A spate of recent scandals concerning personal digital data illustrates the extent to which innovation and finance are thoroughly entangled with one another. The innovation-finance nexus is an example of an emerging dynamic in technoscientific capitalism in which innovation is increasingly driven by the pursuit of "economic rents". Unlike innovation that delivers new products, services, and markets, innovation as rentiership is defined by the extraction and capture of value through different modes of ownership and control over resources and assets. This shift towards rentiership is evident in the transformation of personal digital data into a private asset. In light of this assetization, it is necessary to unpack how innovation itself might be a problem, rather than a solution to a range of global challenges. Our aim in this paper is to conceptualize this relationship between innovation, finance, and data rentiership, and examine the policy implications of this pursuit of economic rents as a deliberate research and innovation strategy in datadriven technology sectors.

While biobanks are established explicitly as scientific infrastructures, they are de facto political-economic ones too. Many biobanks, particularly population-based biobanks, are framed under the rubric of the bio-economy as national political-economic assets that benefit domestic business, while national populations are framed as a natural resource whose genomics, proteomics, and related biological material and national health data can be exploited. We outline how many biobanks epitomize this 'neoliberal' form of science and innovation in which research is driven by market priorities (e.g., profit, shareholder value) underpinned by state or government policies. As both scientific and political-economic infrastructures, biobanks end up entangled in an array of problems associated with market-driven science and innovation. These include: profit trumping other considerations; rentiership trumping entrepreneurship; and applied research trumping basic research. As a result, there has been a push behind new forms of 'post-neoliberal' science and innovation strategies based on principles of openness and collaboration, especially in relation to biobanks. The proliferation of biobanks and the putative transition in both scientific practice and political economy from neoliberalism to post-neoliberalism demands fresh social scientific analyses, particularly as biobanks become further established in fields such as oral health and personalized dentistry. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first analysis of biobanks with a view to what we can anticipate from biobanks and distributed post-genomics global science in the current era of oral health biomarkers.

No abstract

No abstract