Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Tanja Schneider
(Technical University of Denmark)
Janja Komljenovic (Lancaster University)
Loïc Riom (University of Lausanne)
Send message to Convenors
- Format:
- Traditional Open Panel
Short Abstract:
Aligned with the conference theme, we are interested in empirical and conceptual papers that reflect on the impact of assetizing knowledge but are equally interested in the kinds of expertise produced through and along assetization processes.
Long Abstract:
Diverse forms of knowledge, including technoscientific knowledge, can be and have been assetised via patents, copyrights, trademarks, industrial secrets, brands, or tacit knowledge. The privatisation of public knowledge is not new. Universities, key knowledge-producing institutions, have been encouraged to commercialise knowledge since the 1980s, as are other organisations including corporations, consultancies, or start-ups. These global, regional, and national policy shifts have happened in the context of the global economy becoming increasingly rentier and affected by the rise of intangible over tangible assets. After decades of policy and practice change of turning knowledge, its outputs and various knowledge artefacts into assets, it is urgent we examine assetization processes and their various impacts (Birch & Muniesa, 2020). Possible analytical and empirical avenues and questions to explore include:
- Assetization of research processes and outputs: how are global intellectual monopolies built and maintained by assetizing knowledge;
- Assetization of teaching and learning processes: what assets are involved in the teaching process and who controls them;
- Assetization of skills: how can skills be assetized and by whom (individuals, institutions) and under what conditions.
Relatedly, it is important to undestand what kind of knowledge is produced through assetization processes:
- The emergence of new form of knowledge about the economy, companies or business sectors through assetization operations;
- The development of know-how and dedicated staff within public and private institutions to produce assets;
- Indicators, models, expertise and approaches to motivate and justify investment choices.
Aligned with the conference theme, we are interested in papers that reflect on the impact of assetizing knowledge but are equally interested in the kinds of expertise produced through and along assetization processes. The impact may include the potential challenges or benefits of assetizing knowledge for social transformation, mitigating climate change, improving food security, tackling inequities, and so on.
Accepted papers:
Session 1Loïc Riom (University of Lausanne)
Short abstract:
This paper aims to contribute to this field of investigation by focusing on a pivotal aspect of the start-up/VC relationship: rounds of funding. More specifically, it scrutinizes the knowledge and expertise are mobilized and produced during these crucial moments.
Long abstract:
In recent years, Science and Technology Studies (STS) have witnessed a growing discussion surrounding the concepts of asset and assetization (Birch & Muniesa, 2020). However, little research has yet been conducted on the start-ups economy and the processes that lead venture capital funds (VCs) to view companies as assets. This paper aims to contribute to this field of investigation by focusing on a pivotal aspect of the start-up/VC relationship: rounds of funding. More specifically, it scrutinizes the knowledge and expertise are mobilized and produced during these crucial moments. I will draw on a preliminary fieldwork on a start-up project offering online music lessons. My analysis will be based on several interviews with the founder, document collection and participant observation in the preparation of a funding round.
I describe how different types of knowledge are gathered and assembled to craft a narrative about the company. I also explore what forms of knowledge are produced during this process and how their formalization, for example, through calculations or tables. Thus, I examine how the preparation for funding rounds contribute to giving an entrepreneurial project its consistency. Moreover, I show what is constituted as an asset and question how music and musical practices are considered from this point of view. In conclusion, I discuss this case study in a broader analysis of the emergence of the Music Tech sector and entanglements between finance and the music industry.
Jeremy Brice (London School of Economics)
Short abstract:
This paper examines the political implications of the assetisation of knowledge by tracing how activists’ attempts to enrol investors in raising farm animal welfare standards in agribusinesses produce new ‘assetised’ animal welfare knowledges reflecting the concerns of major financial institutions.
Long abstract:
As agribusiness corporations’ growing prominence within the global meat and dairy industry intersects with a turn to sustainable and responsible investment practices, financial institutions increasingly engage with the environmental and ethical issues surrounding livestock agriculture. Animal welfare activists have responded by introducing new forms of company-level data, performance metrics and benchmarking techniques, which they employ to enrol investors in campaigns to raise animal welfare standards within agribusinesses.
This paper explores how these knowledge production technologies make concern for farm animal welfare circulate within financial markets, drawing upon interviews with representatives of campaigning NGOs, responsible investment networks, ESG research firms and financial institutions. Through tracing the evolution of animal welfare performance benchmarking, I will show that activists’ attempts to enrol different groups of financial institutions in their investor engagements have called forth contrasting ways of conceptualising and measuring farm animal welfare over time. Through tracing how this process has reconfigured knowledges of animal welfare, I will argue that farm animal welfare is being transformed from an ethico-political concern into a driver of systemic financial risks such as antimicrobial resistance as activists shift their focus from specialist ethical investment firms to large mainstream asset managers. Animal activism’s attempts to embed itself into capital markets are thus refashioning the concept of animal welfare itself to reflect major asset owners’ concerns and preoccupations (or ‘assetising’ it). This illustrates the importance of exploring what implications the assetisation of knowledge holds for the conduct and content of politics and activism under asset manager capitalism.
Janja Komljenovic (Lancaster University)
Short abstract:
This contribution maps and analyses different ways of constructing assets in the higher education sector. It illuminates strategies for creating assets from digital objects associated with learning; as well as how EdTech companies and universities struggle over instituting these as assets.
Long abstract:
Education technology (EdTech) is a fast-expanding industry. It includes incumbents that are transforming themselves from legacy software to data-based companies and substituting licence fees for subscriptions via Software-as-a-Service models. EdTech also includes a variety of venture capital backed start-up companies that target individuals or universities for their products. Both aim to construct their products (e.g. digital platforms), associated digital objects (e.g. user data), and product operations (e.g. intermediation) as assets. To protect their assets, they build moats, such as technological lock-ins. However, constructing, protecting, and benefitting from assets is not easy, especially in a sector that is perceived as a public service and where privatisation is often disputed. Unlike commodification, where commercial interests are directly observable (e.g., charging tuition fees for university courses), assetisation seems less visible to the public. Yet, it is highly consequential for student and staff rights and freedoms. This contribution maps different ways of how knowledge dissemination in higher education is assetising via digital technology, what kind of assetization knowledge is produced in these processes, and benefitting whom.
Daecheong Ha (Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology)
Short abstract:
This study explores assetization of open source in the AI industry, by examining the GitHub Copilot, an automated code completion AI launched in 2021 by GitHub, a dominant platform in the software development. This exemplifies the assetization process of the knowledge commons by AI technology.
Long abstract:
Recently, there has been growing concern about the use of humanity's intellectual commons by tech giants to train generative artificial intelligence (AI). In particular, Open source, or Free and/or open source (FOSS), which has been shared by the software developer community since the free software movement, is being transformed into the massive amounts of data for AI training. This study explores assetization of open source in the AI industry, by examining the GitHub Copilot, an automated code completion AI launched in 2021 by GitHub, a dominant platform in the software development. Based on interviews with experienced open source developers, the author tries to show that open source communites operate within a distinctive moral economy, and that this moral economy can serve as a catalyst for rendering open source asset for tech companies. Furthermore, after looking at recent litigation in US over the assetization of open source, the author analyzes the assetization strategies of these knowledge commons. This illustrates a new strategy of assetization that leverages the commons and digital infrastructure such as GitHub, as opposed to the traditional strategy of privatizing such as intellectual property.