IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v8y2021i1d10.1057_s41599-021-00777-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The translational lag narrative in policy discourse in the United States and the European Union: a comparative study

Author

Listed:
  • Erik Aarden

    (University of Klagenfurt)

  • Luca Marelli

    (KU Leuven
    University of Milan)

  • Alessandro Blasimme

    (ETH Zurich)

Abstract

Whilst basic science rapidly produces new insights into the biological determinants of human health and disease, clinical innovation is often said to lag behind, as it fails to rapidly turn such knowledge into new tools for innovative patient care. This view of biomedical innovation constitutes a ‘translational lag narrative’, which is widely present in current research policy. This paper presents a qualitative content analysis of a corpus of documents (n = 28) issued by key policy actors in the domain of clinical translation between 2000 and 2018 in the United States and the European Union. The aim is to reconstruct how policy discourse articulates the translational lag narrative, and to analyze how the latter relates to specific sociotechnical imaginaries of progress and of the role of policymaking in their realization. The article identifies key impediments to clinical translation and highlights salient differences in the sociotechnical imaginaries of translation in the US and the EU. In the US, policy discourse around translation is mostly driven by the perceived need to re-instate linearity in the transition from knowledge-production to clinical innovation. In the European context, instead, the driving imaginary of the policy discourse around clinical translation has to do with constructing a distinctly European model of economic growth centered around the idea of a knowledge-based economy, thereby connecting policy stimuli for translation with broader political imaginations. This analysis elucidates how publicly staged narratives about science and technology in the biomedical field simultaneously contain state-specific visions of progress and statecraft.

Suggested Citation

  • Erik Aarden & Luca Marelli & Alessandro Blasimme, 2021. "The translational lag narrative in policy discourse in the United States and the European Union: a comparative study," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-9, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:8:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-021-00777-y
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-021-00777-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-021-00777-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-021-00777-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Henri Delanghe & Ugur Muldur & Luc Soete (ed.), 2009. "European Science and Technology Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13427.
    2. Gardner, John & Webster, Andrew, 2016. "The social management of biomedical novelty: Facilitating translation in regenerative medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 90-97.
    3. Declan Butler, 2008. "Translational research: Crossing the valley of death," Nature, Nature, vol. 453(7197), pages 840-842, June.
    4. Mats Benner, 2018. "The New Global Politics of Science," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 16501.
    5. Aant Elzinga, 2012. "Features of the current science policy regime: Viewed in historical perspective," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(4), pages 416-428, August.
    6. Hogarth, Stuart, 2015. "Neoliberal technocracy: Explaining how and why the US Food and Drug Administration has championed pharmacogenomics," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 255-262.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Neighbors, Harold W. & Mattingly, Delvon T. & Johnson, Janay & Morse, Kayla, 2023. "The contribution of research to racial health equity? Blame and responsibility in navigating the status quo of anti-black systemic racism," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 316(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cambrosio, Alberto & Campbell, Jonah & Keating, Peter & Polk, Jessica B. & Aguilar-Mahecha, Adriana & Basik, Mark, 2022. "Healthcare policy by other means: Cancer clinical research as “oncopolicy”," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    2. Christoph March & Ina Schieferdecker, 2021. "Technological Sovereignty as Ability, Not Autarky," CESifo Working Paper Series 9139, CESifo.
    3. Watzinger, Martin & Schnitzer, Monika, 2019. "Standing on the Shoulders of Science," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 215, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    4. Daniel P. Gross & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2022. "Crisis Innovation Policy from World War II to COVID-19," Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 135-181.
    5. Svend Remøe, 2010. "Supra-national Governance of Research and Innovation Policies and Economic Globalization: Tensions and Dilemmas," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 1(4), pages 268-288, December.
    6. Beáta Gavurová & Martina Halásková & Samuel Koróny, 2019. "Research and Development Indicators of EU28 Countries from Viewpoint of Super-efficiency DEA Analysis," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 67(1), pages 225-242.
    7. Iris Wanzenböck & Koen Frenken, 2018. "The subsidiarity principle: Turning challenge-oriented innovation policy on its head," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1806, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jan 2018.
    8. Pier Paolo Angelini, "undated". "The role of inter-organizational proximity on the evolution of the European Aerospace R&D collaboration network," CERIS Working Paper 201402, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    9. Olof Hallonsten, 2013. "Introducing ‘facilitymetrics’: a first review and analysis of commonly used measures of scientific leadership among synchrotron radiation facilities worldwide," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 497-513, August.
    10. Alberto Bezama & Carlo Ingrao & Sinéad O’Keeffe & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Resources, Collaborators, and Neighbors: The Three-Pronged Challenge in the Implementation of Bioeconomy Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-18, December.
    11. Rossi, Federica & Caloffi, Annalisa & Russo, Margherita, 2016. "Networked by design: Can policy requirements influence organisations' networking behaviour?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 203-214.
    12. Philip McCann & Raquel Ortega-Argil�s, 2015. "Smart Specialization, Regional Growth and Applications to European Union Cohesion Policy," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(8), pages 1291-1302, August.
    13. Gergő Tóth & Sándor Juhász & Zoltán Elekes & Balázs Lengyel, 2021. "Repeated collaboration of inventors across European regions," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(12), pages 2252-2272, December.
    14. Marguin, Séverine & Haus, Juliane & Heinrich, Anna Juliane & Kahl, Antje & Schendzielorz, Cornelia & Singh, Ajit, 2021. "Positionality Reloaded: Debating the Dimensions of Reflexivity in the Relationship Between Science and Society: An Editorial," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 46(2), pages 7-34.
    15. Bonnin Roca, Jaime & O'Sullivan, Eoin, 2022. "The role of regulators in mitigating uncertainty within the Valley of Death," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    16. Paul David & Adriaan van Zon, 2013. "Designing an Optimal 'Tech Fix' Path to Global Climate Stability: Directed R&D and Embodied Technical Change in a Multi-phase Framework," Discussion Papers 12-029, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    17. Richard Heidler & Olof Hallonsten, 2015. "Qualifying the performance evaluation of Big Science beyond productivity, impact and costs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(1), pages 295-312, July.
    18. Tim Hulsen, 2020. "Sharing Is Caring—Data Sharing Initiatives in Healthcare," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-12, April.
    19. D’Ippolito, Beatrice & Rüling, Charles-Clemens, 2019. "Research collaboration in Large Scale Research Infrastructures: Collaboration types and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1282-1296.
    20. Liang (Leon) Xu & Hui Zhao & Nicholas C. Petruzzi, 2021. "Inducing Compliance with Postmarket Studies for Drugs Under FDA’s Accelerated Approval Pathway," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 170-190, 1-2.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:8:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-021-00777-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.