IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v32y2007i4p397-423.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technology transfer perspectives in globalising India (drugs and pharmaceuticals and biotechnology)

Author

Listed:
  • S. Agarwal

    ()

  • Ashwani Gupta

    ()

  • R. Dayal

    ()

Abstract

The paper briefly outlines the status of technology transfer related issues in drugs & pharma and biotechnology sectors in India. The paper also outlines the contemporary business strategies including R&D and technology transfer models. The study indicates that present technology transfer policies and mechanisms are weak and need to be restructured. The current fiscal incentives and tax concessions etc. available for R&D in industry seem to have outlived and are no longer attractive because of continuous lowering of tariff rates and tax rates in the context of WTO and liberalization of policies. Moreover, the issue of R&D support to industry is not covered in the WTO as in case of subsidies. Therefore, it is advisable for the government to revisit the existing promotional measures for R&D. FDI policies also need to be tailored to encourage Technology transfers and capability building. Recommendations are made for making Technology Transfer more effective for the growth and competitiveness of the industry. A technology transfer management model is suggested. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Suggested Citation

  • S. Agarwal & Ashwani Gupta & R. Dayal, 2007. "Technology transfer perspectives in globalising India (drugs and pharmaceuticals and biotechnology)," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 397-423, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:32:y:2007:i:4:p:397-423 DOI: 10.1007/s10961-006-9025-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10961-006-9025-8
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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. Michael Spence, 1976. "Product Selection, Fixed Costs, and Monopolistic Competition," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 217-235.
    2. Franke, Nikolaus & Hippel, Eric von, 2003. "Satisfying heterogeneous user needs via innovation toolkits: the case of Apache security software," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1199-1215, July.
    3. Hart, Oliver D, 1985. "Monopolistic Competition in the Spirit of Chamberlin: Special Results," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 95(380), pages 889-908, December.
    4. Rothwell, R. & Freeman, C. & Horsley, A. & Jervis, V. T. P. & Robertson, A. B. & Townsend, J., 1993. "SAPPHO updated -- project SAPPHO phase II," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 110-110, April.
    5. Gilles Saint-Paul, 2003. "Growth Effects Of Nonproprietary Innovation," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(2-3), pages 429-439, 04/05.
    6. Nancy Gallini & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2002. "Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?," NBER Chapters,in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2, pages 51-78 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Ogawa, Susumu, 1964-, 1997. "Does sticky information affect the locus of innovation? : evidence from the Japanese convenience-store industry," Working papers WP 3984-97., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    8. Michele Boldrin & David Levine, 2002. "The Case Against Intellectual Property," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 209-212, May.
    9. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    10. Lerner, Josh & Tirole, Jean, 2002. "Some Simple Economics of Open," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 197-234, June.
    11. Eaton, B Curtis & Schmitt, Nicolas, 1994. "Flexible Manufacturing and Market Structure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 875-888, September.
    12. Michael Sattinger, 1984. "Value of an Additional Firm in Monopolistic Competition," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(2), pages 321-332.
    13. Baumol, William J, 1982. "Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the Theory of Industry Structure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 1-15, March.
    14. Curtis Eaton, B. & Lipsey, Richard G., 1989. "Product differentiation," Handbook of Industrial Organization,in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 12, pages 723-768 Elsevier.
    15. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    16. Pamela D. Morrison & John H. Roberts & Eric von Hippel, 2000. "Determinants of User Innovation and Innovation Sharing in a Local Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(12), pages 1513-1527, December.
    17. Adam B. Jaffe & Josh Lerner & Scott Stern, 2002. "Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number jaff02-1, January.
    18. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    19. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters,in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Harhoff, Dietmar & Henkel, Joachim & von Hippel, Eric, 2003. "Profiting from voluntary information spillovers: how users benefit by freely revealing their innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1753-1769, December.
    21. Rothwell, R. & Freeman, C. & Horlsey, A. & Jervis, V. T. P. & Robertson, A. B. & Townsend, J., 1974. "SAPPHO updated - project SAPPHO phase II," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 258-291, November.
    22. Benkler, Yochai, 2002. "Intellectual property and the organization of information production," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 81-107, July.
    23. Anderson, Simon Peter & de Palma, Andre & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1988. "A Representative Consumer Theory of the Logit Model," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 29(3), pages 461-466, August.
    24. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Shane Greenstein, 1994. "The Competitive Crash in Large-Scale Commercial Computing," NBER Working Papers 4901, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    25. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2009. "Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 611-635.
    26. Spence, Michael, 1976. "Product Differentiation and Welfare," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(2), pages 407-414, May.
    27. Glen L. Urban & Eric von Hippel, 1988. "Lead User Analyses for the Development of New Industrial Products," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(5), pages 569-582, May.
    28. Allen, Robert C., 1983. "Collective invention," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 1-24, March.
    29. Franke, Nikolaus & Shah, Sonali, 2003. "How communities support innovative activities: an exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 157-178, January.
    30. repec:bin:bpeajo:v:27:y:1996:i:1996-3:p:1-83 is not listed on IDEAS
    31. Lancaster, Kelvin, 1975. "Socially Optimal Product Differentiation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(4), pages 567-585, September.
    32. Mansfield, Edwin & Wagner, Samuel, 1975. "Organizational and Strategic Factors Associated with Probabilities of Success in Industrial R & D," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(2), pages 179-198, April.
    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. Schmiele, Anja, 2009. "Drivers for international innovation activities in developed and emerging countries," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-064, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    2. Anja Schmiele, 2012. "Drivers for international innovation activities in developed and emerging countries," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 98-123, February.
    3. Basant, Rakesh & Srinivasan, Shuchi, 2015. "Intellectual Property Protection in India and Implications for Health Innovation: Emerging Perspectives," IIMA Working Papers WP2015-04-01, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technology; R&D; Drugs & pharma; Biotechnology; Competitiveness; Policy; WTO; Incentives; Globalization; Model; Technology transfer; O33;

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:kap:jtecht:v:32:y:2007:i:4:p:397-423. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

    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.