IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v36y2007i4p566-589.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The myth of the biotech revolution: An assessment of technological, clinical and organisational change

Author

Listed:
  • Hopkins, Michael M.
  • Martin, Paul A.
  • Nightingale, Paul
  • Kraft, Alison
  • Mahdi, Surya

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Hopkins, Michael M. & Martin, Paul A. & Nightingale, Paul & Kraft, Alison & Mahdi, Surya, 2007. "The myth of the biotech revolution: An assessment of technological, clinical and organisational change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 566-589, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:36:y:2007:i:4:p:566-589
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048-7333(07)00056-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. David, Paul A, 1990. "The Dynamo and the Computer: An Historical Perspective on the Modern Productivity Paradox," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 355-361, May.
    2. Galambos, Louis & Sturchio, Jeffrey L., 1998. "Pharmaceutical Firms and the Transition to Biotechnology: A Study in Strategic Innovation," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 72(02), pages 250-278, June.
    3. Freeman, Chris & Louca, Francisco, 2002. "As Time Goes By: From the Industrial Revolutions to the Information Revolution," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199251056.
    4. Kenney, Martin, 1986. "Schumpeterian innovation and entrepreneurs in capitalism: A case study of the U.S. biotechnology industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 21-31, February.
    5. Devine, Warren D., 1983. "From Shafts to Wires: Historical Perspective on Electrification," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(02), pages 347-372, June.
    6. Nicholas Crafts, 2004. "Steam as a general purpose technology: A growth accounting perspective," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 338-351, April.
    7. Timothy J. Sturgeon, 2002. "Modular production networks: a new American model of industrial organization," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 451-496, June.
    8. Giesecke, Susanne, 2000. "The contrasting roles of government in the development of biotechnology industry in the US and Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 205-223, February.
    9. Pavitt, Keith, 1998. "Technologies, Products and Organization in the Innovating Firm: What Adam Smith Tells Us and Joseph Schumpeter Doesn't," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 433-452, September.
    10. Dohse, Dirk, 2000. "Technology policy and the regions -- the case of the BioRegio contest," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1111-1133, December.
    11. Nightingale, Paul, 2004. "Technological capabilities, invisible infrastructure and the un-social construction of predictability: the overlooked fixed costs of useful research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1259-1284, November.
    12. Guice, Jon, 1999. "Designing the future: the culture of new trends in science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 81-98, January.
    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. Ali, Ayfer & Gittelman, Michelle, 2016. "Research paradigms and useful inventions in medicine: Patents and licensing by teams of clinical and basic scientists in Academic Medical Centers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1499-1511.
    2. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier.
    3. Vargas-Peláez, Claudia Marcela & Soares, Luciano & Rover, Marina Raijche Mattozo & Blatt, Carine Raquel & Mantel-Teeuwisse, Aukje & Rossi Buenaventura, Francisco Augusto & Restrepo, Luis Guillermo & L, 2017. "Towards a theoretical model on medicines as a health need," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 167-174.
    4. repec:hig:fsight:v:11:y:2017:i:2:p:44-53 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:spr:scient:v:94:y:2013:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0711-z is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli & Daniele Rotolo & Vito Albino, 2014. "Determinants of Patent Citations in Biotechnology: An Analysis of Patent Influence Across the Industrial and Organizational Boundaries," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-05, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.
    7. DiVito, Lori, 2012. "Institutional entrepreneurship in constructing alternative paths: A comparison of biotech hybrids," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 884-896.
    8. Gittelman, Michelle, 2016. "The revolution re-visited: Clinical and genetics research paradigms and the productivity paradox in drug discovery," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1570-1585.
    9. repec:oup:indcch:v:27:y:2018:i:1:p:173-187. is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Nahuis, Roel & Stemerding, Dirk, 2013. "Genomics as a new research regime? Evidence from the Netherlands," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 676-687.
    11. repec:eee:tefoso:v:123:y:2017:i:c:p:283-297 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Lauto, Giancarlo & Valentin, Finn, 2016. "The knowledge production model of the New Sciences: The case of Translational Medicine," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 12-21.
    13. Fabio Sorrentino & Francesco Garraffo, 2012. "Explaining performing R&D through alliances: Implications for the business model of Italian dedicated biotech firms," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(3), pages 449-475, August.
    14. repec:oup:scippl:v:45:y:2018:i:1:p:24-35. is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Andreas Reinstaller & Gerhard Schwarz, 2013. "The Use of Biotechnology Patents in Austria and their Impact on Private and Public Research," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 86(3), pages 237-251, March.
    16. Nikulainen, Tuomo & Kulvik, Martti, 2009. "How General Are General Purpose Technologies? Evidence from nano-, bio- and ICT-technologies in Finland," Discussion Papers 1208, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    17. Kotiranta, Annu – Kulvik & Tahvanainen, Antti – Trieste, . "Raiders Of Lost Value," ETLA B, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy, number 267, June.
    18. Aarden, Erik & Van Hoyweghen, Ine & Horstman, Klasien, 2011. "Constructing access in predictive medicine. Comparing classification for hereditary breast cancer risks in England, Germany and the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(4), pages 553-559, February.
    19. Jing Zhang & Charles Baden-Fuller, 2010. "The Influence of Technological Knowledge Base and Organizational Structure on Technology Collaboration," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 679-704, June.
    20. Bergek, Anna & Berggren, Christian & Magnusson, Thomas & Hobday, Michael, 2013. "Technological discontinuities and the challenge for incumbent firms: Destruction, disruption or creative accumulation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1210-1224.
    21. Wydra, Sven, 2009. "Production and employment impacts of new technologies: analysis for biotechnology," FZID Discussion Papers 08-2009, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    22. repec:eee:crpeac:v:21:y:2010:i:7:p:631-641 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Alessia Pisoni & Alberto Onetti & Luciano Fratocchi & Marco Talaia, 2010. "Managing R&D activities in the Italian red biotech industry. A comparison between Italian independent firms and multinational companies," Economics and Quantitative Methods qf1003, Department of Economics, University of Insubria.
    24. Roberta Piergiovanni & Enrico Santarelli, 2013. "The more you spend, the more you get? The effects of R&D and capital expenditures on the patenting activities of biotechnology firms," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 497-521, February.

    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:eee:respol:v:36:y:2007:i:4:p:566-589. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.