The US Biotechnology Industry: Industry Dynamics and Policy

Abstract

The inseparability of the biotechnology industry and the state is a central theme in the analysis of the location and performance of biotechnology industry in the US and elsewhere. This paper reports on the results of a survey of US biotechnology companies looking particularly at their assessment of needs, barriers, strategies, and government programs. The paper shows that although there is an increasing level of federal and state intervention, there are considerable barriers faced by biotechnology firms, which may or may not be resolved in the near future because of the nature of the business of biotechnology, which involves uncertainties at every stage of innovation and commercialisation.

Absorptive capacity and openness of small biopharmaceutical firms – aEuropeanUnion–UnitedStates comparison

“…Our results also emphasize the importance of skills to the US industry, a factor that has been highlighted as one of the barriers to growth in the sector (Zucker et al., ; Bagchi‐Sen et al., ).…”

Alliance‐Driven Governance: Applying a Global Commodity Chains Approach to the U.K. Biotechnology Industry

“…Previous research on biotechnology innovation has drawn on a number of different approaches, including systems of innovation, strategic management, and the "new economic geography" of Krugman and others (see Senker 2005;Birch 2007a). 3 The more recent research in economic geography and regional studies has concerned the local and regional scale, with the conceptualization of concentrations of biotechnology firms and associated organizations as biotechnology clusters (e.g., Lawton Smith, Mihell, and Kingham 2000;Zeller 2001;Cooke 2002Cooke , 2004aCooke , 2004bCooke , 2004cCooke , 2005Audretsch 2003;Fuchs and Krauss 2003;Prevezer 2003;Bagchi-Sen, Lawton Smith, and Hall 2004;Casper and Murray 2004;McKelvey 2004). There have been studies of Scotland (Leibovitz 2004); Maryland, United States (Feldman and Francis 2003); Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom (Casper and Karamanos 2003); and Lombardy, Italy (Breschi, Lissoni, and Orsenigo 2003), among other regions in such countries as Canada, Germany, and Sweden.…”

Multiple successful models: how demographic features of founding teams differ between regions and over time

“…In contrast, Boston demonstrated a tendency towards isomorphism theory albeit not in the strictest sense of the theory (the most successful model as measured by initial investment did not become more common over time) and not in terms of how venture capitalists in the region invested. Given that San Francisco and Boston have similar resource bases (Table 1; Bagchi-Sen, Lawton Smith, and Hall, 2004), this suggests that the third statement about the moderating effect of local norms and cultures extends not only to organizational structures and routines, but also to more subtle differences like the composition of founding teams. More specifically, I suggest that the frequent injection of outsiders coupled with a promoter of an alternative form is necessary for a region to evolve beyond the original status quo with respect to founding teams.…”

“…Biotechnology in Boston and San Francisco originated during the same period and under similar conditions. Both areas are home to world-class educational institutions, have regional ties to funding sources and have a ready supply of qualified employees (Bagchi-Sen, Lawton Smith, and Hall 2004;Nelsen 2005;Powell et al 2002). All of these aspects are necessary inputs for successful cluster formation (Stuart and Sorenson 2003).…”