IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mse/wpsorb/r00056.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

L'utilisation des notions de confiance et de proximité dans l'étude des processus de R&D pharmaceutiques

Author

Listed:
  • Dominique Perrochon

    (MATISSE - Université Paris 1)

  • Didier Lebert

    (MATISSE - Université Paris 1)

Abstract

Biotechnology modified the structure of the pharmaceutical industry via drastic changes in industry - university relationships. That found expression in the development of both new drug discovery processes and specific cooperative devices between numerous institutional and economic actors. We show that it is possible to consider an appreciative theory of structural changes in pharmaceutical R&D processes based on the concepts of trust and proximity. One of the interests of this theory is to suggest an ongoing tendency toward a closure of R&D networks in this industry

Suggested Citation

  • Dominique Perrochon & Didier Lebert, 2000. "L'utilisation des notions de confiance et de proximité dans l'étude des processus de R&D pharmaceutiques," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques r00056, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    • Handle: RePEc:mse:wpsorb:r00056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-04134071
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joly, P. B. & Mangematin, V., 1996. "Profile of public laboratories, industrial partnerships and organisation of R & D: the dynamics of industrial relationships in a large research organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 901-922, September.
    2. Dominique Pestre, 1997. "La production des savoirs entre académies et marché - Une relecture historique du livre : « The New Production of Knowledge », édité par M. Gibbons," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 79(1), pages 163-174.
    3. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 1996. "Costly Information in Firm Transformation, Exit, or Persistent Failure," NBER Working Papers 5577, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Julia Porter Liebeskind & Amalya Lumerman Oliver & Lynne Zucker & Marilynn Brewer, 1996. "Social networks, Learning, and Flexibility: Sourcing Scientific Knowledge in New Biotechnology Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 428-443, August.
    5. Rothschild, R., 1998. "On the limits to the growth of coalitions by means of transfers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 251-262, February.
    6. Tapon, Francis, 1989. "A transaction costs analysis of innovations in the organization of pharmaceutical R & D," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 197-213, October.
    7. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    8. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1994. "Evaluating technological information and utilizing it : Scientific knowledge, technological capability, and external linkages in biotechnology," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 91-114, June.
    9. Mansfield, Edwin & Lee, Jeong-Yeon, 1996. "The modern university: contributor to industrial innovation and recipient of industrial R&D support," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(7), pages 1047-1058, October.
    10. Marie-Claude Bélis-Bergouignan, 1997. "Coopérations inter-firmes en R&D et contrainte de proximité : le cas de l'industrie pharmaceutique," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 81(1), pages 59-76.
    11. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Marilynn B. Brewer, 1994. "Intellectual Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises," NBER Working Papers 4653, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Gunnar Eliasson & Asa Eliasson, 1996. "The biotechnological competence bloc," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 78(1), pages 7-26.
    13. Williamson, Oliver E, 1993. "Calculativeness, Trust, and Economic Organization," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(1), pages 453-486, April.
    14. Senker, Jacqueline, 1995. "Tacit Knowledge and Models of Innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 4(2), pages 425-447.
    15. Chiesa, Vittorio, 1996. "Separating research from development: Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 638-647, December.
    16. Richardson, G B, 1972. "The Organisation of Industry," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 82(327), pages 883-896, September.
    17. Zucker, Lynne G. & Brewer, Marilynn B. & Darby, Michael R. & Peng, Yusheng, 1994. "Collaboration Structure and Information Dilemmas in Biotechnology: Organizational Boundaries as Trust Production," Institute for Social Science Research, Working Paper Series qt0gd8j9k8, Institute for Social Science Research, UCLA.
    18. Abdelillah Hamdouch & Marc-Hubert Depret, 2000. "Coalitions industrielles, réseaux de firmes et dynamiques de concurrence-coopération dans les secteurs en cours de globalisation : le cas de l'industrie pharmaceutique," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques r00024, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    19. Henderson, Rebecca., 1994. "The evolution of integrative capability : innovation in cardiovascular drug discovery," Working papers 3711-94., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    20. Burchell, Brendan & Wilkinson, Frank, 1997. "Trust, Business Relationships and the Contractual Environment," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 21(2), pages 217-237, March.
    21. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Jeff Armstrong, 1994. "Intellectual Capital and the Firm: The Technology of Geographically Localized Knowledge Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 4946, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Håkansson, Per & Kjellberg, Hans & Lundgren, Anders, 1993. "Strategic alliances in global biotechnology -- a network approach," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 65-82.
    23. Pierre-André Mangolte, 1997. "La dynamique des connaissances tacites et articulées : une approche socio-cognitive," Post-Print hal-00129061, HAL.
    24. Abdelillah Hamdouch & Marc-Hubert Depret, 2000. "Coalitions industrielles, réseaux de firmes et dynamiques de concurrence-coopération dans les secteurs en cours de globalisation : le cas de l'industrie pharmaceutique," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques r00024, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    25. Kuemmerle, Walter, 1999. "Foreign direct investment in industrial research in the pharmaceutical and electronics industries--results from a survey of multinational firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 179-193, March.
    26. Nelson, Richard R., 1990. "Capitalism as an engine of progress," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 193-214, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R., 1997. "Present at the biotechnological revolution: transformation of technological identity for a large incumbent pharmaceutical firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 429-446, December.
    2. McMillan, G. Steven & Narin, Francis & Deeds, David L., 2000. "An analysis of the critical role of public science in innovation: the case of biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-8, January.
    3. Salter, Ammon J. & Martin, Ben R., 2001. "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 509-532, March.
    4. Leiponen, Aija, . "Essays in the Economics of Knowledge: Innovation, Collaboration, and Organizational Complementarities," ETLA A, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy, number 31.
    5. Marcela Miozzo & Lori DiVito & Panos Desyllas, 2011. "Cross-border acquisitions of science-based firms: Their effect on innovation in the acquired firm and the local science," DRUID Working Papers 11-17, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    6. Traore, Namatie & Rose, Antoine, 2003. "Determinants of biotechnology utilization by the Canadian industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1719-1735, December.
    7. Murray, Fiona, 2002. "Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks: exploring tissue engineering," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1389-1403, December.
    8. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 1996. "Costly Information in Firm Transformation, Exit, or Persistent Failure," NBER Working Papers 5577, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2009. "Diversity of science linkages and innovation performance: some empirical evidence from Flemish firms," Economics Discussion Papers 2009-30, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    10. Mario Coccia, 2012. "Path-breaking innovations for lung cancer: a revolution in clinical practice," CERIS Working Paper 201201, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    11. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
    12. Lionel Nesta & Vincent Mangematin, 2002. "Industry Life Cycle, Knowledge Generation and Technological Networks," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-03398092, HAL.
    13. Krafft Jackie & Quatraro Francesco & Colombelli Alessandra, 2011. "High Growth Firms and Technological Knowledge: Do gazelles follow exploration or exploitation strategies?," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201114, University of Turin.
    14. Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker & Andrew Wang, 2003. "Universities, Joint Ventures, and Success in the Advanced Technology Program," NBER Working Papers 9463, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Becker Wolfgang & Peters Jürgen, 2005. "Innovation Effects of Science-Related Technological Opportunities / Innovationseffekte von technologischen Möglichkeiten aus dem Wissenschaftsbereich: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Findings," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 225(2), pages 130-150, April.
    16. Kenneth Zahringer & Christos Kolympiris & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2017. "Academic knowledge quality differentials and the quality of firm innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(5), pages 821-844.
    17. Margarida Fontes, 2005. "Distant networking: The knowledge acquisition strategies of 'out-cluster' biotechnology firms," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(6), pages 899-920, September.
    18. Dibiaggio, Ludovic & Nasiriyar, Maryam & Nesta, Lionel, 2014. "Substitutability and complementarity of technological knowledge and the inventive performance of semiconductor companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1582-1593.
    19. Belleflamme, Paul, 2000. "Stable Coalition Structures with Open Membership and Asymmetric Firms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-21, January.
    20. Zhang, Jing & Baden-Fuller, Charles & Mangematin, Vincent, 2007. "Technological knowledge base, R&D organization structure and alliance formation: Evidence from the biopharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 515-528, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trust; proximity; networks; innovation processes; R&D; biotechnology; pharmaceutical industry;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • L22 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Organization and Market Structure
    • L65 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Chemicals; Rubber; Drugs; Biotechnology; Plastics
    • 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:mse:wpsorb:r00056. 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: Lucie Label (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/msep1fr.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.