Has Big Pharma hijacked the European health research budget?

Galsworthy, Michael J.; Palumbo, Leonardo

doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)60232-4

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the 2011 EU action plan on AMR, the lack of new antimicrobial agents was addressed by launching new programmes under the Innovation Medicines Initiative (https://ec.europa.eu/health/amr/sites/amr/files/communication_amr_2011_748_en.pdf page 9; https://www.imi.europa.eu/), the EU’s largest public–private partnership. This initiative has been criticised for its industry-driven research agenda and non-transparent decision-making67 68 as well as its lack of support to small-sized and medium-sized enterprises67 and for the health needs and participation of LMICs (https://eghrin.eu/).…”

Section: Analysis Of Eu Randi Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Where is the ‘global’ in the European Union’s Health Research and Innovation Agenda?

Berner-Rodoreda

Rehfuess²,

Klipstein‐Grobusch

et al. 2019

BMJ Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global Health has not featured as prominently in the European Union (EU) research agenda in recent years as it did in the first decade of the new millennium, and participation of low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) in EU health research has declined substantially. The Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Framework adopted by the European Parliament in April 2019 for the period 2021–2027 will serve as an important funding instrument for health research, yet the proposed health research budget to be finalised towards the end of 2019 was reduced from 10% in the current framework, Horizon 2020, to 8% in Horizon Europe. Our analysis takes the evolvement of Horizon Europe from the initial framework of June 2018 to the framework agreed on in April 2019 into account. It shows that despite some improvements in terms of Global Health and reference to the Sustainable Development Goals, European industrial competitiveness continues to play a paramount role, with Global Health research needs and relevant health research for LMICs being only partially addressed. We argue that the globally interconnected nature of health and the transdisciplinary nature of health research need to be fully taken into account and acted on in the new European Research and Innovation Framework. A facilitated global research collaboration through Horizon Europe could ensure that Global Health innovations and solutions benefit all parts of the world including EU countries.

show abstract

Section: Analysis Of Eu Randi Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Where is the ‘global’ in the European Union’s Health Research and Innovation Agenda?

Berner-Rodoreda

Rehfuess²,

Klipstein‐Grobusch

et al. 2019

BMJ Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The governmental sector is therefore one of the most influential players when it comes to shaping translational research areas. [23] Here all stakeholders have to take care that a balanced funding for the most diverse translational research areas can be provided. When it comes to financial volume, European research programs can be wellfunded overall, but sometimes the tendency to create large complex consortia mean resources are spread thinly across multiple partners.…”

Section: Mitigation Of Financial Risksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk mitigation in academic drug discovery

Ellinger

Gribbon

2016

Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…With concepts such as ‘commercial determinants’ and ‘industrial epidemic’ gaining currency, attention to industry engagement in the governance of NCDs has increased. 12 - 14 Yet a large part of the growing literature describing industry interference is focused on the national or regional level, 15 - 17 and thus there is a need to assess the role of industry at the global level. 7 In this context, the 2018 HLM provides a major opportunity to examine how NCD policy-making at the global level is negotiated and influenced by various types of stakeholders.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Competing Frames in Global Health Governance: An Analysis of Stakeholder Influence on the Political Declaration on Non-communicable Diseases

Suzuki

Webb

Small

2021

Int J Health Policy Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are increasingly recognized as a significant threat to health and development globally, and United Nations (UN) Member States adopted the Political Declaration of the Third High-level Meeting (HLM) on the prevention and control of NCDs in 2018. The negotiation process for the Declaration included consultations with Member States, intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), and non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the private sector. With NCD responses facing charges of inadequacy, it is important to scrutinize the governance process behind relevant high-level global decisions and commitments. Methods: Through a review of 159 documents submitted by stakeholders during the negotiation process, we outline a typology of policy positions advocated by various stakeholders in the development of the Declaration. We document changes in text from the draft to the final version of the Declaration to analyse the extent to which various positions and their proponents were influential. Results: NGOs and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) generally pursued ‘stricter’ governance of NCD risk factors including stronger regulation of unhealthy products and improved management of conflicts of interest that arise when health-harming industries are involved in health policy-making. The private sector and high-income countries generally opposed greater restrictions on commercial factors. The pattern of changes between the draft and final Declaration indicate that advocated positions tended to be included in the Declaration if there was no clear opponent, whereas opposed positions were either not included or included with ambiguous language. Conclusion: Many cost-effective policy options to address NCDs, such as taxation of health-harming products, were opposed by high-income countries and the private sector and not well-represented in the Declaration. To ensure robust political commitments and action on NCDs, multi-stakeholder governance for NCDs must consider imbalances in power and influence amongst constituents as well as biases and conflicts in positioning.

show abstract

Has Big Pharma hijacked the European health research budget?

Cited by 5 publications

References 2 publications

Where is the ‘global’ in the European Union’s Health Research and Innovation Agenda?

Where is the ‘global’ in the European Union’s Health Research and Innovation Agenda?

Risk mitigation in academic drug discovery

Competing Frames in Global Health Governance: An Analysis of Stakeholder Influence on the Political Declaration on Non-communicable Diseases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About