UC Deal Should be Celebrated, Not Criticized
By Robert J. Birgeneau
April 29, 2007
Story appeared in FORUM section, Page E5
Sacramento Bee
We at the University of California, Berkeley, have a treasured tradition of accommodating diverse perspectives and understand that the free exchange of opinion is essential to a healthy democracy. Yet the public is done a disservice when perspectives are disconnected from the facts. For this reason we regret The Bee's April 19 editorial, which based its conclusions on inaccurate information.
The editorial criticized UC Berkeley's proposed partnership with the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the University of Illinois and BP to create the Energy Biosciences Institute (EBI), whose mission is to develop new biofuels to stem global warming and help secure our nation's energy supply. While we share The Bee's belief in the need for transparency, we cannot accept its portrayal of this important endeavor.
The battle to reverse alarming climate changes is nothing less than this generation's moon shot. It is a complex challenge with wide societal implications -- the kind of challenge that Berkeley, as the nation's preeminent public university, is uniquely equipped and obligated to tackle. That conviction makes it imperative we correct the editorial's inaccurate assertions that are potentially damaging to this vital research effort.
• The most egregious error in the editorial is its statement that, "BP would retain exclusive licensing rights over products developed at the institute." This is not true, and we appreciate the correction this newspaper has published. To be absolutely clear: The University of California will retain intellectual property ownership rights in all research conducted by Berkeley personnel under the auspices of the EBI.
• The editorial also stated, "UC officials have been ... secretive about their negotiations with BP." The word "secretive" is inconsistent with the facts. From the start of the process, UC Berkeley's senior administrators have continuously consulted with our faculty leadership. The extensive nature of that engagement has been publicly documented by the independent chair of our Academic Senate. In addition, shortly after the announcement that the Berkeley-led team had won the international competition for BP funding, we published a detailed summary of the proposal that will inform contract negotiations with BP (ebiweb.org). During those negotiations we will continue to consult with the chairs of four key Academic Senate committees.
• Finally, the editorial suggested that I tried to "shut off dissent and consolidate power," as if that were even possible at Berkeley. If this were, in fact, true I do not believe that Berkeley's Academic Senate would have endorsed our approach to the EBI by an overwhelming majority. This group, known for its independence, integrity and intelligence, also validated the position I articulated on academic freedom for all of our faculty -- the very position derided by the editorial. They adopted a resolution stating that preventing a faculty member from accepting research funding based solely on the source of the funds raises "grave issues of academic freedom."
California is leading the way in the quest to curb global warming; if a stand is going to be made to turn this crisis around, it is going to be made here. This work cannot succeed in an isolated ivory tower or a cloistered corporate laboratory. I firmly believe in the faculty of UC Berkeley and in the investment that California makes in their expertise and integrity. This alliance of public university and industry capabilities is the most effective way to ensure that our research discoveries will quickly and safely move from the laboratory to the fuel pump.
We know how to work productively and symbiotically with private sector partners for the public good; we have done this before. Just ask the pioneers who helped build Silicon Valley.
About the writer:
Robert J. Birgeneau is chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley.