How Can a Biotech Tool Reveal what's Going on under the Surface of Three Hyped Biotech Regions? The Embedding of ÄKTApilot in the US, China and … (original) (raw)
Related papers
State-sponsored Research and Development: A Case Study of China's Biotechnology
Regional Studies, 2011
Zhang F., Cooke P. and Wu F. State-sponsored research and development: a case study of China's biotechnology, Regional Studies. This paper examines the model of China's biotechnology innovation. It applies the typology of entrepreneurial, partnership, and developmental state to the Chinese biotechnology sector. Biotechnology development in China originates from state-sponsored programmes. Although China's total product sales only account for less than half those of the major biotechnology firm Amgen in the United States, Chinese biotechnology research capacities experience fast growth. State funding plays a crucial role in the latecomer situation. Geographically, biotechnology industries are concentrated in Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, and other major cities. The state promotes biotechnology development through strategic support in its ‘Medium and Long Term S&T [science and technology] Development Plan’, overseas talent-attraction programmes, commercialization initiatives, and the development of high-technology and science parks. However, such a model has its problems: the lack of sustained funding and underdeveloped venture capital, a weak link between research and industry, and under-performed intellectual property output. Faced with the funding constraint, contract research organizations have recently proliferated. Despite the strong role of state, it is concluded that the Chinese model of biotechnology innovation is a hybrid one, rather than the classical one of the developmental state, which combines various elements of different models. Zhang F., Cooke P. et Wu F. La recherche-développement publique: une étude de cas de la biotechnologie en Chine, Regional Studies. Cet article cherche à examiner le modèle de l'innovation de la biotechnologie en Chine. On applique la typologie de l'esprit d'entreprise, du partenariat, et de l'étape de développement au secteur de la biotechnologie en Chine. Le développement de la biotechnologie en Chine remonte aux programmes financés par l'Etat. Bien que les ventes globales n'expliquent que moins de la moitié de celles de l'entreprise biotechnologique phare aux Etats-Unis, à savoir Amgen, la capacité de la recherche biotechnologique en Chine jouit d'un taux de croissance élevé. Les dépenses publiques jouent un rôle primordial dans la recherche d'un pays qui y vient tard. D'un point de vue géographique, les industries biotechnologiques se concentrent à Beijing, à Shanghai, à Shenzhen et en d'autres grandes villes. L'Etat encourage le développement de la biotechnologie par le soutien stratégique au sein du Plan de développement à moyen et à long terme de la S et T (la science et la technologie), des programmes de recrutement internationaux, des initiatives commerciales, et le développement des technopôles. Cependant, un tel modèle peut s'avérer problématique: à savoir, le manque de fonds soutenus et le capital-risque sous-développé, une synergie faible entre la recherche et l'industrie, et une propriété intellectuelle à faible rendement. Face à la contrainte financière, des entreprises de recherche ont proliféré récemment. En dépit de l'importance du rôle de l'Etat, on conclut que le modèle de l'innovation biotechnologique en Chine s'avère une hybride plutôt que la situation classique de l'étape de développement, qui combine divers éléments des modèles différents.Innovation Recherche-développement Biotechnologie Modèle de l'innovation ChineZhang F., Cooke P. und Wu F. Staatlich subventionierte Forschung und Entwicklung: eine Fallstudie der Biotechnologie in China, Regional Studies. In diesem Beitrag wird das Modell der biotechnologischen Innovation in China untersucht. Hierfür wird die Typologie des unternehmerischen, partnerschaftlichen und entwicklungsfördernden Staates auf den chinesischen Biotechnologiesektor angewandt. Die Entwicklung der Biotechnologie in China hat ihren Ursprung in staatlich subventionierten Programmen. Obwohl der chinesische Gesamtumsatz mit Produkten weniger als halb so hoch ausfällt wie der Umsatz der wichtigen Biotechnologiefirma Amgen in den USA, sind die biotechnologischen Forschungseinrichtungen Chinas von raschem Wachstum gekennzeichnet. In dieser Nachzüglersituation spielen staatliche Subventionen eine entscheidende Rolle. In geografischer Hinsicht konzentrieren sich die Biotechnologieindustrien auf Peking, Schanghai, Shenzhen und andere Großstädte. Der Staat fördert die Entwicklung der Biotechnologie durch eine strategische Unterstützung in Form eines ‘mittel- und langfristigen Entwicklungsplans für Wissenschaft und Technik’ sowie mit Hilfe von Programmen zum Anwerben hochqualifizierter ausländischer Fachkräfte, Vermarktungsinitiativen und der Entwicklung von Hochtechnologie- und Wissenschaftsparks. Ein solches Modell hat jedoch seine Probleme: Mangel an nachhaltiger Finanzierung, unterentwickeltes Risikokapital, eine schwache Verbindung zwischen Forschung und Industrie sowie zu geringe Leistungen im Bereich des geistigen Eigentums. Aufgrund der begrenzten Finanzierung sind in letzter Zeit zahlreiche vertragliche Forschungsorganisationen entstanden. Trotz der starken Rolle des Staates lässt sich das Fazit ziehen, dass China statt des klassischen Modells des entwicklungsfördernden Staates ein Hybridmodell der biotechnologischen Innovation aufweist, in dem sich die Elemente verschiedener Modelle miteinander verbinden.Innovation Forschung und Entwicklung (F&E) Biotechnologie Innovationsmodell ChinaZhang F., Cooke P. y Wu F. Investigación y desarrollo patrocinados por el estado: el ejemplo de la biotecnología en China, Regional Studies. En este artículo analizamos el modelo de innovación biotecnológica de China. Aplicamos la tipología de actividad empresarial, colaboraciones y estado de desarrollo para el sector biotecnológico chino. El desarrollo biotecnológico en China proviene de los programas patrocinados por el estado. Aunque las ventas totales de producción de China sólo representan menos de la mitad de las que obtiene Amgen, la principal empresa de biotecnología de los Estados Unidos, las capacidades de investigación biotecnológica de China se distinguen por un rápido crecimiento. La financiación estatal desempeña un papel fundamental en esta situación tardía. Geográficamente, las industrias de biotecnología están concentradas en Pekín, Shanghai, Shenzhen y otras ciudades grandes. El estado fomenta el desarrollo biotecnológico mediante un apoyo estratégico en su ‘plan de desarrollo para ciencia y tecnología a medio y largo plazo’, y con ayuda de programas para atraer a talentos extranjeros, iniciativas de comercialización y el desarrollo de parques de alta tecnología y ciencia. Sin embargo, este modelo tiene sus problemas: la falta de fondos sostenidos y el subdesarrollo de capital de riesgo, un vínculo débil entre la investigación y la industria y un nivel bajo de desempeño en cuanto a la propiedad intelectual . Ante esta limitación financiera, en los últimos tiempos han proliferado las organizaciones de investigación por contrato. Concluimos que pese al fuerte papel del estado, el modelo chino de la innovación biotecnológica es un modelo híbrido más que clásico del estado de desarrollo, ya que combina los diferentes elementos de distintos modelos.Innovación Investigación y Desarrollo (I + D) Biotecnología Modelo de innovación China
Korea and China bear witness to the transformation of these states in nurturing an innovation-based industry. This article argues that the segmentation of the value chain of the biopharmaceutical industry has provided industrializing countries with a window of opportunity. These East Asian states have modified their former catching-up approaches by establishing a more effective institutional platform that can attract knowledge-creation players to the industry. Through case studies, the authors show that the Taiwan state's promotion of the biopharmaceutical industry has been based on an incremental approach; existing state policies have been modified to cope with the demands of the industry, which has resulted in the continuation of its SME-based industrial structure. The methods of the Korean state have been more radical, in that the policies that previously favoured the chaebols have gradually been reoriented toward the promotion of smaller, science-based firms that now co-exist alongside the chaebols. Finally, the Chinese state and local governments have sought to promote this innovation-based industry by building biotech parks. This approach has resulted in a boom in new science firms, which have become increasingly isolated from the flourishing domestic SOE-led market.
2007
This article discusses the technology policymaking problems associated with the establishment of the Taiwan Biobank. Taiwan, as a latecoming, technology-learning country, is characterized by a hidden and delayed risk culture. In particular, by comparing biotech and industrial policies and GMO (genetically modified organism) risk governance, we can analyze the confrontation involving the state, science experts, and society, which is the result of the authoritarian regime and expert politics that have existed in Taiwan since the Cold War era. We find that none of these factors is conducive to social trust and social support, which are essential for the establishment of a genetic database. This article argues that, in different social and historical contexts, such hidden and delayed risk cultures may have formed in different countries that value technological R&D competition.
The Myth of the Biotech Revolution1
TRENDS in Biotechnology, 2009
The existence of a medical'biotech revolution'has been widely accepted and promoted by academics, consultants, industry and government. It has generated expectations about significant improvements in the drug discovery process, health care and economic development that underpin a considerable amount of policy-making. This chapter presents empirical evidence, from a variety of indicators, which shows that a range of outputs have failed to keep pace with increased R&D spending and rather than producing revolutionary ...
The biotech developmental state? : investigating the Chinese gene revolution
2003
China's experience with agricultural biotechnology has been dramatic. Many new technologies have been developed by public sector research institutes that rival the outputs of the major biotech corporations. This has happened in the context of policy processes and priority setting exercises that are articulated in terms of the provision of public goods. In many respects this model contrasts with other parts of the world where the private sector has been dominant. The paper looks at how and why China has so vigorously pursued this biotech path, looking in particular at the role of science-policy networks in promoting a biotechnology discourse. It also looks at the particular challenges associated with developing a domestic biotech industry while managing multinationals such as Monsanto. A central question is to what extent this experience is an example of the state acting "developmentally": steering both the private and public sectors to deliver public goods, and seizing the opportunities presented by a new technology while attempting to ensure that there is some level of social control over it. The paper asks: to what extent is China a biotech developmental state; and what are some of the challenges and limitations associated
This article explores the research patterns and organizational features within R&D sector in China’s biotechnology industry, delineating the innovation in knowledge production and industrial development. The more recent development of China’s biotechnology industry is briefly examined from an interdisciplinary perspective, whilst a set of salient features embodied by social actors are envisaged as have so far strongly shaped the market-based, commercially driven mode of scientific knowledge production in the R&D activities. Furthermore, this mode serves as a premise to the innovation of the interaction-network. The implications derived from this analytical work shed a new light upon policy-making both at the level of S&T governance and in the management practice in China’s biotechnology industry.
With the growing trend of globalization and rapid development of high technologies, emerging economies face more challenges in technology development because they are chasing a fast-moving frontier. They need to identify global technology trends and adapt to local needs and capabilities. Strategies for technology development differ among countries at different developmental stages. In this research, a technology policy choice framework is developed to link prospective high-tech areas, technology development strategies, and various innovative resources. The research approach is to develop a hierarchical decision model (HDM) and apply the analytic hierarchical process (AHP). Experts are invited from diverse sources to provide a balanced perspective representing different stakeholders. This research focuses on the fast developing Chinese biopharmaceutical industry as a case study. The results of this research have identified thirteen prospective biotech areas that China should invest more resources for development. These technology areas include: recombinant therapeutic proteins, recombinant vaccines, monoclonal antibody technology, cell and tissue engineering, gene therapy, antisense therapy, RNAi, nanobiotechnology, synthetic biology, bioinformatics, pharmacogenetics, gene sequencing, and biotechnology diagnostics. For most of these technology areas, the results have indicated an imitative innovation strategy should be taken as a better strategy under current technological conditions in China. The research has further found that hightech small-to-medium companies and multinational corporations are major innovation contributors in the Chinese biopharmaceutical sector.