IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v39y2010i6p810-821.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Knowledge sources, patent protection, and commercialization of pharmaceutical innovations

Author

Listed:
  • Sternitzke, Christian

Abstract

This paper investigates different types of innovations (from radical to incremental) in the pharmaceutical industry by studying bibliometric data of drugs approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), looking at time-to-market aspects, knowledge sources of these innovations, and protection strategies. Scientific knowledge stemming from the public sector is found to be important for all innovations. Nevertheless, radical innovations build on a higher degree on basic research, and they build on a significantly higher share of own prior scientific research than do incremental innovations. Furthermore, each drug is shown to be accompanied by, on average, about 19 journal publications and 23 additional patents. Additional patent filings peak when the commercialization of the drug is in reach. Firms do not differ among the various types of innovations regarding the amount of additional patent filings, but rather with the speed of filing these patents. Finally, this work contributes to the improvement of future econometric analyses that aim to link bibliometric indicators such as patent or publication counts to firm success.

Suggested Citation

  • Sternitzke, Christian, 2010. "Knowledge sources, patent protection, and commercialization of pharmaceutical innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 810-821, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:39:y:2010:i:6:p:810-821
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048-7333(10)00074-0
    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. Mansfield, Edwin, 1991. "Academic research and industrial innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    2. Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R., 1997. "Present at the biotechnological revolution: transformation of technological identity for a large incumbent pharmaceutical firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 429-446, December.
    3. J. Robert Baum & Stefan Wally, 2003. "Strategic decision speed and firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(11), pages 1107-1129, November.
    4. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Michael S. Fogarty, 2000. "The Meaning of Patent Citations: Report on the NBER/Case-Western Reserve Survey of Patentees," NBER Working Papers 7631, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Gambardella, Alfonso, 1992. "Competitive advantages from in-house scientific research: The US pharmaceutical industry in the 1980s," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 391-407, October.
    6. Hicks, Diana, 1995. "Published Papers, Tacit Competencies and Corporate Management of the Public/Private Character of Knowledge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 4(2), pages 401-424.
    7. Cockburn, Iain M & Henderson, Rebecca M, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    8. Godoe, Helge, 2000. "Innovation regimes, R&D and radical innovations in telecommunications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1033-1046, December.
    9. Chaney, Paul K & Devinney, Timothy M & Winer, Russell S, 1991. "The Impact of New Product Introductions on the Market Value of Firms," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64(4), pages 573-610, October.
    10. Achilladelis, Basil & Schwarzkopf, Albert & Cines, Martin, 1990. "The dynamics of technological innovation: The case of the chemical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 1-34, February.
    11. Fama, Eugene F, 1991. "Efficient Capital Markets: II," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(5), pages 1575-1617, December.
    12. Henry Grabowski & John Vernon, 1990. "A New Look at the Returns and Risks to Pharmaceutical R&D," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(7), pages 804-821, July.
    13. Achilladelis, Basil & Antonakis, Nicholas, 2001. "The dynamics of technological innovation: the case of the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 535-588, April.
    14. Hüseyin Tanriverdi & N. Venkatraman, 2005. "Knowledge relatedness and the performance of multibusiness firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 97-119, February.
    15. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    16. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    17. Comanor, William S & Scherer, Frederic M, 1969. "Patent Statistics as a Measure of Technical Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 77(3), pages 392-398, May/June.
    18. Mowery,David C. & Nelson,Richard R. (ed.), 1999. "Sources of Industrial Leadership," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521645201.
    19. Nathan ROSENBERG, 2009. "Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 11, pages 225-234, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    20. Narin, Francis & Rozek, Richard P., 1988. "Bibliometric analysis of U.S. pharmaceutical industry research performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 139-154, June.
    21. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1994. "Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 63-84, December.
    22. Fama, Eugene F, 1970. "Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 383-417, May.
    23. Wernerfelt, Birger & Montgomery, Cynthia A, 1988. "Tobin's q and the Importance of Focus in Firm Performance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(1), pages 246-250, March.
    24. Curtis R. Chong & David J. Sullivan, 2007. "New uses for old drugs," Nature, Nature, vol. 448(7154), pages 645-646, August.
    25. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    26. Arundel, Anthony & Kabla, Isabelle, 1998. "What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 127-141, June.
    27. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    28. Iain M. Cockburn & Rebecca M. Henderson, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    29. Mansfield, Edwin, 1998. "Academic research and industrial innovation: An update of empirical findings1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 773-776, April.
    30. Koenig, Michael E. D., 1983. "A bibliometric analysis of pharmaceutical research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 15-36, February.
    31. Hicks, Diana M. & Isard, Phoebe A. & Martin, Ben R., 1996. "A morphology of Japanese and European corporate research networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 359-378, May.
    32. Tijssen, Robert J. W., 2004. "Is the commercialisation of scientific research affecting the production of public knowledge?: Global trends in the output of corporate research articles," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 709-733, July.
    33. Birgitte Andersen, 1999. "The hunt for S-shaped growth paths in technological innovation: a patent study," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 487-526.
    34. Lang, Larry H P & Stulz, Rene M, 1994. "Tobin's q, Corporate Diversification, and Firm Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(6), pages 1248-1280, December.
    35. Gambardella,Alfonso, 1995. "Science and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521451185.
    36. Rosenberg, Nathan & Nelson, Richard R., 1994. "American universities and technical advance in industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 323-348, May.
    37. Dosi, Giovanni, 1988. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 1120-1171, September.
    38. Donna Marie DeCarolis & David L. Deeds, 1999. "The impact of stocks and flows of organizational knowledge on firm performance: an empirical investigation of the biotechnology industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(10), pages 953-968, October.
    39. Hirschey, Mark & Richardson, Vernon J., 2004. "Are scientific indicators of patent quality useful to investors?," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 91-107, January.
    40. R. J. W. Tussen & R. K. Buter & Th. N. van Leeuwen, 2000. "Technological Relevance of Science: An Assessment of Citation Linkages between Patents and Research Papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 47(2), pages 389-412, February.
    41. Achilladelis, Basil, 1993. "The dynamics of technological innovation: The sector of antibacterial medicines," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 279-308, August.
    42. Francis, J & Pagach, D & Stephan, J, 1992. "The Stock-Market Response To Earnings Announcements Released During Trading Versus Nontrading Periods," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 165-184.
    43. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953, December.
    44. Francis Narin & Gabriel Pinski & Helen Hofer Gee, 1976. "Structure of the Biomedical Literature," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 27(1), pages 25-45, January.
    45. Wayne S. DeSarbo & C. Anthony Di Benedetto & Michael Song & Indrajit Sinha, 2005. "Revisiting the Miles and Snow strategic framework: uncovering interrelationships between strategic types, capabilities, environmental uncertainty, and firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 47-74, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Anna Giunta & Filippo M. Pericoli & Eleonora Pierucci, 2016. "University–Industry collaboration in the biopharmaceuticals: the Italian case," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 818-840, August.
    2. Rotolo, Daniele & Camerani, Roberto & Grassano, Nicola & Martin, Ben R., 2022. "Why do firms publish? A systematic literature review and a conceptual framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    3. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    4. Leten, Bart & Kelchtermans, Stijn & Belderbos, Ren, 2010. "Internal Basic Research, External Basic Research and the Technological Performance of Pharmaceutical Firms," Working Papers 2010/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    5. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Lia Sheer, 2017. "Back to Basics: Why do Firms Invest in Research?," NBER Working Papers 23187, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Hsu, David H. & Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Zhao, Qifeng, 2021. "Rich on paper? Chinese firms’ academic publications, patents, and market value," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    7. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Andrea Patacconi, 2015. "Killing the Golden Goose? The Decline of Science in Corporate R&D," NBER Working Papers 20902, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Kenneth Zahringer & Christos Kolympiris & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2017. "Academic knowledge quality differentials and the quality of firm innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(5), pages 821-844.
    9. Bastian Rake, 2017. "Determinants of pharmaceutical innovation: the role of technological opportunities revisited," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 691-727, September.
    10. Simeth, Markus & Raffo, Julio D., 2013. "What makes companies pursue an Open Science strategy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1531-1543.
    11. Scott Stern, 2004. "Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 835-853, June.
    12. Salter, Ammon J. & Martin, Ben R., 2001. "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 509-532, March.
    13. Lim, Kwanghui, 2004. "The relationship between research and innovation in the semiconductor and pharmaceutical industries (1981-1997)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 287-321, March.
    14. Fabrizio, Kira R., 2009. "Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 255-267, March.
    15. Kapoor, Rahul & McGrath, Patia J., 2014. "Unmasking the interplay between technology evolution and R&D collaboration: Evidence from the global semiconductor manufacturing industry, 1990–2010," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 555-569.
    16. Markus Simeth & Michele Cincera, 2016. "Corporate Science, Innovation, and Firm Value," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(7), pages 1970-1981, July.
    17. Antonio Malva & Stijn Kelchtermans & Bart Leten & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2015. "Basic science as a prescription for breakthrough inventions in the pharmaceutical industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 670-695, August.
    18. Roberto Camerani & Daniele Rotolo & Nicola Grassano, 2018. "Do Firms Publish? A Multi-Sectoral Analysis," SPRU Working Paper Series 2018-21, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    19. Añón Higón, Dolores, 2016. "In-house versus external basic research and first-to-market innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 816-829.
    20. Yin Li & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2015. "Why do technology firms publish scientific papers? The strategic use of science by small and midsize enterprises in nanotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1016-1033, December.

    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:39:y:2010:i:6:p:810-821. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.