MEMORANDUM


To:             CNR Faculty, Students, and Staff

From:           Gordon Rausser, Dean

Date:           May 27, 1999
                                                                                                                

Over the last five years CNR has taken pride in resolving its own internal differences, while respecting the values, culture, and policies of the Berkeley Campus and the Office of the President, U.C. Systemwide. This has sometimes been a daunting task, given the eclectic mix of disciplines that CNR embraces.  The vastly different scientific and sociological orientations of our many faculty and students often make it difficult to achieve consensus, let alone achieve unanimity.  In this setting, we can only serve the collective interest of the College if we set the stage for clear and unbiased communication. 

The recent petition drive by Students for Responsible Research demonstrates that communication on the topic of Novartis is still incomplete.  That petition and factually false remarks made at commencement demonstrate that many students still have not read or understood the workings of the recent NADI agreement. Questions regarding the Agreement are best addressed within the College. I am sure a number of us will end up differing on the advisability of public/private alliances, a critical issue of great concern to many institutions.  However, I am also confident that most CNR faculty, staff and students have the intellectual integrity to reserve judgement until they understand the facts and empirical evidence.

In order to provide an occasion to explore these issues, I propose we schedule an initial public forum to discuss whether the NADI agreement is consistent with our fundamental principles followed by additional meetings, if needed.  The principles that I have articulated in the past for structuring public/private alliances are largely motivated by economic concepts and if they have not been readily understood, I apologize.   In terms of objectives, the principles are as follows:

Ø       Enhance Faculty Freedom
Ø       Seek Intellectual Capital Complementarities
Ø       Establish Incentive and Cultural Alignment
Ø       Structure Checks and Balances
Ø       Open Access, Transparency, and Oversight
Ø       Lower Faculty Transaction Costs
Ø       Understand and Actively Pursue Strategic Position
Ø       Leverage Public Resources, Not Vice Versa
Ø       Maximize Discretionary Resources for Infrastructure and Graduate Programs
Ø       Limit Option Rights to Well Defined and Time Limited Negotiation Rights

A debate about whether these are the correct objectives may produce some insights: political grandstanding and tantalizing journalism almost certainly won't. Also, a discussion about whether the NADI agreement serves to enhance these objectives could be enlightening.

All students, staff, and faculty who have a real interest in this topic are welcome to attend the forums to discuss both fundamental principles and the NADI agreement. The forums will provide an opportunity to explain why the University cannot and should not accommodate some of the petition’s requests. Other requests of the petition have already been accommodated. Whatever forums we hold will also provide an opportunity to correct some of the most frequently repeated mischaracterizations of the terms of the NADI agreement.  The Dean’s Office will wait to hear from the ESPM graduate student representatives about the appropriate time to hold the initial proposed public forum.


Gordon Rausser
Robert Gordon Sproul Distinguished Professor
Dean, College of Natural Resources
University of California
101 Giannini Hall, MC 3100
Berkeley, CA 94720
Phone:  510-642-7171
Fax:            510-642-4612

http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/