IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/102532.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Making DNA and its becoming an experimental commodity

Author

Listed:
  • Berry, Dominic J.

Abstract

This paper pursues the history of biology and technology in tandem. It focuses on DNA’s materiality regardless of informational properties. My emphasis on ‘making’ integrates attention to cultures of work in material histories of biology with analyses of the development of technical apparatuses and machines. When it comes to the history of DNA synthesis our materials are as much chemical as they are biological, which means that there is really a third history present, one that also needs to be drawn in, but on its own terms. I demonstrate the ways in which different chemistries have been combined with different technologies, all together affording different arrangements of personnel and biological science. It is a history of how synthesised DNA first came to be, became desired, and became a commodity, available for inclusion in a wide variety of experiments and experimental systems. This method could be replicated for other ‘experimental commodities’.

Suggested Citation

  • Berry, Dominic J., 2020. "Making DNA and its becoming an experimental commodity," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102532, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:102532
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/102532/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mirowski, Philip, 2011. "Science-Mart: Privatizing American Science," Economics Books, Harvard University Press, number 9780674046467, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luna, Jessie K. & Dowd-Uribe, Brian, 2020. "Knowledge politics and the Bt cotton success narrative in Burkina Faso," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    2. Kerry Holden, 2022. "The spectral scientists of corridor B: Neoliberalization and its ghosts in higher education," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 54(2), pages 330-346, March.
    3. Jeon, Heesang, 2015. "Knowledge and Contemporary Capitalism in Light of Marx's Value Theory," Thesis Commons g5njk, Center for Open Science.
    4. A. Basu & P. Foland & G. Holdridge & R. D. Shelton, 2018. "China’s rising leadership in science and technology: quantitative and qualitative indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 249-269, October.
    5. Petersen, Alan, 2013. "From bioethics to a sociology of bio-knowledge," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 264-270.
    6. Benedikt Fecher & Gert G. Wagner, 2016. "Open Access, Innovation, and Research Infrastructure," Publications, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-8, June.
    7. Altuğ Yalçıntaş, 2018. "n≥30 vs. n=all: Büyük Veri, Veri Obezitesi ve Kaybolan Nedensellikler," Yildiz Social Science Review, Yildiz Technical University, vol. 4(2), pages 153-166.
    8. Michael David Maffie, 2023. "The mythology of ‘Big Data’ as a source of corporate power," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 674-696, September.
    9. Lisa D. Cook & Janet Gerson & Jennifer Kuan, 2021. "Closing the Innovation Gap in Pink and Black," NBER Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, volume 1, pages 43-66, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Esquivel-Sada, Daphne, 2022. "Responsible intellectual property rights? Untangling open-source biotech adherence to intellectual property rights through DIYbio," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Jesper W. Schneider & Thed Leeuwen & Martijn Visser & Kaare Aagaard, 2019. "Examining national citation impact by comparing developments in a fixed and a dynamic journal set," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 973-985, May.
    12. Sylvia Schwaag Serger & Mats Benner & Li Liu, 2015. "Chinese university governance: Tensions and reforms," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(6), pages 871-886.
    13. Andrea Saltelli & Monica Fiore, 2020. "From sociology of quantification to ethics of quantification," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-8, December.
    14. Benedikt Fecher & Gert G. Wagner, 2015. "Flipping journals to open: Rethinking publishing infrastructure," RatSWD Working Papers 251, German Data Forum (RatSWD).
    15. Leland L. Glenna, 2017. "AFHVS 2017 presidential address," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 1021-1031, December.
    16. Mariana Mazzucato & Gregor Semieniuk, 2017. "Public financing of innovation: new questions," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(1), pages 24-48.
    17. Alexandra Waluszewski & Alessandro Cinti & Andrea Perna, 2021. "Antibiotics in pig meat production: restrictions as the odd case and overuse as normality? Experiences from Sweden and Italy," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    18. Koen Beumer & Dirk Stemerding & Jac. A. A. Swart, 2021. "Innovation and the commons: lessons from the governance of genetic resources in potato breeding," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(2), pages 525-539, June.
    19. Shaw, Jamie, 2022. "There and back again: Revisiting Vannevar Bush, the linear model, and the freedom of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    20. Lai Ma, 2023. "Information, platformized," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(2), pages 273-282, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    synthetic biology; DNA synthesis; biological engineering; chemistry; commodification;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L81 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Retail and Wholesale Trade; e-Commerce

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:102532. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.