Strategies for Heterogeneous R&D Alliances of In Vitro Diagnostics Firms in Rapidly Catching-Up Economies

Most developed countries already have high-quality in vitro diagnostic (IVD) techniques for diseases, but developing countries often do not have access to these technologies and cannot afford them. Enabling firms to leverage external resources to optimize their research and development (R&D) performance has become one of the most critical issues for small and medium-sized late-coming IVD firms. R&D alliances, especially heterogeneous alliances, are necessary for releasing the resource limitations of late-coming small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and reaching the metaoptimum of the R&D performances. However, to the authors’ knowledge, a few, if any, previous studies have investigated the key success factors and strategies of heterogeneous alliances in the IVD industry. Therefore, the authors aim to define the critical factors for evaluating and selecting strategies for heterogeneous alliances in the IVD industry. A Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL)-based analytic network process (DANP) was proposed to prioritize the weights associated with the evaluation criteria. Then, a heterogeneous R&D alliance strategy was derived from the compromise ranking based on the modified VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR) method. An empirical study of major Taiwanese IVD firms’ evaluation and selection of heterogeneous R&D alliance strategies will be used to reveal the practicability of the analytic framework. Based on the analytic results, the joint venture strategy is the most suitable heterogeneous R&D alliance strategy for IVD firms in rapidly catching-up economies. These results can serve as the basis for heterogeneous R&D alliance strategy definitions in the IVD industry in the future.

A network analysis of research productivity by country, discipline, and wealth

Introduction

Research productivity has been linked to a country’s intellectual and economic wealth. Further analysis is needed to assess the association between the distribution of research across disciplines and the economic status of countries.

Methods

By using 55 years of data, spanning 1962 to 2017, of Elsevier publications across a large set of research disciplines and countries globally, this manuscript explores the relationship and evolution of relative research productivity across different disciplines through a network analysis. It also explores the associations of those with economic productivity categories, as measured by the World Bank economic classification. Additional analysis of discipline similarities is possible by exploring the cross-country evolution of those disciplines.

Results

Results show similarities in the relative importance of research disciplines among most high-income countries, with larger idiosyncrasies appearing among the remaining countries. This group of high-income countries shows similarities in the dynamics of the relative distribution of research productivity over time, forming a stable research productivity cluster. Lower income countries form smaller, more independent and evolving clusters, and differ significantly from each other and from higher income countries in the relative importance of their research emphases. Country-based similarities in research productivity profiles also appear to be influenced by geographical proximity.

Conclusions

This new form of analyses of research productivity, and its relation to economic status, reveals novel insights to the dynamics of the economic and research structure of countries. This allows for a deeper understanding of the role a country’s research structure may play in shaping its economy, and also identification of benchmark resource allocations across disciplines for developing countries.

Technical and social issues influencing the adoption of preprints in the life sciences

Preprints are gaining visibility in many fields. Thanks to the exponential growth in submissions to bioRxiv, an online server for preprints in biology, versions of manuscripts prior to the completion of journal-organized peer review are poised to become a standard component of the publishing experience in the life sciences. Here, we provide an overview of current challenges facing preprints, both technical and social, and a vision for their future development.

Evaluation of technological competence and operations efficiency in the defense industry: The strategic planning of South Korea

This research aims to contribute to efficiency improvement by providing the implications for decision-making on continuous defense R&D investment strategies and acquisition methods via analyzing the current position and measuring the efficiency of overall weapon systems on technological competence and operations. This research is distinctive in comparison to previous studies because it is structured in a two-stage DEA analysis for efficiency by distinguishing between the technology and operations of the current eight fields of weapon systems and by adding the external index for government competence and market competence. In 2016, in comparison to the year 2013, the eight major weapon systems' efficiency fields of the overall system of Korea, efficiency of technological competence, and efficiency of operations all increased. This research introduced the input and output variable that fits in with the defense industry by connecting the weapon systems efficiency with the national innovation system and the sectoral innovation system that are both projected in this industry. It also formed the concepts of technological competence efficiency and operations efficiency using the two-stage Network DEA method.

Limited alignment of publicly competitive disease funding with disease burden in Japan

OBJECTIVE

The need to align investments in health research and development (R&D) with public health needs is one of the most important public health challenges in Japan. We examined the alignment of disease-specific publicly competitive R&D funding to the disease burden in the country.

METHODS

We analyzed publicly available data on competitive public funding for health in 2015 and 2016 and compared it to disability-adjusted life year (DALYs) in 2016, which were obtained from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study. Their alignment was assessed as a percentage distribution among 22 GBD disease groups. Funding was allocated to the 22 disease groups based on natural language processing, using textual information such as project title and abstract for each research project, while considering for the frequency of information.

RESULTS

Total publicly competitive funding in health R&D in 2015 and 2016 reached 344.1 billion JPY (about 3.0 billion USD) for 32,204 awarded projects. About 49.5% of the funding was classifiable for disease-specific projects. Five GDB disease groups were significantly and relatively well-funded compared to their contributions to Japan's DALY, including neglected tropical diseases and malaria (funding vs DALY = 1.7% vs 0.0%, p<0.01) and neoplasms (28.5% vs 19.2%, p<0.001). In contrast, four GDB disease groups were significantly under-funded, including cardiovascular diseases (8.0% vs 14.8%, p<0.001) and musculoskeletal disorders (1.0% vs 11.9%, p<0.001). These percentages do not include unclassifiable funding.

CONCLUSIONS

While caution is necessary as this study was not able to consider public in-house funding and the methodological uncertainties could not be ruled out, the analysis may provide a snapshot of the limited alignment between publicly competitive disease-specific funding and the disease burden in the country. The results call for greater management over the allocation of scarce resources on health R&D. DALYs will serve as a crucial, but not the only, consideration in aligning Japan's research priorities with the public health needs. In addition, the algorithms for natural language processing used in this study require continued efforts to improve accuracy.

Systematic analysis of global health research funding in Canada, 2000-2016

OBJECTIVES

Considering recent shifts in global funding landscapes, this study analyzes Canada's long-term global health research funding trends in the hope of informing a new Canadian global health research strategy. Examining past investments can help prioritize limited future resources to either build on Canada's existing strengths or fill gaps where needed, while simultaneously informing the investments of research funders in other countries.

METHODS

Administrative data were analyzed covering all 1584 global health research grants awarded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) to 927 unique principal investigators from 2000 to 2016, totalling C$341 million. Existing metadata associated with each grant was supplemented by additional qualitative coding. Descriptive time-series analyses of global health research grant data were conducted using various measures related to each grant's recipient (e.g., province, university, sex, distribution) and subject matter (e.g., research theme, area, focus).

RESULTS

CIHR's total annual global health research funding increased sharply from $3.6 million in FY2000/2001 to $30.3 million in FY2015/2016, with the largest share of research funding now focused on health equity-representing nearly 50% of CIHR's global health research funding. Past grants have concentrated on infectious disease and public health research. One third of CIHR's global health grant funding went to 20 principal investigators. Only 42.2% of global health research funding came from CIHR's open investigator-driven competitions, with the rest coming from strategic priority-driven competitions.

CONCLUSION

Global health research has seen steady increases in funding from CIHR's open competitions when preceded by investment in strategic competitions, which suggests the level of a national research funding agency's strategic investments in global health research may determine the size of the field in their country. The greatest concentration of past investment lies in health equity research, followed by infectious disease research. Future analyses of research funding would benefit from an internationally accepted keyword classification scheme and more granular administrative data.

The Role of Evidence in the US Response to the Opioid Crisis

The National Institutes of Health is investing hundreds of millions of dollars into new research on opioids. As these studies yield insights and results, their results will have to change policy and practice before they can bend the curve of the epidemic. However, the United States does not have a strong track record of translating evidence on drug policy into action. Three reasons for the translation gap are the historical legacy of drugs in the United States, vested interests, and politics. Researchers can become engaged in policy and political processes to strengthen the US response.

Assessing research impact: A framework and an evaluation of the Society of Family Planning Research Fund's grantmaking (2007-2017)

The Society of Family Planning Research Fund (SFPRF) provides grants for research on abortion and contraception. In 2017, SFPRF conducted a retrospective evaluation of its investment in family planning research. Using a developmental evaluation approach, we created a framework for assessing research impact in family planning and applied it to an analysis of our grantmaking between 2007 and 2017. Our framework consists of 30 indicators of research impact, which span nine impact categories from building researchers' capacity to influencing individuals, communities, and systems. Through application of this framework to our grantmaking, we learned that our grantmaking has helped build the research capacity of emerging and established family planning scholars and advance the field of family planning by supporting the creation of a robust scholarly evidence base. At the same time, we identified less evidence of impact on policy and practice. The results of this analysis directed SFPRF to move towards more focused funding opportunities, including longer-term and larger investments, and to prioritize partnerships between researchers and knowledge brokers.

'All the stars were aligned'? The origins of England's National Institute for Health Research

BACKGROUND

In 2006, the research and development (R&D) activity of England's national healthcare system, the National Health Service, was reformed. A National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) was established within the Department of Health, the first body to manage this activity as an integrated system, unlocking significant increases in government funding. This article investigates how the NIHR came to be set up, and why it took the form it did. Our goal was a better understanding of 'how we got here'.

METHODS

We conducted oral history interviews with 38 key witnesses, held a witness seminar, and examined published and unpublished documents.

RESULTS

We conclude that the most important forces shaping the origin of NIHR were the growing impact of evidence-based medicine on service policies, the growth of New Public Management ways of thinking, economic policies favouring investment in health R&D and buoyant public funding for healthcare. We note the strong two-way interaction between the health research system and the healthcare system - while beneficial for the use of research, challenges for healthcare (such as stop-go funding) could also produce challenges for health research.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding how and why England came to have a centralised health service research system alongside a long-established funder of biomedical research (the Medical Research Council) helps us interpret the significance of the English health research experience for other countries and helps English policy-makers better understand their present options. Learning lessons from the features of the English health research system calls for an understanding of the processes which shaped it. Firstly, the publicly funded, nationally organised character of healthcare promoted government interest in evidence-based medicine, made research prioritisation simpler and helped promote the implementation of findings. Secondly, the essential role of leadership by a group who valued research for its health impact ensured that new management methods (such as metrics and competitive tendering) were harnessed to patient benefit, rather than as an end in themselves. A policy window of government willingness to invest in R&D for wider economic goals and buoyant funding of the health system were also effectively exploited.

Geographically-related outcomes of U.S. funding for small business research and development: Results of the research grant programs of a component of the National Institutes of Health

This article examines the geographic distribution of funding for the U.S. Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs sponsored by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS). Despite a significant investment in SBIR/STTR and an interest in increasing geographic diversity in the institute's research portfolio, there has not been an assessment of the distribution of NIGMS's SBIR/STTR funding, outcomes associated with that investment, and relationships between the two. The geographic distribution of NIGMS' SBIR/STTR funding was highly concentrated in a small number of states, with a high correlation between each state's funding and its number of small scientific research and development businesses. Affiliation with a major research university was correlated with several measures of innovation and firm success. Our findings are consistent with earlier research showing that economic activity in research and development and research output tend to cluster in geographic regions where knowledge can be generated and shared more efficiently. These findings lend support to an investment strategy for small business research and development that creates networks between major research universities and small businesses.

Pension and state funds dominating biomedical R&D investment: fiduciary duty and public health

BACKGROUND

Who benefits from the commercial biomedical research and development (R&D)? Patients-consumers and investors-shareholders have traditionally been viewed as two distinct groups with conflicting interests: shareholders seek maximum profits, patients - maximum clinical benefit. However, what happens when patients are the shareholders? With billions of dollars of public risk capital channeled into the drug development industry, analysing the complex financial architecture and the market for corporate control is essential for understanding industry's characteristics, such as pricing strategies or R&D priorities.

RESULTS

Adding investments by governmentally-mandated retirement schemes, central and promotional banks, and sovereign wealth funds to tax-derived governmental financing shows that the majority of biomedical R&D funding is public in origin. Despite this, even in the high-income countries patients can be denied access to effective treatments due to their high cost. Since these costs are set by the drug development firms that are owned in substantial part by the retirement accounts of said patients, the complex financial architecture of biomedical R&D may be inconsistent with the objectives of the ultimate beneficiaries.

CONCLUSIONS

The divergence in economic and public health performance of the drug development industry is resultant from its financial underwriting by enormously expanded pension schemes, governmentally mandated to represent the interests of "captive" beneficiaries, as well as similar policymaker-designed funding flows, whose standards of transparency, accountability and representation are substantially lower than that of governments themselves. Strengthening those elements of institutional design and thus ensuring active responsible shareholding in the interest of the patients-savers is an under-utilised, but potentially high-impact opportunity for advancing public health.

Direct and moderating effects of environmental regulation intensity on enterprise technological innovation: The case of China

There is few significant attempt to integrate environmental regulation, government financial support, and corporate technological innovation in a methodological framework. Employing the data of the industrial enterprises with an annual turnover of over 20 million yuan from 30 Chinese provinces or municipalities between 2008 and 2016, this paper applies the fixed effect regression model to reveal the relationships between environmental regulation, government financial support, and corporate technological innovation simultaneously. Results show that: (1) there exists a U-shaped relation between environmental regulation intensity and technological innovation of enterprises which declines first and then climbs up, and China is still at the stage of inhibition before the “inflection point”. (2) government financial support does not significantly work on technological innovation directly, but environmental regulation drives this effect to be achieved; when the value of lnER is higher than 3.69, government financial support can significantly facilitate corporate technological innovation. (3) the comparison between regional samples reveals that heterogeneity exists in the influence of environmental regulation intensity and government financial support on corporate technological innovation. The threshold value of enabling effects of environmental regulation in eastern region is higher than that of the central and western region. These results remain consistent after we experiment several robustness checks. Theory and policy implications of our work are discussed.

Commentary: Texas Has a Secret Weapon Against Cancer

Cancer is the No. 2 cause of death in Texas and across the United States. The good news is that things change, and we can be active agents in making sure that they change for the better. The Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) was established by a voter-supported constitutional amendment in 2007. It is a unique Texas resource, and is now second only to the National Institutes of Health in overall cancer research funding. On Nov. 5, voters will have the opportunity to extend CPRIT's important work for an additional 10 years and $3 billion. If approved, Texas will continue to lead the nation and the world in the fight against cancer. If the new funding is not approved, far too much of this important work will end. Reauthorization of CPRIT would do more than keep the ball rolling; it would save lives.

Science, Technology and Innovation as Social Goods for Development: Rethinking Research Capacity Building from Sen's Capabilities Approach

Science and technology are key to economic and social development, yet the capacity for scientific innovation remains globally unequally distributed. Although a priority for development cooperation, building or developing research capacity is often reduced in practice to promoting knowledge transfers, for example through North-South partnerships. Research capacity building/development tends to focus on developing scientists' technical competencies through training, without parallel investments to develop and sustain the socioeconomic and political structures that facilitate knowledge creation. This, the paper argues, significantly contributes to the scientific divide between developed and developing countries more than any skills shortage. Using Charles Taylor's concept of irreducibly social goods, the paper extends Sen's Capabilities Approach beyond its traditional focus on individual entitlements to present a view of scientific knowledge as a social good and the capability to produce it as a social capability. Expanding this capability requires going beyond current fragmented approaches to research capacity building to holistically strengthen the different social, political and economic structures that make up a nation's innovation system. This has implications for the interpretation of human rights instruments beyond their current focus on access to knowledge and for focusing science policy and global research partnerships to design approaches to capacity building/development beyond individual training/skills building.

Understanding plastics pollution: The role of economic development and technological research

Our world is awash with plastic. The massive increase in plastics production, combined with a shift to single-use, disposable plastics and widespread mismanagement of plastic waste, has created a huge "tragedy of the commons" (Hardin, 1968) in our oceans, seas and waterways. Plastics pollution is now a global externality that damages ecosystems, curtails biodiversity and ultimately has the potential to affect everyone on the planet. Although waste output is often modelled separately from environmental pollution in research, in the case of plastics, the waste problem has become one of global pollution. In this paper, we model the relationship between mismanaged plastic waste¹ and income per capita for 151 countries, and for the first time find empirical support for the environmental Kuznets curve using plastics pollution data. Further, we find support for the hypothesis that a key instrument for reducing plastics pollution is investment in scientific and technological research. The paper concludes with a discussion of the results, limitations, and implications for future research and practice.

[Challenges to the use of research results by a former West African Economic and Monetary Union decision-maker.]

The problem of the use of research results by public health decision-makers is a topical issue in developing countries, in which considerable research is conducted, but is poorly used.The author was previously Director of Health, Social Protection and Mutual Insurance of the UEMOA Commission from 2006 to 2017.The central question raised in this article is: What are the challenges to the use of research results by directors of public health programmes in a sub-regional integration institution?The main findings and challenges raised in this text can be summarized as follows:Programme and budget constraints surrounding the intervention planning process that prevent effective implementation of the health research results ;Implementation of programmes in member countries does not always comply with the guidelines adopted by the Union on the basis on good practice derived from research results;The dissemination of research results is insufficient due to calendar and budget constraints and certain prejudices concerning the efficacy of large-scale scientific meetings.

One lab, two firms, many possibilities: On R&D outsourcing in the biopharmaceutical industry

We draw from documented characteristics of the biopharmaceutical industry to construct a model where two firms can choose to outsource R&D to an external unit, and/or engage in internal R&D, before competing in a final market. We investigate the distribution of profits among market participants, and the incentives to coordinate outsourcing activities or to integrate R&D and production. Consistent with the empirical evidence, we find that the sign and magnitude of an aggregate measure of direct (inter-firm) and indirect (through the external unit) technological externalities drives the distribution of industry profits, with higher returns to the external unit when involved in development (clinical trials) than in early-stage research (drug discovery). In the latter case, the delinkage of investment incentives from industry value, together with the ability of firms to transfer risks to the external unit, imply a vulnerability of early-stage investors' returns to negative shocks, and the likely abandonment of projects with economic and medical value. We also find that competition in the equity market makes a buyout by one of the two firms more profitable to a research biotech than to a clinical services unit, and can stimulate early-stage investments. However, this long-term incentive can be minimal, notably if the superior efficiency of outsourced operations originates from economies of scope that can hardly be exploited when a firm takes control of the external unit exclusively for itself. R&D outsourcing thus does not always qualify as a relevant pathway to address the declining productivity in innovation that has characterized the industry over several decades.

The effect of energy R&D expenditures on CO2 emission reduction: estimation of the STIRPAT model for OECD countries

Energy innovations are critical to combating global warming and climate change. In this context, we focus on the impact of energy research-development (R&D) expenditures, which are the input of energy innovations, on CO₂ emissions. For this purpose, we investigate the effect of disaggregated energy R&D expenditures on CO₂ emission in 19 high-income OECD countries over the period 2003-2015. The dynamic panel data method is followed for empirical analysis. The results of the study show that R&D expenditures for energy efficiency and fossil energy have an increasing effect on CO₂ emissions. Contrary to expectations, there is no significant relationship between renewable energy R&D expenditures and CO₂ emissions. Remarkably, there is strong evidence that the power and storage R&D expenditures have a reducing effect on CO₂ emissions. In light of the empirical findings, policy implications and recommendations to potential readers and authorities are further discussed.