IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The French Paradox: How Can We Explain The Assimilation Of Health Biotechnogies?

Listed author(s):
  • Bertrand PAUGET


    (European Business School, Paris, France)

  • Xavier PARISOT

    (European Business School, Paris, France)

Registered author(s):

    There is in France and more generally in Europe a paradox. In the agro industry business, the use of biotechnology is suspicious and controversy (see for example the emblematic case of GMOs), the subject is little debate in the health sector. Yet, in those two sectors, the production process of biotechnology is the same. How can we explain those differences? This article aims to explain the reasons for the acceptance of biotechnology in the business of health. Health professionals interviewed in this study leave use the biotechnology as a tool to improve their practices and benefiting their patients. In doing so, they play a key role to facilitate their consumption by the public. This article is based on a qualitative and exploratory methodology. Our sample consists of leaders of biotech companies or selling biotechnology and doctors who use them.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by University of Pitesti in its journal Scientific Bulletin - Economic Sciences.

    Volume (Year): 12 (2013)
    Issue (Month): 2 ()
    Pages: 85-94

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:pts:journl:y:2013:i:2:p:85-94
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pts:journl:y:2013:i:2:p:85-94. 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: (Logica Banica)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.