IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cnpexx/v22y2017i1p76-91.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governing new global health-care markets: the case of stem cell treatments

Author

Listed:
  • Brian Salter
  • Yinhua Zhou
  • Saheli Datta

Abstract

Stem cell innovation has enabled the growth of a global market of treatments for a wide range of diseases but most of this market operates outside the domain of orthodox forms of innovation governance. Much of the analysis of this issue has adopted a supply side perspective informed by the values of the orthodox scientific model of biomedical innovation, arguing that national and transnational regulation has failed to impose appropriate standards on the ‘illicit’ supply of stem cell treatments. In contrast, this paper shows how and why the analysis of global stem cell innovation governance must incorporate the market and health consumer demand into the conceptual framework. Central to the argument is the role of innovation models in mediating the relationship between demand and supply in the global market of new stem cell treatments. Different models of scientific and medical innovation mediate that relationship in different ways and, in jurisdictions where health consumer demand is frustrated, may result in parallel political demands for change in stem cell innovation governance. Such demands are likely to be resisted by the dominant scientific model, producing a further response from health consumers and a continuing dynamic in the political economy of stem cell treatments.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian Salter & Yinhua Zhou & Saheli Datta, 2017. "Governing new global health-care markets: the case of stem cell treatments," New Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 76-91, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:cnpexx:v:22:y:2017:i:1:p:76-91
    DOI: 10.1080/13563467.2016.1198757
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13563467.2016.1198757
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13563467.2016.1198757?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. Dhaval Dave & Henry Saffer, 2012. "Impact of Direct-to-Consumer Advertising on Pharmaceutical Prices and Demand," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 79(1), pages 97-126, July.
    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. Bicudo, Edison & Faulkner, Alex & Li, Phoebe, 2021. "Sociotechnical alignment in biomedicine: The 3D bioprinting market beyond technology convergence," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(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. Dhaval M. Dave, 2013. "Effects of Pharmaceutical Promotion: A Review and Assessment," NBER Working Papers 18830, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Castanheira, Micael & Ornaghi, Carmine & Siotis, Georges, 2019. "The unexpected consequences of generic entry," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    3. Alpert, Abby & Lakdawalla, Darius & Sood, Neeraj, 2023. "Prescription drug advertising and drug utilization: The role of Medicare Part D," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    4. Julen Castillo‐Apraiz & Jesus Matey, 2020. "Customizing competitive strategy to entry timing: Implications for firm performance in the pharmaceutical industry," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(6), pages 976-985, September.
    5. Anusua Datta & Dhaval Dave, 2017. "Effects of Physician‐directed Pharmaceutical Promotion on Prescription Behaviors: Longitudinal Evidence," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(4), pages 450-468, April.
    6. Svetlana Beilfuss & Sebastian Linde, 2021. "Pharmaceutical opioid marketing and physician prescribing behavior," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(12), pages 3159-3185, December.
    7. Robert Nathenson & Michael R. Richards, 2018. "Do coverage mandates affect direct-to-consumer advertising for pharmaceuticals? Evidence from parity laws," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 321-336, September.
    8. Matthew Chesnes & Ginger Zhe Jin, 2016. "Direct-to-Consumer Advertising and Online Search," NBER Working Papers 22582, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Chesnes, Matthew & Jin, Ginger Zhe, 2019. "Direct-to-consumer advertising and online search," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 1-22.
    10. Eisenberg, Matthew D. & Avery, Rosemary J. & Cantor, Jonathan H., 2017. "Vitamin panacea: Is advertising fueling demand for products with uncertain scientific benefit?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 30-44.
    11. Gregory G. Lubiani & Albert A. Okunade & Weiwei Chen, 2018. "Income Elasticity Decomposition Models and Determinants of U.S. Pharmaceutical Expenditures," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 46(4), pages 389-403, December.
    12. Byl, Jacob P. & Viscusi, W. Kip, 2021. "Experimental study of consumer responses to different sources of information about prescription drugs," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 754-771.
    13. Lakdawalla, Darius & Sood, Neeraj & Gu, Qian, 2013. "Pharmaceutical advertising and Medicare Part D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1356-1367.
    14. Siotis, Georges & Castanheira, Micael & de Frutos, Maria-Angeles & Ornaghi, Carmine, 2017. "The Unexpected Consequences of Asymmetric Competition. An Application to Big Pharma," CEPR Discussion Papers 11813, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Deiana, C. & Giua, L. & Nisticò, R., 2020. "Opium Price Shocks and Prescription Opioids in the US," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 20/23, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.

    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:taf:cnpexx:v:22:y:2017:i:1:p:76-91. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cnpe20 .

    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.