Biotechnology Innovation System Research Articles

Cultural Beliefs and Stakeholder Affiliation Influence Attitudes Towards Responsible Research and Innovation Among United States Stakeholders Involved in Biotechnology and Gene Editing

Biotech developers are concerned about the future of gene editing having experienced the contentious history of first-generation GM foods. They have also expressed desires to do better with public engagement in gene-editing innovation. The framework of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) may provide a way forward to act on their desires for greater public legitimacy. However, in the United States, -there has also been reluctance to incorporate RRI into biotechnology innovation systems like gene editing in food and agriculture. In this article, we investigate individual- and group-level factors, including demographic, sociographic, and cultural factors, that influence attitudes towards RRI among biotechnology United States stakeholders. Using the Advocacy Coalition Framework’s (ACF) hierarchy of beliefs as a theoretical guide, biotechnology stakeholders (n = 110) were surveyed about their cultural (deep-core) beliefs and then about their attitudes towards principles (policy-core beliefs) and practices (secondary beliefs) of RRI applied to biotechnology innovation. Through statistical analysis of the results, we found significant relationships between stronger egalitarian cultural-beliefs and positive attitudes towards both the principles and practices of RRI. We also found that participants with higher levels of experience held more positive attitudes towards principles of RRI. In contrast, we found a significant inverse relationship between professional affiliation with industry or trade organizations and attitudes towards RRI practices. With these results, we present a model of factors that influence RRI attitudes for future testing. In closing, we interpret the results in the context of ACF to examine the potential for building cross-sector coalitions for practicing RRI within United States gene-editing innovation systems.

Brazilian Health Biotechnology Innovation System: an essay about the public policy rationale

O surgimento da biotecnologia é uma das transformações mais importantes dos sistemas de inovação em saúde. Este artigo visa discutir a lógica das políticas públicas de promoção da biotecnologia para saúde humana no Brasil no período 2004-2014. Com base num exaustivo trabalho de revisão documental e levantamento primário de dados, o artigo salienta como as políticas públicas brasileiras seguiram um roteiro de desigual acumulação, onde convivem diferentes fundamentações teóricas para as políticas, sejam elas explícitas ou implícitas. A análise conclui com a discussão dos limites das políticas publica, salientando duas dimensões que afetam o alcance das mesmas: i) a mudança na orientação e na lógica das políticas, ii) que coloca novos desafios para a governança, os quais, por sua vez, requerem novas coordenações com outras políticas implícitas.

Technology futures analysis in the Indian biotechnology innovation system

Purpose – Technology foresight or technology futures analysis is increasingly being recognised as a tool for planning sustainable development. Similarly, as argued by many, biotechnology could be harnessed for sustainable development. Hence, the purpose of this paper is to map out foresight activities in the Indian biotechnology innovation system. Design/methodology/approach – The present paper has adopted a systemic approach to analyse the foresight activities in the Indian biotechnology sector. An online Delphi survey, including interviews, was conducted for 750 biotech units. Findings – The greatest need of foresight is felt in the biopharma sector, especially in the small- and medium-sized firms. The methodologies used are only pre-foresight in nature and for short-term time horizons. The output preferred is “setting the R&D planning and priorities”. “Assessing socioeconomic and environment impact” is not accorded a high priority. Most of the regulatory agencies do not carry out foresight exercises. Originality/value – The research holds significance for evolving sustainable development policy.

Science, technology and innovation policy to sustain agricultural biotechnology in emerging economies: evidence from Mexico

This paper analyses agricultural biotechnology in emerging economies. Particularly, the case of Mexico is studied as an example of how agricultural biotechnology has evolved in these countries. A system dynamics (SD) model is developed to evaluate alternative science, technology and innovation (STI) policy scenarios of biotechnology activity in Mexico. From this analysis, it seems that cooperative and mission STI policies are more suitable for supporting and developing agricultural biotechnology. This analysis supports the idea that the presence of venture capital markets, a positive attitude among consumers for consuming genetically modified organisms (GMOs), an entrepreneurial attitude among scientist, and the development of management capabilities are core variables to advance biotechnology innovation systems (BISs) in emerging economies.

Understanding the Turkish biotechnology system through the functions of an innovation system

The paper empirically examines biotechnology innovation system in order to present the concerns of developing countries. Through mapping innovation processes/functions over time, it is possible to develop insights of the dynamics of innovation systems. This mapping is carried out for the Turkish biotechnology system, and the findings are summarised.

Evolutionary policy targeting: towards a conceptual framework for effective policy intervention

This special issue reflects on innovation and industrial policy from the premise that economic growth can be based on the permanent transformation of an economic system via the emergence and/or transformation of multi-agent structures and their inherent competences and knowledge base. The process of emergence or transformation is conceived as being the result of entrepreneurial effort, or entrepreneurs reacting to external stimuli in a way that takes advantage of an evolving knowledge base. The same process, however, can be undermined by both market and institutional failures. Past research has clearly indicated the importance of institutional structures for innovation, but also that structures as they exist may not be ideal: some institutions involved in innovation may provide the wrong incentives, faulty information, or allocate insufficient resources to accomplish their goals or mandates; and they may fail to reduce uncertainty. The paper asks whether and how a targeted, co-evolutionary approach can help overcome a lack of dynamic coordination and other failures that originate in coincidence with the emergence of a complex form of industrial organisation, be it an innovation system, cluster or a new industrial sector. More specifically, it builds upon the extended industry life cycle (EILC) model and the notion of evolutionary targeting to explore the potential benefits (and drawbacks) of targeting biotechnology innovation systems (BISs).

Формування інноваційної системи біотехнологій: досвід зарубіжних країн, проблеми України

Формування інноваційної системи біотехнологій: досвід зарубіжних країн, проблеми України

National, sectoral and technological innovation systems: The case of Taiwanese pharmaceutical biotechnology and agricultural biotechnology innovation systems (1945-2000)

This paper explores the dynamics of the configuration of the national, the sectoral and the technological innovation systems and defines the configuration of these three innovation systems as the national, sectoral and technological innovation systems (NSTISs). Through comparing the Taiwanese pharmaceutical biotechnology and agricultural biotechnology innovation systems we find that even within the same nation different NSTISs reveal different dynamics, in terms of actors and networks, the application of technology and knowledge and institutions. We conclude that the new research, technology, development and innovation policies should be customized according to the differing dynamics of the NSTISs. Copyright The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com, Oxford University Press.

Complexity and path dependence in biotechnology innovation systems

In commercial applications of biotechnology, there is no international convergence. On many critical dimensions, the United States is pulling ahead vis-a-vis most other developed or emerging countries, in spite of the efforts made by the potential catching-up nations. The article argues that the explanation lies in the institutional fabric that fosters commercial biotechnology: this institutional structure is too complex and costly, it exists mainly in the United States, and the followers either do not understand it, or are trapped with more inefficient institutions. The paper builds on biotechnology in order to theorize about institutions and their evolution in sectoral innovation systems. It also applies concepts and models from complex system theory. Copyright 2011 The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Associazione ICC. All rights reserved., Oxford University Press.

Health biotechnology innovation system in India: capitalisation of linkages

Health biotechnology innovation system in India: capitalisation of linkages

National Biotechnology Innovation System in the United States

Biotechnology has strategic importance related to the development of start-up companies, industries and nations in the near future. Therefore, many countries have promoted and developed biotechnology. The United States has led the world in promoting biotechnology. American biotechnology policies are diverse, and thus no comprehensive systematic studies have been done on it. In our paper, we will discuss American biotechnology policy in detail. For effective analysis, we will rely on the concept of a national innovation system, which emphasizes the institutional settings of innovation actors and their interaction. This paper deals with the American national innovation system for biotechnology. We will analyze the role of major actors, academia, public research institutes, and venture companies and their interactions. The American biotechnological innovation system is composed of diverse actors and numerous start-up companies in the biotechnology industry. In addition, there are many diverse policy programs for promoting biotechnology. Because of country-specific frame conditions, every country has different institutional settings and policies for promoting biotechnology. Our paper will render meaningful implications for various countries. We also think that this paper will be of interest for international readers.

Emerging Indian entrepreneurship in biotechnology and National Innovation System: exploring linkages and prospects

The recent expansion of Indian biotechnology industry backed by strong R&D allocations sets the upward movement of the industry on a new growth trajectory intertwined with innovation and entrepreneurship. This is most likely to take off Indian biopharma industry from 'bio-generics' and 'bio-similars' to a higher pedestal where it may develop 'proprietary processes', carving a new niche for the growth of the sector, giving further push to R&D-intensive activities. The issue is how National Innovation System (NIS), which could provide initial manpower and financial support to the sector, responds to the growing specialisation of the Indian biopharma and help evolve new strategies to sustain the growth in the high-end biopharma sector.

Assessment of technology generating institutions in biotechnology innovation system of South-eastern Nigeria.

The study was carried out in Southeastern agro-ecological zones of Nigeria. Questionnaire was used to collect data from a sample of forty-three heads of departments from research institutes and universities involved in biotechnology research. Results of the study revealed that some of the institutions have been involved in biotechnology research for the past two decades but have only significantly invested on bio-processing (58.8%) and cell and tissue culture (88.2%). The mandates of the institutions and donor agencies constituted the major determinants of biotechnology research. The institutions sourced research funds mainly from the government and donor agencies. However, their biotechnology research activities were highly constrained by several factors namely poor funding, unavailability of research equipment, and high cost of maintenance of equipment, among others. The study recommends that government should increase investment in human resource capacity building, infrastructural development and encourage public-private partnership for development and safe application of biotechnology innovations. Awareness campaign among researchers, consumers and farmers on the potentials of biotechnology for food security is expedient.

Assessment of technology generating institutions in biotechnology innovation system of South-eastern Nigeria.

The study was carried out in Southeastern agro-ecological zones of Nigeria. Questionnaire was used to collect data from a sample of forty-three heads of departments from research institutes and universities involved in biotechnology research. Results of the study revealed that some of the institutions have been involved in biotechnology research for the past two decades but have only significantly invested on bio-processing (58.8%) and cell and tissue culture (88.2%). The mandates of the institutions and donor agencies constituted the major determinants of biotechnology research. The institutions sourced research funds mainly from the government and donor agencies. However, their biotechnology research activities were highly constrained by several factors namely poor funding, unavailability of research equipment, and high cost of maintenance of equipment, among others. The study recommends that government should increase investment in human resource capacity building, infrastructural development and encourage public-private partnership for development and safe application of biotechnology innovations. Awareness campaign among researchers, consumers and farmers on the potentials of biotechnology for food security is expedient.

Toward a New Era of Intellectual Property: From Confrontation to Negotiation - A Report by the International Expert Group on Biotechnology, Innovation and Intellectual Property

Intellectual property occupies a central position in the biotechnology innovation system, the expected source of new medicines, foods and bio-energy. An international and inter-disciplinary research team has convened for the last seven years in an attempt to better understand the mechanisms of intellectual property in biotechnology innovation, and to suggest improvements to the role of intellectual property in that system. This report represents the research team's core findings and recommendations.

Why innovation policies should include a multiple system perspective: The case of biotechnology in EC Member States’ innovation systems

SummaryTraditionally, public policies in the field of innovation have been based on neo-classical assumptions about market failures concerning for example appropriability conditions and information asymmetry. In addition, during the last decade, policy makers at both the national and international level have adopted the concepts of innovation systems and system failures for the formulation, implementation and evaluation of their innovation policies. The innovation system concept broadens the rationale for government intervention as it introduces system imperfections by referring to inappropriate functioning of innovation systems. Nevertheless, the diversity in innovation system concepts and their relatively one-sided approach raise the need for reviewing innovation systems as a conceptual tool to innovation policy. In this paper we use the results of three EC funded studies on biotechnology developments in Europe to demonstrate that biotechnology innovation systems are simultaneously shaped by national, sectoral and technological characteristics and also their interplay. Therefore we argue that innovation policymakers need to take into account all of these aspects for the design and implementation of (more) effective policies.

Harnessing genomics to improve health in the Eastern Mediterranean Region – an executive course in genomics policy

BackgroundWhile innovations in medicine, science and technology have resulted in improved health and quality of life for many people, the benefits of modern medicine continue to elude millions of people in many parts of the world. To assess the potential of genomics to address health needs in EMR, the World Health Organization's Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office and the University of Toronto Joint Centre for Bioethics jointly organized a Genomics and Public Health Policy Executive Course, held September 20th–23rd, 2003, in Muscat, Oman. The 4-day course was sponsored by WHO-EMRO with additional support from the Canadian Program in Genomics and Global Health. The overall objective of the course was to collectively explore how to best harness genomics to improve health in the region. This article presents the course findings and recommendations for genomics policy in EMR.MethodsThe course brought together senior representatives from academia, biotechnology companies, regulatory bodies, media, voluntary, and legal organizations to engage in discussion. Topics covered included scientific advances in genomics, followed by innovations in business models, public sector perspectives, ethics, legal issues and national innovation systems.ResultsA set of recommendations, summarized below, was formulated for the Regional Office, the Member States and for individuals.• Advocacy for genomics and biotechnology for political leadership;• Networking between member states to share information, expertise, training, and regional cooperation in biotechnology; coordination of national surveys for assessment of health biotechnology innovation systems, science capacity, government policies, legislation and regulations, intellectual property policies, private sector activity;• Creation in each member country of an effective National Body on genomics, biotechnology and health to:- formulate national biotechnology strategies- raise biotechnology awareness- encourage teaching and training of biotechnology- devise integration of biotechnology within national health systems.ConclusionThe recommendations provide the basis for a road map for EMR to take steps to harness biotechnology for better and more equitable health. As a result of these recommendations, health ministers from the region, at the 50th Regional Committee Meeting held in October 2003, have urged Member States to establish national bodies of biotechnology to formulate a strategic vision for developing biotechnology in the service of the region's health. These efforts promise to raise the profile of genomics in EMR and increase regional cooperation in this exciting new field.

Introduction: promoting global health through biotechnology

term ‘health biotechnology’ evokes images of research-intensive universities such as Stanford University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), as well as initial public offerings on NASDAQ. Ty pically, we don’t think about biotechnology in connection with health solutions for poor people in developing countries. Still, as has been demonstrated in a technology foresight exercise, biotechnology can potentially be applied to a wide spectrum of health problems all over the world 1 .S uccessful research and development in health biotechnology is taking place in several countries that typically are classified as lower income countries or developing countries. With a view to understanding these successes and reproducing them more widely in the developing world, we have undertaken a detailed study of health biotechnology development in seven countries. This supplement reports the results of a 3-year study of health biotechnology innovation systems in Brazil, China, Cuba, Egypt, India, South Africa and South Korea. When compared with industrially advanced nations, the seven countries in this study are each at a different stage of economic development, but they can generally be considered ‘innovating developing countries’ (IDCs) 2 . Our objective was to identify and analyze the conditions encouraging successful development of health biotechnologies in developing countries. Ultimately, we want to identify lessons on how these countries have been able to build up capacity in health biotechnology. These lessons can potentially be put to use in other developing countries that so far have not succeeded in promoting biotechnology development, but may also be of relevance to industrially advanced nations. This

Biotechnology innovation systems in two small countries: a comparison of Portugal and Ireland

This paper compares the biotechnology policies of two small EU member states (Ireland and Portugal) from an innovation systems perspective. By drawing on both quantitative data and qualitative interviews the paper asks whether differences in performance in these two countries can be traced back to specific systems failures. It demonstrates that Portugal is less successful than Ireland overall, and that this is partially because Portugal suffers from a failure of industrial demand. It concludes that an integrated set of policies addressing both development of the knowledge base and commercialisation are needed for the successful promotion of biotechnology in a country.

From sectoral to horizontal public policies: the evolution of support for biotechnology in Europe, 1994-2001

A number of policies have been developed in Europe, to facilitate the scientific and commercial development of high-technology sectors. How effective have these policies been? This paper addresses this question by exploring the impacts of policy on the development of biotechnology in the Member States. It analyses policy effects on the performance of different actor types that are crucial for a prospering biotechnology innovation system (start-ups, established firms, research labs, universities, and so on). The diversity of the measures and schemes to encourage the development of biotechnology reflects the diversity of the framework conditions, cultural preferences and political priorities in the Member States. Priority could have been given to research or to commercialisation. Incentive schemes and support policies could be dedicated to biotechnology as a sector, or targeted towards all innovative sectors, depending on national context. The organisation of research and development may be more or less efficient, depending on how funds are allocated and on the extent to which they are linked to priorities