The Allocation of Publicly Funded Biomedical Research
In: Medical Care Output and Productivity
We develop a simple theoretical model of the allocation of public biomedical research expenditure, and present some empirical evidence about the determinants of this allocation. The structure of expenditure should depend on the relative costs as well as the relative benefits of different kinds of research. Analysts of technical change typically have data on neither of these, but the measures of disease burden we use are indicative of the benefit of achieving advances against different diseases. We calculate distributions of government-funded biomedical research expenditure, by disease, from records of all research projects supported by the US Public Health Service: to obtain a reasonably complete accounting of disease burden, we utilize data on both the dying (from the Vital Statistics-Mortality Detail file) and the living (from the National Health Interview Survey). We find a very strong positive relationship across diseases between total life-years lost before age 65 and public R&D expenditure. But the amount of publicly-funded research on a disease decreases with the share of life-years before age 65 lost to the deases by non-whites, perhaps because lack of scientific knowledge is a less important cause of premature mortality among non-whites than it is among whites. The number of research grants mentioning a chronic condition is completely uncorrelated with the number of people with the condition but very strongly positively related to the number of people whose activities are limited by that condition. There tends to be more research about chronic conditions that are prevalent among people living in low-income households, and that are prevalent among the young (under age 18) and the old (above age 75).
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
|This chapter was published in: ||This item is provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Chapters with number
7642.||Handle:|| RePEc:nbr:nberch:7642||Contact details of provider:|| Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.|
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1996.
"Scale, Scope, and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 32-59, Spring.
- Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, . "Scale, Scope and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery," Working Papers ec25/94, Department of Economics, University of Lancaster.
- Adams, James D, 1990. "Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(4), pages 673-702, August.
- Zvi Griliches & Frank R. Lichtenberg, 1982. "R and D and Productivity at the Industry Level: Is There Still a Relationship?," NBER Working Papers 0850, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Frank R. Lichtenberg, 1996. "The Effect of Pharmaceutical Utilization and Innovation on Hospitalization and Mortality," NBER Working Papers 5418, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Lichtenberg, Frank R, 1996. "Do (More and Better) Drugs Keep People Out of Hospitals?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(2), pages 384-88, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberch:7642. 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: ()
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.