-depth interviews, over 300 hours of observations of citizen scientists’ organizational and research activities, and content analysis of journal articles and university and nonprofit organizations’ policies and websites, I trace a burgeoning movement to apply “open” principles and practices to the research and making of pharmaceuticals, an area I refer to as open pharma. I begin with an analysis of this open pharma movement by examining three key characteristics. First, I identify the major narratives discursively employed by actors to frame the movement and provide rationales to mobilize others, often drawing on market logics. Next, I trace the active building and institutionalizing of open pharma through the establishment of organizations and open sharing policies. Then I reveal sites of resistance actors experienced in university settings related to publishing and commercialization imperatives—which often translated to patent imperatives. My next set of findings focus on Open Insulin and the connections between their organizational structure and goals for creating more egalitarian alternatives to corporatized science practices and logics. I surface how membership and decision-making authority acted as key nodes of tension and change within the group, and I illustrate the project’s mission as continuously constructed in relation to these nodes. Finally, I further explore the discursive production of Open Insulin’s mission through two competing visions for making affordable insulin: an unprecedented but more transformative approach for “community manufacturing” through medicine cooperatives, and a more common and socially legitimized approach through a contract manufacturer partnership. As group members organized toward these visions, I unpack specific challenges groups face in looking to resist processes of capitalization in highly technical and regulated domains such as pharmaceuticals. \nThrough my tracing of movement practices and aims, I illuminate important entanglements between divergent approaches to social change, markets, regulatory regimes, and technoscientific infrastructure that construct and value openness in pharmaceuticals. This research articulates alternative imaginaries for how to organize biomedical knowledge production, and how they variously shape projects to intervene in inequities perpetuated by the political economy of health and illness.\n
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,027 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».