PHFI - Industry - Conflict of Interest?- Dr.Rajan R Patil

8/2/2019 PHFI - Industry - Conflict of Interest?- Dr.Rajan R Patil

1/5

Universal Journal of Education and General Studies Vol. 1(2) pp. 028-032, February, 2012Available online http://www.universalresearchjournals.org/ujegsCopyright 2012 Universal Research Journals

Full Length Research Paper

Academia-industry collaboration is not necessarily aconflict of interest in the context of public health

education and research

Rajan R Patil

Division of Epdiemiology,School of Public Health,SRM University, PotheriKattankulathur-603203,Chennai, India.Email : [email protected], Tel; 9445811610

Accepted 2 January, 2012

Academia-Industry collaboration need not necessarily be a conflict of Interest. Qualityeducation/research comes at cost, it requires significant amount of money, government does not haveenough money or lacks the will to provide it. All the universities are encouraged to generate funds tosupport their research activities, so they turn towards industry to provide funding. Industry-Academiafeed into each other and benefit out of each other. That explains why most of the academic bodies arebeginning to have corporate Chief Executives Officers (CEOs) as board members. Most of the criticismsagainst academia-industry collaboration is embedded in leftist ideological base. In the larger perspectiveindustrialists and academicians joining hands together for various collaborations is in align with largerpolicy that encourages academic institutions to court industry. Industry benefits from Research andDevelopment (R and D) of academia and in turn universities/research Institutions get funds- extra muralfunding in that way they are in symbiotic relationship

Key words: Collaboration, Industry funding, Conflict of Interest

INTRODUCTION

Relationships between academia and industry areincreasingly intimate and commercial. Whileopportunities are created for each partner, there arealso important conflict of interest issues. Particularlychallenging is ensuring that universities maintain theirtraditional role in public science while partnering with acommercial entity with a tradition of proprietary science(Carpenter, 2004).

Public Health Foundation of India [PHFI] waslaunched by the prime minister Dr. Manmohan singh on

march 28, 2006 in new Delhi. It was established as anacademic body to strengthen public health workforce inIndia by offering quality public health education andenhancing pool of professionals available to teachpublic health in India. PHFI was formed as public-private partnership model which was evolvedcollaboratively through consultation with multipleconstituencies including government of India at bothcentral and state level, Indian and internationalacademia, bilateral and multilateral agencies and civilsociety organization. PHFI has a fully empowered ,

independent governing council with eminent personfrom academia and industries (PHFI, 2012).

A cursory look at list of governing board members ofPHFI show that its academic body is overwhelminglydominated by corporate CEOs. PHFI has beencriticized by left inclined commentators for being co-opted by Industry lobby and have questioned theirintent to be on the high profile board. To be fair toPHFI, it has made conscious attempt to attract manyintellectuals of global repute who are well known for

their academic expertise and more importantly for theirintegrity. The 30 board members board would havelooked all the same if not for the presence of peoplewith high integrity like Dr.Ravi Narayan, Prof. AmarthyaSen, Dr. Mashelkar and now Mr.Narayan Murthy. It isa good sign for they have begun to occupy the spacewhich otherwise would have been occupied by anotherset of CEOs whose credentials or the intent would havebeen a suspect. The left inclined commentators arecriticizing senior scientists and academicians likeMashelkar, Amarthya sen and Ravi naryan for lending


2/5

their reputation to PHFI and for being aligned with profitmaking corporate. Motives and morality is beingquestioned of all the people who are choosing to bepart of PHFI governing body. Most of these criticismsare embedded in leftist ideological base, wherein PHFIis largely seen as private supported corporate initiative

in India. In the larger perspective industrialists andacademicians joining hands together for variouscollaborations is in align with larger policy thatencourages academic institutions to court industry.Industry benefits from R and D of academia and in turnuniversities/research Institutions get funds- extra muralfunding in that way they are in symbiotic relationship.

There is little justification in criticism of PHFI forpresence of corporate CEOs on their academicgoverning board or because it has significant corporatepresence. It would be equally myopic to denigrateacademic institutions that have significant industrysupport. It important to engage rather than avoidcorporate sector in the field of education just as weengage government not withstanding all the corruptioncharges against it. Yet most of academicians chooseto engage it, they choose to be in their committees sothat their voice is represented and they could influenceits activities and policies positively. The same principleneed to be applied while engaging corporate sector inthe field of education.

DISCUSSION

Quality education/research comes at cost, it requiressignificant amount of money. Government does not

have enough money or lacks the will to provide it. Allthe universities are encouraged to generate funds tosupport their research activities, so they turn towardsindustry to provide funding. Industry-Academic feedinto each other and benefit out of each other. Thatexplains why most of academic bodies are beginning tohave corporate CEOs as board members. Anincreasing number of academicians are emphasizingthe importance of having external organizations providesupport for research projects, acquiring a greatproportion of research costs from private or publicinstitutions and transferring knowledge to the industrialsphere. For example, in the USA, an average of 20-

25% of academic projects is financed by industry. Onthe other hand, the exchange of scientific knowledgewith industrial organizations has given universitiesaccess to a significant amount of funding. Projectscarried out in collaboration with industry not onlyprovide finance but also have a positive effect on theperformance of academicians in academic publicationsand in the number of patents granted (Kaymaz andEryigit, 2011)

Patil 029

Academic Perspective

The goal of research in academic institutions can beconsidered as the activity of creating new knowledge.Academicians have a very strong ability to abstractfrom the problem and conceptualize and then solve it in

the conceptual domain. This is an expertise that iswoefully lacking in the industry, which is faced withdown-to-earth problems day-in and day-out, often notletting the conceptualization skill to develop and withoutproper conceptualization, there can really be noresearch, as research always tries to address a generalproblem, academician can lend the conceptualizationand generalization skills and the industry can providethe practical reality in which the conceptualization canbe rooted (Jalote). The other benefit to academia is thatprojects carried out in collaboration with industry notonly provide finance but also have a positive effect onthe performance of academicians in academicpublications and in the number of patents granted(Kaymaz and Eryigit, 2011)

Industry collaborations is one of the parameter tomeasure the credibility of academic institutions. Theyare evaluated on degree of self reliance achievedbased on quantum of funds generated for theiracademic research projects from outside their parentInstitution. A spin off of industry collaboration is that itcreate opportunities for placements for their students.University/Research institutions credibility also dependupon the market up take of their trained students.Evaluation measurements of successful Academic-Industry collaborations have been well laid out. Theperformance measurements are; i) an increase in the

amount of funding provided by industry for academicresearch development projects; ii) an increase in jointscientific articles by researchers from both theuniversity and industry; iii) an increase in licensingagreements made by the university; iv) an increase inincome from licensing agreements obtained by theuniversity; v) an increase in new patents resulting fromuniversity industry collaborations (Kaymaz and Eryigit,2011).

Industry tends to have greater faith on a researchercoming from a university as he/she is regarded assomebody who is seeking pure knowledge ascompared to researcher from a consultancy firm. Even

if he or she is charging a lot of money for the services itwill most likely not change the perception of theresearcher as somebody telling the truth and is neutral.The consultants, on the other hand, earn moneydirectly on knowledge and skill, and are believed to usethat knowledge advantage. The knowledge is regardedas instrument to earning money (Victoria u.d).


3/5

030. Univers. J. Edu. Gen. Stud.

Industry Perspective

In Industry, the knowledge is mainly being regarded asinstrumental and that is not something that generatesnew knowledge. Industry companies are not seeingthemselves as being participating in a knowledge

creating process, but rather a knowledge consumingprocess. Knowledge is thus regarded as an assetcomparable to other necessary assets, like machineryand buildings so the main goals for the participants incollaboration projects is thus to collect suitableknowledge from the source (university) and bring itback so the company can improve the competitiveness.Knowledge happens, unfortunately for the industry, tobe encapsulated in people and not purchasable inpackages from a supplier (Victoreia u.d). Research inindustry is typically not a business or a profit center buta long term investment, which helps a companygenerate more revenue and profits. In India, till recentlythere was no need for research in most companies the knowledge that existed in the public domain wassufficient for the business the company was engagedin. But that seems to be changing now technologyplayer whose business depends on pushing technologyadvances needs research simply to develop newtechnologies that it can then use to bring out newerproducts in the market (Jalote u.d)

Impact Of Industry Collaboration On Academics

Faculty contributing to knowledge and technologybelieve that industry collaboration complements their

own academic research by securing funds for graduatestudents and lab equipment, and by providing themwith ideas for their own research. Financial rewardshave a positive impact on the production of basicresearch because basic and applied research effortsmight be complementary or because they might inducea selection of riskier research programmes.

Industry has a positive impact on publications output.The number of publications in peer-reviewed journalseven if not the only measure is the best recorded andthe most accepted measure for research output aspublications are essential in gaining scientific reputationand for career advancements. There appears to be two

countervailing effects in the impact of Collaborativeresearch on academic research output. Researcherswith no industry involvement are predicted to publishless than those with a small degree of collaboration.Nevertheless, higher levels of industry involvementnegatively affect research productivity. Therefore, theexistence of industry partners is positive but theintensity of industry collaboration is negative. Thepredicted publication rate of an academic with anaverage level of collaboration is higher than that of anacademic with no collaborative funding. But, for higher

levels of collaboration, the predicted number ofpublications turns out to be lower, and can even belower than for those with no funding at all (Banal-Estanol, 2010).

Conflict of Interest

In order to prevent conflicts of interest from arising inrelationships between industry and academia, there area few principles to consider. From a financial standpointall arrangements should be transparent, there shouldbe clear demarcation of the contributions and rewards,and there should be clear audit trails and independentverification of the arrangements. From the standpoint ofpersonal integrity, there should be adherence to soundscientific and ethical principles, respect for intellectualproperty, and fair and appropriate allocation of effort aswell as distribution of credit. Adhering to theseprinciples would contribute greatly to maintaining ahealthy relationship between academia and industry. Itsimportant to understand that Conflict of interest inthe medical context has a clear meaning. Specifically, itoccurs when practitioners accept personal rewards(such as fees, grants, awards, or recognition) in returnfor actions that could violate their professionalobligations. In essence, to accuse a researcher ofconflict of interest would require empirical proof that, inreturn for a reward, an action was taken that resulted indiminished care or even harm to patients. It is a shouldbe appreciated that mere association with industry isdoes not lead to conflict of industry per se. It is wellknown that many medical societies, particularly small

specialty organizations, depend on industry support.The operating costs of societies, as well as the cost ofmeetings, publications, patient education and otherprofessional activities cannot be fully funded bymember subscriptions. Support from industry is oftenessential and comes in the form of corporatememberships, sponsorship of CME or other activities atscientific meetings, exhibit fees, and journal advertisingetc all of which have potential for conflict of interest, butone need to prove it empirically (Weber, 2009).

Steps to avoid conflict of interest

There are many thorny issues affecting the academia-industry relationship. They fall into four categories:integrity of research, ownership of data, publication anddisclosure, and conflicts of interest. It is worthwhile toconsider each carefully. First and foremost, there mustbe an assurance that there will be no inappropriateinfluence on data selection or interpretation. Secondly,there should be assurance of technical compliance andquality control; clearly the studies must apply validexperimental methods. Lastly, there should be full


4/5

access to data and participation in its analysis andpresentation. Following these principles will keepacademic-industry collaborations on the highest plane.The ownership of data collected in industry-sponsoredclinical trials has been the subject of substantialdebate. Investigators who engage in clinical research

understandably feel that the data they collect arerightfully owned by them for use toward an academicpurpose. Major scientific problems occasionally arisewhen investigators wish to analyze and publish theresults obtained from a subset of a data pool, as forexample from one site or country in a multi-centerinternational clinical trial, the results of which may differfrom the results of the complete trial (Yamada, 2005).

Ensuring Sanctity of Research in Academic-Industry collaboration

The following items require special consideration inplanning the business and legal details to govern thecollaboration: (Yamada, 2005)

1. Public science with right to publish2. Investigator-initiated science3. Project work in areas of mutual scientific interest

without obligating faculty to work outsidetheir own self-defined scientific plan

4. Flexibility, which permits rapid change in responseto evolving scientific opportunities

5. No restriction on academic collaborations orFederal government- and foundation-supported

Science6. A research and financial plan that would increase

productivity in scientific areas selected byThe participating investigators

7. Freedom to access the most promisingcompounds for the scientific purpose of each project

8. No restriction on pursuing the best opportunities inclinical trials, regardless of source of

Compounds or research support9. MPRC-wide involvement of scientific faculty 10.

Protection of intellectual property rights11. Emphasis on attracting and maintaining Federal

research support in each laboratory.

Authors personal experience and perspective

It is misconception that researchers who engageIndustry do not challenge the Industry. Thats wrongperception for which the author presents his personalevidence to this effect. The author is known supporterof Academia-Industry collaboration in principle. But thatdoes not necessarily influence authors objectivity andsanctity in his research findings. On several

Patil 031

occasions the author has pulled up Industry for theirwrongdoings in defense of Peoples health and goneahead and published [Patil 2003,2002, 2011, 2010).The authors anti-Industry crusade is not necessarilyrestricted research and publications. He along with hiscolleagues just recently won a law suit in supreme

court of India in a case against pesticide industry afterseven year long battle on their stand againstunscrupulous ways in which pesticide industry washarming farmers in India. The details of authorscase and the Supreme Court judgment on our victoryagainst the industry are available on public domain(Prajapati and Shah, 2010).

CONCLUSION

1. Conflict of interest stems from selfish motive/ intent thatare converted into action for personal gain and not by

simple association. As long as one is being fair andupright in his or her conduct-, conflict of interest doesnot come into play- in spite of potentially having conflictof interest a-priori.

2. Academicians do have ability to handle conflict ofInterest. Lets start trusting them. They do know whereto draw line, where and when to keep their academicfreedom intact. IITs are fine example of exercise of thisdiscretion by researchers while very well engagingindustry.

REFERENCE

Banal-Estanol A, Jofre-Bonet M, Meissner C (2010). The Impact ofIndustry Collaboration on esearch: Evidence from EngineeringAcademics in the UK. Available athttp://www.econ.upf.edu/~albertbanal/Impact%20of%20Industry.pdf

Carpenter T Jr, Koenig JI, Bilbe Q, et al(2004). A Model forAcademic/Industry Collaborationby William. Schizophrenia Bulletin.30(4):998-1004

Jalote P (u.d). Challenges in Industry-Academia Collaboration., Deptof CSE, IIT Kanpur. Available at http://www.iiitd.edu.in/~jalote/GenArticles/IndAcadCollab.pdf

Kaymaz K, Eryigit KY (2011) . Determining Factors HinderingUniversity-Industry Collaboration: An Analysis from thePerspective of Academicians in the Context of EntrepreneurialScience. Int. J. Soc. Inquiry. 4(1): 185-213

Patil RR (2002). Suicide deaths among farmers. BMJ (S.Asia ed).18(4):310

Patil RR (2003). Circumstances leading to death of Indian CottonFarmers. Int. J. Occup. Med. Environ. Health. 15 (4): 405-407

Patil RR, Ravi Kumar K (2010). World Bank EMCP Malaria Project InOrissa, India- A Field Reality. Trop Parasitol .1:26 -29.

Patil RR (2011). Environmental Health Risk Assessment of NationalAluminum Company[NALCO] Orissa. Indian J. Occup. Environ.Med. (In press). 15:73-5

Prajapati R, Shah T (2010). Supreme Court quashes defamationcase on activists by Association of Pesticide ManufacturingCompanies. Radical Socialist. Thursday, 05 August 2010.Available at

http://www.radicalsocialist.in/articles/environment/211-supreme-court-quashes-defamation-case-on-activists-by-association-of-pesticide-manufacturing-companies.


5/5

032. Univers. J. Edu. Gen. Stud.

PHFI (2012). Introduction to PHFI:http://www.phfi.org/images/about_us/phfi_story.pdf

Viktoria Institutea. Academia, Industry and Consulting firms inCollaboration An value-based analysis of different institutionsMartin Brjessonac, Ingela Bruceab, Kerstin Forsbergad. Availableat http://www.well.com/user/mb/docs/AICCollaboration.pdf

Weber MA (2009) . Academic Physicians Confront a Hostile world:

The Creation of ACRE. J. Clin. Hypertens. (Greenwich). ;11(10):533-6.

Yamada T (2005). Academia-industry collaboration: A dynamicpartnership on behalf of patients. Association of AmericanPhysicians Presidential Address. The J. Clin. Investig.115(10):2944-9

PHFI - Industry - Conflict of Interest?- Dr.Rajan R Patil

Documents

Transcript of PHFI - Industry - Conflict of Interest?- Dr.Rajan R Patil