IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/crc/wpaper/2008.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Biomed Europa: after the coronavirus, a public infrastructure to overcome the pharmaceutical oligopoly

Author

Listed:
  • Massimo FLORIO

    (University of Milan, Department of Economics, Management, Quantitative Methods, Milan (Italy))

Abstract

As of June 30th, 2020, the global outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)—associated coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has claimed about 500,000 lives, with over 10 million confirmed cases and nearly 3 billion people around the world under some form of lockdown. The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed profound weaknesses in a global health system that in the last decades relied in most countries too heavily on the pro-profit private sector for the discovery, development and distribution of new drugs. Pharmaceutical research is slow, risky, and costly. Governments allocate public funds to health-related research – grants for the most part aimed at supporting research upstream of drug development. Rather, late-stage drug development is largely funded by private pharmaceutical companies, drug corporations and venture capitals, which are incentivized to invest by a system of patent monopolies. To maximize their financial returns, private agents invest almost exclusively on the most marketable and profitable biomedical sectors, where drugs command the highest profits even if sometimes offer marginal therapeutic improvements and have little impact on social welfare. Critically important biomedical research sectors remain thus underfunded, and urgent public health needs are left unmet by the investment plans of the industry. Such was the case of drug development to prevent and fight coronavirus infections – neglected by “Big-Pharma†companies despite the alarming concerns raised by the scientific community for almost 20 years, the predicted economic burden of a pandemic on the public sanitary system, and the undisputable societal benefits represented by the discovery of an affordable cure. This pandemic provides a fundamental lesson — one ignored after the outbreak of SARS in 2003, the epidemic of MERS in 2006, and other past pandemics — a lesson about infectious threats that we face globally and that exacerbate vulnerabilities associated with income inequality and health disparities. It is now imperative to rethink the present public health funding strategy, and the roles and goals of all players involved. Here, after a brief analysis of the causes underlying the failure of the private sector to prevent and address the present COVID-19 pandemic, we propose a structural intervention aimed at creating the conditions for a new model of public health research. We detail a plan for an international, interconnected, transparent, science-informed, and publicly funded research infrastructure for pharmaceutical and biomedical research – BIOMED EUROPA. The proposed platform aims at identifying research priorities in the public health sector, 5 focusing efforts on the development of preventive and therapeutic strategies against those diseases that pose the greatest threats to human and social welfare. We suggest that BIOMED EUROPA should be managed as both a research infrastructure, along the model of CERN (the European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva) or the EMBL (European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Heidelberg) and as a knowledge-intensive public enterprise with an industrial policy mission, such as the ESA (European Space Agency).

Suggested Citation

  • Massimo FLORIO, 2020. "Biomed Europa: after the coronavirus, a public infrastructure to overcome the pharmaceutical oligopoly," CIRIEC Working Papers 2008, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
  • Handle: RePEc:crc:wpaper:2008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ciriec.uliege.be/repec/WP20-08.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philippe Aghion & Mathias Dewatripont & Julian Kolev & Fiona Murray & Scott Stern, 2016. "Of Mice and Academics: Examining the Effect of Openness on Innovation," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) halshs-01496928, HAL.
    2. Comanor, William S. & Scherer, F.M., 2013. "Mergers and innovation in the pharmaceutical industry," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 106-113.
    3. Stern, Ariel Dora, 2017. "Innovation under regulatory uncertainty: Evidence from medical technology," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 181-200.
    4. Lakdawalla, Darius & Malani, Anup & Reif, Julian, 2017. "The insurance value of medical innovation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 94-102.
    5. Pierre Dubois & Olivier de Mouzon & Fiona Scott-Morton & Paul Seabright, 2015. "Market size and pharmaceutical innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 46(4), pages 844-871, October.
    6. Rena M. Conti & Jonathan Gruber & Daniel A. Ollendorf & Peter J. Neumann, 2020. "Valuing Rare Pediatric Drugs: An Economics Perspective," NBER Working Papers 27978, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Fiona Murray & Philippe Aghion & Mathias Dewatripont & Julian Kolev & Scott Stern, 2016. "Of Mice and Academics: Examining the Effect of Openness on Innovation," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 212-252, February.
    8. Simona Gamba & Laura Magazzini & Paolo Pertile, 2019. "R&D and market size: who benefits from orphan drug regulation?," Working Papers 09/2019, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    9. Gamba, Simona & Magazzini, Laura & Pertile, Paolo, 2021. "R&D and market size: Who benefits from orphan drug legislation?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    10. Sandeep Juneja & Aastha Gupta & Suerie Moon & Stephen Resch, 2017. "Projected savings through public health voluntary licences of HIV drugs negotiated by the Medicines Patent Pool (MPP)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-15, May.
    11. Manica Balasegaram & Peter Kolb & John McKew & Jaykumar Menon & Piero Olliaro & Tomasz Sablinski & Zakir Thomas & Matthew H Todd & Els Torreele & John Wilbanks, 2017. "An open source pharma roadmap," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-7, April.
    12. Jeffrey Clemens, 2012. "The Effect of U.S. Health Insurance Expansions on Medical Innovation," Discussion Papers 11-016, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    13. Nicola Dimitri, 2012. "R&D Incentives for Neglected Diseases," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-4, December.
    14. Eliana Barrenho & Marisa Miraldo & Peter C. Smith, 2019. "Does global drug innovation correspond to burden of disease? The neglected diseases in developed and developing countries," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(1), pages 123-143, January.
    15. Blume-Kohout, Margaret E. & Sood, Neeraj, 2013. "Market size and innovation: Effects of Medicare Part D on pharmaceutical research and development," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 327-336.
    16. Daron Acemoglu & Joshua Linn, 2004. "Market Size in Innovation: Theory and Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(3), pages 1049-1090.
    17. Rea,Philip A. & Pauly,Mark V. & Burns,Lawton R., 2018. "Managing Discovery in the Life Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107130906.
    18. Anthony B. Atkinson & Joseph E. Stiglitz, 2015. "Lectures on Public Economics Updated edition," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 2, number 10493.
    19. Nord, Erik & Richardson, Jeff & Street, Andrew & Kuhse, Helga & Singer, Peter, 1995. "Maximizing health benefits vs egalitarianism: An Australian survey of health issues," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 1429-1437, November.
    20. Franco Malerba & Luigi Orsenigo, 2015. "The evolution of the pharmaceutical industry," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(5), pages 664-687, July.
    21. Jobjörnsson, Sebastian & Forster, Martin & Pertile, Paolo & Burman, Carl-Fredrik, 2016. "Late-stage pharmaceutical R&D and pricing policies under two-stage regulation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 298-311.
    22. Henry Hansmann, 2012. "Ownership and Organizational Form [The Handbook of Organizational Economics]," Introductory Chapters,, Princeton University Press.
    23. Gamba, Simona, 2017. "The Effect of Intellectual Property Rights on Domestic Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Sector," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 15-27.
    24. Congressional Budget Office, 2021. "Research and Development in the Pharmaceutical Industry," Reports 57025, Congressional Budget Office.
    25. Fan, Victoria Y & Jamison, Dean T & Summers, Lawrence H, 2018. "Pandemic risk: how large are the expected losses?," Scholarly Articles 35014363, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    26. Ayotte, Kenneth & Hansmann, Henry, 2015. "A nexus of contracts theory of legal entities," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-12.
    27. Jan E. Carette & Matthijs Raaben & Anthony C. Wong & Andrew S. Herbert & Gregor Obernosterer & Nirupama Mulherkar & Ana I. Kuehne & Philip J. Kranzusch & April M. Griffin & Gordon Ruthel & Paola Dal C, 2011. "Ebola virus entry requires the cholesterol transporter Niemann–Pick C1," Nature, Nature, vol. 477(7364), pages 340-343, September.
    28. Jeffrey Clemens & Parker Rogers, 2020. "Demand Shocks, Procurement Policies, and the Nature of Medical Innovation: Evidence from Wartime Prosthetic Device Patents," NBER Working Papers 26679, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    29. Amy Finkelstein, 2004. "Static and Dynamic Effects of Health Policy: Evidence from the Vaccine Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(2), pages 527-564.
    30. Marceline Côté & John Misasi & Tao Ren & Anna Bruchez & Kyungae Lee & Claire Marie Filone & Lisa Hensley & Qi Li & Daniel Ory & Kartik Chandran & James Cunningham, 2011. "Small molecule inhibitors reveal Niemann–Pick C1 is essential for Ebola virus infection," Nature, Nature, vol. 477(7364), pages 344-348, September.
    31. Ryan Lampe & Petra Moser, 2016. "Patent Pools, Competition, and Innovation—Evidence from 20 US Industries under the New Deal," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 1-36.
    32. Nicola Dimitri, 2012. "R&D for Neglected Diseases," Working Papers 2012/07, Maastricht School of Management.
    33. Rea,Philip A. & Pauly,Mark V. & Burns,Lawton R., 2018. "Managing Discovery in the Life Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107577305.
    34. Leila Agha & Soomi Kim & Danielle Li, 2020. "Insurance Design and Pharmaceutical Innovation," NBER Working Papers 27563, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    35. Luc Bernier & Massimo Florio & Philippe Bance, 2020. "The Routledge Handbook of State-Owned Enterprises," Post-Print hal-02613944, HAL.
    36. Cockburn, Iain M. & Henderson, Rebecca M., 2001. "Scale and scope in drug development: unpacking the advantages of size in pharmaceutical research," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 1033-1057, November.
    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. Jovana Milenković & Dragana Lakić & Nataša Bogavac-Stanojević, 2023. "Analysis of the Professional Aspects of Medical Drugs Industry in the Republic of Serbia in Times of COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-16, May.
    2. Anna Balestra & Raul Caruso, 2023. "Vaccines between war and market," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 26(1), pages 24-39, March.
    3. Giovanni Dosi, 2021. "Some policy lessons from medical/therapeutic responses to the COVID-19 Crisis: A rich research system for knowledge generation and dysfunctional institutions for its exploitation," LEM Papers Series 2021/19, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    4. Giovanni Dosi, 2021. "Policy Lessons From Medical Responses to the COVID-19 Crisis," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 56(6), pages 337-340, November.
    5. Emanuela Sirtori & Alessandra Caputo & Domenico Scalera, 2021. "Patterns of development in the European biopharmaceutical industry. A network analysis of cross-sectoral linkages (2000-2016)," Working Papers 202101, CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies.
    6. Nazim Hajiyev & Manafova Mansura & Elena Sverdlikova & Roman Safronov & Tatyana Vityutina, 2021. "Oligopoly Trends in Energy Markets: Causes, Crisis of Competition, and Sectoral Development Strategies," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 11(6), pages 392-400.
    7. Els Torreele, 2020. "Business-as-Usual will not Deliver the COVID-19 Vaccines We Need," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 63(2), pages 191-199, December.

    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. Gamba, Simona & Magazzini, Laura & Pertile, Paolo, 2021. "R&D and market size: Who benefits from orphan drug legislation?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. Dranove, David & Garthwaite, Craig & Heard, Christopher & Wu, Bingxiao, 2022. "The economics of medical procedure innovation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    3. Jeffrey P. Clemens & Morten Olsen, 2021. "Medicare and the Rise of American Medical Patenting: The Economics of User-Driven Innovation," CESifo Working Paper Series 9008, CESifo.
    4. Leila Agha & Soomi Kim & Danielle Li, 2020. "Insurance Design and Pharmaceutical Innovation," NBER Working Papers 27563, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Agarwal, Ruchir & Gaule, Patrick, 2022. "What drives innovation? Lessons from COVID-19 R&D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    6. Margaret K. Kyle, 2019. "The Alignment of Innovation Policy and Social Welfare: Evidence from Pharmaceuticals," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 20, pages 95-123, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Jeffrey P. Clemens & Parker Rogers, 2020. "Demand Shocks, Procurement Policies, and the Nature of Medical Innovation: Evidence from Wartime Prosthetic Device Patents," CESifo Working Paper Series 8781, CESifo.
    8. Zhang, Xuan & Nie, Huihua, 2021. "Public health insurance and pharmaceutical innovation: Evidence from China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    9. Kyle, Margaret K., 2022. "Incentives for pharmaceutical innovation: What’s working, what’s lacking," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    10. Volker Grossmann, 2021. "Medical Innovations and Ageing: A Health Economics Perspective," CESifo Working Paper Series 9387, CESifo.
    11. Heidi L. Williams, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from Health Care Markets," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 53-87.
    12. Mark Pauly & Kyle Myers, 2016. "A Ricardian-Demand Explanation for Changing Pharmaceutical R&D Productivity," NBER Working Papers 22720, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Iizuka, Toshiaki & Uchida, Gyo, 2017. "Promoting innovation in small markets: Evidence from the market for rare and intractable diseases," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 56-65.
    14. Wang, Lucy Xiaolu, 2022. "Global drug diffusion and innovation with the medicines patent pool," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    15. Beerli, Andreas & Weiss, Franziska J. & Zilibotti, Fabrizio & Zweimüller, Josef, 2020. "Demand forces of technical change evidence from the Chinese manufacturing industry," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    16. Jillian Chown & David Dranove & Craig Garthwaite & Jordan Keener, 2019. "The Opportunities and Limitations of Monopsony Power in Healthcare: Evidence from the United States and Canada," NBER Working Papers 26122, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Hermosilla, Manuel & Wu, Yufei, 2018. "Market size and innovation: The intermediary role of technology licensing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 980-991.
    18. Jeffrey Clemens & Joshua D. Gottlieb, 2017. "In the Shadow of a Giant: Medicare’s Influence on Private Physician Payments," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(1), pages 1-39.
    19. Dubois, Pierre & Majewska, Gosia, 2022. "Mergers and Advertising in the Pharmaceutical Industry," TSE Working Papers 22-1380, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    20. Higgins, Matthew J. & Yan, Xin & Chatterjee, Chirantan, 2021. "Unpacking the effects of adverse regulatory events: Evidence from pharmaceutical relabeling," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    pharmaceutical industry; biomedical research; Covid-19; public research infrastructure;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H51 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Health
    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • L32 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Public Enterprises; Public-Private Enterprises
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:crc:wpaper:2008. 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: CIRIEC (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciulgbe.html .

    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.