Mergers and innovation in the pharmaceutical industry

Comanor, William S.; Scherer, F. M.

doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2012.09.006

Cited by 91 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Cuts in research and development investment after such mergers and acquisitions (fig 2⇓), which are often aimed at achieving efficiency and economies of scale, result in the loss of two essential conditions for breakthroughs: independent research groups (fewer researchers now work in laboratories) and diverse research portfolios. 45 The resulting loss of multiple approaches to the same research question 46 leads to a reduction in the number of breakthrough drugs that reach patients.…”

Section: Box 2: How Mergers and Acquisitions Reduce Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why the drug development pipeline is not delivering better medicines

Naci

Carter

Mossialos

2015

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Box 2: How Mergers and Acquisitions Reduce Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why the drug development pipeline is not delivering better medicines

Naci

Carter

Mossialos

2015

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A similar argument about the advantages of "econodiversity" can be found in Farrell (2006), where he also asks the question whether competition policy should protect such diversity. These kinds of advantages of diversity have also been emphasized in Comanor/Scherer (2013) and mentioned in Shapiro (2012, 382) and Rubinfeld/Hoven (2001, 72); from an innovation economics perspective see Cohen/Klepper (1992). 38 See for the following Penrose (1959), Barney (1991), Teece/Pisano/Shuen (1997), Teece (2007) and Wojcik (2015) who offers an overview about this broad literature.…”

Section: Competition and Innovation: What Do We Know?mentioning

confidence: 87%

Competition, Innovation, and Competition Law: Dissecting the Interplay

Kerber

2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. thorities should use for investigating innovation effects, e.g., in merger cases. This paper, on one hand, reviews briefly our economic knowledge about competition and innovation, and claims that it is necessary to go beyond the limited insights that can be gained from industrial economics research about innovation (Schumpeter vs. Arrow discussion), and take into account much more insights from innovation research, evolutionary innovation economics, and business and management studies. On the other hand, it is also necessary to develop much more innovation-specific assessment concepts in competition law (beyond the traditional product market concept). Using the example of assessing innovation competition in merger cases, this article suggests to analyze much more systematically the resources (specialized assets) that are necessary for innovation. Terms of use: Documents inThis concept is directly linked to the new discussion about the Dow/DuPont case in the EU and about data as necessary resource for (data-driven) innovation.

show abstract

“…However sustaining innovation output in this way demanded huge research funding, combined with massive marketing expenditure, as integral features of the innovation process for such products were tending to become more fragmented, leading to an increased risk of market failure (Comanor and Scherer, 2013;Hara, 2003;Malerba and Orsenigo, 2002, p. 667-8).…”

Section: Insert Figure 1 About Herementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, it has been suggested that the sector is suffering from a productivity crisis as the cost of R&D increases and additionally, the changing regulatory environment, becomes more stringent, with an increasing focus on safety and efficacy (Hara, 2003;Lowman et al, 2011;Paul et al, 2010;Munos, 2009;Light and Lexchin, 2012;Subramaniam, 2003;DiMasi et al, 2003;Melese et al, 2009;Kaitin and DiMasi, 2011;LaMattina, 2011;Schuhmacher et al, 2013). In addition, despite the large investments, merges and acquisitions, the sector has faced marked decline in productivity, as the size of the company or R&D budget does not necessarily guarantee equivalent success (Comanor and Scherer, 2013;Khanna, 2012Khanna, , p. 1089. The traditional linear approach to innovation has thus come under pressure (Attridge, 2007;Altshuler et al, 2010;Cohen et al, 2004;Hara, 2003), although these and other imperatives for change have arguably been present since the 1980s, according to Drews (2000).…”

Section: Insert Figure 1 About Herementioning

confidence: 99%

A mapping for managers: open innovation for R&D intensive SMEs in the life sciences sector

Marangos

Warren

2017

EJIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe study examines what strategies the CEOs of Research & Development (R&D) intensive Small/Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in the life sciences sector carry out in regard to open innovation (OI), as R&D costs continue to rise, placing pressure on innovation managers. Design/methodology/approachA qualitative study was carried out, consisting of 30 semi-structured interviews with CEOs of small R&D intensive SMEs in the life sciences sector. We analysed the key factors identified by the CEOs in relation to their OI strategies. FindingsSMEs adopt a range of OI strategies and collaborations, subject to certain conditions. A multilevel mapping developed from the analysis connects actors to the wider domain, setting the outcomes of the research in context. Research limitationsThis qualitative study provides detailed understandings that could provide the basis for a wider quantitative study that would provide greater coverage of the sector, thus reinforcing the outcomes. Practical implicationsThe study will be relevant to practising CEOs who are considering the range of options offered by OI. Originality/valueWhile large firms are adopting OI strategies, less is known about the OI strategies developed in SMEs. The study addresses that gap. The life sciences context is also novel.

show abstract

Mergers and innovation in the pharmaceutical industry

Cited by 91 publications

References 14 publications

Why the drug development pipeline is not delivering better medicines

Why the drug development pipeline is not delivering better medicines

Competition, Innovation, and Competition Law: Dissecting the Interplay

A mapping for managers: open innovation for R&D intensive SMEs in the life sciences sector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About