IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v81y2014icp22-38.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Big Pharma, little science?

Author

Listed:
  • Rafols, Ismael
  • Hopkins, Michael M.
  • Hoekman, Jarno
  • Siepel, Josh
  • O'Hare, Alice
  • Perianes-Rodríguez, Antonio
  • Nightingale, Paul

Abstract

There is a widespread perception that pharmaceutical R&D is facing a productivity crisis characterised by stagnation in the numbers of new drug approvals in the face of increasing R&D costs. This study explores pharmaceutical R&D dynamics by examining the publication activities of all R&D laboratories of the major European and US pharmaceutical firms (Big Pharma) during the period 1995–2009. The empirical findings present an industry in transformation. In the first place, we observe a decline of the total number of publications by large firms. Second, we show a relative increase of their external collaborations suggesting a tendency to outsource, and a diversification of the disciplinary base, in particular towards computation, health services and more clinical approaches. Also evident is a more pronounced decline in publications by both R&D laboratories located in Europe and by firms with European headquarters. Finally, while publications by Big Pharma in emerging economies sharply increase, they remain extremely low compared with those in developed countries. In summary, the trend in this transformation is one of a gradual decrease in internal research efforts and increasing reliance on external research. These empirical insights support the view that Big Pharma are increasingly becoming ‘network integrators’ rather than the prime locus of drug discovery.

Suggested Citation

  • Rafols, Ismael & Hopkins, Michael M. & Hoekman, Jarno & Siepel, Josh & O'Hare, Alice & Perianes-Rodríguez, Antonio & Nightingale, Paul, 2014. "Big Pharma, little science?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 22-38.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:81:y:2014:i:c:p:22-38
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2012.06.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162512001540
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.06.007?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Matteo Lascialfari & Marie-Benoît Magrini & Guillaume Cabanac, 2022. "Unpacking research lock-in through a diachronic analysis of topic cluster trajectories in scholarly publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6165-6189, November.
    2. J. Gómez-Verjan & I. Gonzalez-Sanchez & E. Estrella-Parra & R. Reyes-Chilpa, 2015. "Trends in the chemical and pharmacological research on the tropical trees Calophyllum brasiliense and Calophyllum inophyllum, a global context," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 1019-1030, November.
    3. Michele Cincera & Ela Ince, 2019. "Types of Innovation and Firm performance," Working Papers TIMES² 2019-032, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Fumio Teramae & Tomohiro Makino & Yeongjoo Lim & Shintaro Sengoku & Kota Kodama, 2020. "Impact of Research and Development Strategy on Sustainable Growth in Multinational Pharmaceutical Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-15, July.
    5. Roberto Camerani & Daniele Rotolo & Nicola Grassano, 2018. "Do firms publish? A multi-sectoral analysis," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2018-05, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Patricia Laurens & Christian Le Bas & Antoine Schoen, 2019. "Worldwide IP coverage of patented inventions in large pharma firms: to what extent do the internationalisation of R&D and firm strategy matter?," Post-Print hal-01725229, HAL.
    7. Bastian Krieger & Maikel Pellens & Knut Blind & Sonia Gruber & Torben Schubert, 2021. "Are firms withdrawing from basic research? An analysis of firm-level publication behaviour in Germany," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9677-9698, December.
    8. Blandinieres, Florence & Krieger, Bastian & Pellens, Maikel, 2021. "Cluster support activities in the German biotechnology sector," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 233052.
    9. 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).
    10. Sara Amoroso & Simone Vannuccini, 2019. "Teaming up with Large R&D Investors: Good or Bad for Knowledge Production and Diffusion?," SPRU Working Paper Series 2019-20, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    11. He, Vivianna Fang & von Krogh, Georg & Sirén, Charlotta & Gersdorf, Thomas, 2021. "Asymmetries between partners and the success of university-industry research collaborations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    12. Azagra-Caro, Joaquín M. & Tijssen, Robert J.W. & Tur, Elena M. & Yegros-Yegros, Alfredo, 2019. "University-industry scientific production and the Great Recession," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 210-220.
    13. Cecere, Grazia & Martinelli, Arianna, 2017. "Drivers of knowledge accumulation in electronic waste management: An analysis of publication data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 925-938.
    14. 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.
    15. Chen, Shih-Hsin & Lin, Wei-Ting, 2017. "The dynamic role of universities in developing an emerging sector: a case study of the biotechnology sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 283-297.
    16. 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.
    17. Jiang, Hanchen & Qiang, Maoshan & Fan, Qixiang & Zhang, Mengqing, 2018. "Scientific research driven by large-scale infrastructure projects: A case study of the Three Gorges Project in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 61-71.
    18. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    19. Vincent Larivière & Benoit Macaluso & Philippe Mongeon & Kyle Siler & Cassidy R Sugimoto, 2018. "Vanishing industries and the rising monopoly of universities in published research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-10, August.
    20. Michele Boldrin & David K Levine, 2021. "Reforming Patent Law: The Case of Covid‐​19," Levine's Working Paper Archive 786969000000001782, David K. Levine.
    21. Bonnin Roca, Jaime & O'Sullivan, Eoin, 2022. "The role of regulators in mitigating uncertainty within the Valley of Death," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).

    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:tefoso:v:81:y:2014:i:c:p:22-38. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.