Commercialization Of Biotechnology Research Articles

Commercialisation of biotechnology in newly industrialised economies

Biotechnology, the surging wave of economic development in the world, prompted Newly Industrialised Economies (NIEs) in Asia to emulate developed countries in biotechnology development. The stakes are however high and the uncertainty about return on investment has provoked a careful assessment of national scientific and technological strengths. With a focus on Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan, this paper reviews the current market conditions and key factors that may advantage the development of biotechnology industry in the NIEs. It is argued that co-evolution of scientific and technology capabilities are essential, and the NIEs will have to leverage their comparative advantages in technological capabilities and should focus on core competencies in the already locally established biotechnology areas.

Commercialisation of biotechnology: public trust and research

The success of the biotechnology revolution depends on an array of interwoven factors, not the least of which is the protection, preservation and promotion of public trust in the science, the scientists and the regulators. This paper considers some of the areas in which the commercialisation of biotechnology research may affect public trust. The increasing involvement of the private sector in basic research and the need for the public sector to commercialise its research has resulted in a blurring of the divide between the two sectors. The expanding public and private partnerships are creating an elision between the two sectors. In biotechnology, knowledge itself has become commodified and subject to confidentiality agreements and patent protections. These trends are challenging the traditional science norms of universalism, collegiality, disinterestedness and organised scepticism. These trends may equally have a detrimental flow on effect in relation to public trust in science. This paper considers and emphasises the appropriate roles of regulation, public consultation and corporate social responsibility and benefit sharing in protecting and restoring the key factor of public trust.

The case of the San Francisco Bay Area: a regional success story in information technology and biotechnology commercialisation

This paper looks beyond the conventional notion of technology transfer where the parties involved are a government laboratory and a business firm or an entrepreneur. The paper examines the factors that make it possible for an economic region such as the San Francisco Bay Area to succeed in large scale technology commercialisation from various sources including government laboratories, universities, and corporate research and development efforts. The regions success factors include: the talent pool, pillar companies, supply of capital, university and R&D linkages to the economy, support services, and a good quality of life. The process of technology commercialisation is neither obvious nor very rapid. For a region to be a successful host to technology commercialisation it needs to have in place the infrastructure of technology commercialisation (ITC). Civic entrepreneurs are a key element of the ITC, in addition to the success factors for Silicon Valley listed above. A key lesson from the Silicon Valley experience is that technology commercialisation moves faster and with greater success when it is a part of broad-based economic development efforts. Finally, despite the apparent placelessness of Internet and information technologies, it is important to realise that location and place matter a great deal. It matters because knowledge workers value access to universities as well as K-12 education, cultural richness, civic virtue, choice in housing and transportation, diversity of employment opportunities, and a healthy environment. These are location specific attributes, and places that possess these attributes and work to enhance and maintain them are the best places for technology commercialisation. Therefore, such places tend to create more wealth and have well-developed economies.

Discussion of current status of commercialization of plant biotechnology in the global marketplace

Discussion of current status of commercialization of plant biotechnology in the global marketplace

Commercialization of animal biotechnology

Commercialization of animal biotechnology is a wide-ranging topic for discussion. In this paper, we will attempt to review embryo transfer (ET) and related technologies that relate to food-producing mammals. A brief review of the history of advances in biotechnology will provide a glimpse to present and future applications. Commercialization of animal biotechnology is presently taking two pathways. The first application involves the use of animals for biomedical purposes. Very few companies have developed all of the core competencies and intellectual properties to complete the bridge from lab bench to product. The second pathway of application is for the production of animals used for food. Artificial insemination (AI), embryo transfer, in vitro fertilization (IVF), cloning, transgenics, and genomics all are components of the toolbox for present and future applications. Individually, these are powerful tools capable of providing significant improvements in productivity. Combinations of these technologies coupled with information systems and data analysis, will provide even more significant change in the next decade. Any strategies for the commercial application of animal biotechnology must include a careful review of regulatory and social concerns. Careful review of industry infrastructure is also important. Our colleagues in plant biotechnology have helped highlight some of these pitfalls and provide us with a retrospective review. In summary, today we have core competencies that provide a wealth of opportunities for the members of this society, commercial companies, producers, and the general population. Successful commercialization will benefit all of the above stakeholders.

The commercialization of biotechnology in Japan

This exploratory study examines the role of large pharmaceutical companies, the government, universities and dedicated biotechnology firms in the commercialization of biotechnology in Japan. Based on secondary data, as well as primary qualitative data, we conclude that, in particular, the low level of basic research and deficiencies in the technology transfer from universities to the private sector have inhibited the commercialization of modern biotechnology in Japan. Several of the formal barriers have been removed recently and there are already weak signals of a bio-boom in Japan, as indicated by the increasing number of newly founded dedicated biotechnology firms. A change in the mindset of university professors towards entrepreneurship will be essential for the success of commercial biotechnology in the long run.

Shift in interests towards biotechnology in Indian pharmaceutical industry: an analysis

Have Indian pharmaceutical companies entered into biotechnology commercialization? Their outputs and inputs to R&D that were related to biotechnology from 1986–1997 were examined. The results show very small, but consistent and growing efforts in this direction by Indian companies. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Genetics, commodification, and social justice in the globalization era.

The commercialization of biotechnology, especially research and development by transnational pharmaceutical companies, is already excessive and is increasingly dangerous to distributive justice, human rights, and access of marginal populations to basic human goods. Focusing on gene patenting, this article employs the work of Margaret Jane Radin and others to argue that gene patenting ought to be more highly regulated and that it ought to be regulated with international participation and in view of concerns about solidarity and the common good. The mode of argument called for on this issue is more pragmatic than logical, emphasizing persuasion based on evidence about the reality and effects of control of genetic research by profit-driven biotech companies.

The biotechnology revolution: lessons for technology management research and practice

Rapid advances in both the science and commercialisation of biotechnology over the past 25 years have attracted considerable research attention and offer useful insights for technology management research and practice. Drawing on both academic research and managerial experience, this paper highlights defining characteristics of the biotechnology revolution and the pivotal roles played by emerging firms in the translation of basic science into commercial products and processes. Selected lessons are suggested to guide future academic studies and management practice.

Success factors for biotechnology: lessons from Japan, Germany and Great Britain

The development of biotechnology during the past 20 years has been driven mainly by research and industrial activities in the USA. At least two key elements contributed to the success of biotechnology in the USA: a strong science push which could draw on a well-developed research base, and an early realisation of the technological and commercial potentials of this science push. It is questionable, however, whether the US situation could be transferred to other countries. Against this background, the goal of this paper is to describe and analyse the development of biotechnology in selected countries outside the USA (Japan, Germany, and Great Britain) in order to learn more about different trajectories pursued in this field. From the comparative analysis success factors are derived which are applicable for commercialisation of biotechnology not just under the peculiar circumstances of the USA.

Manpower requirements in biotechnology and strategies to achieve them - international and Indian experiences

Commercialisation of biotechnology (BT) depends on manpower with specific skills and high science based knowledge. This is due to some of the inherent qualities of biotechnology, like high rates of obsolescence, R&D intensive nature, skill dependence, limited amenability to automation of procedures, need for constant monitoring of structures, etc., and it is further reinforced by the behaviour of companies commercialising BT in the developed world. To acquire this important resource for successful commercialisation and industrial competitiveness, various strategies have been adopted by different firms, States, or as a combined effort of both with academic institutions. The strategies could range from identification of areas of skills in which shortfalls either occur or could occur and efforts taken to generate these skills, adapt existing related skills by orienting to new demands or automating that part of the operation. In this paper, Indian experience has been elaborated after overviewing international experiences and areas of strengths and weaknesses identified, along with strategies to combat envisaged shortfalls in certain specialists by 2000 A.D., have been suggested.

Where science comes to life: University bioscience, commercial spin‐offs, and regional economic development

Biotechnology, rather than being defined as a distinct industry like steelmaking or shipbuilding, is instead a scientific knowledge base—a rapidly evolving technology—that has economically valuable applications in such diverse industries as Pharmaceuticals, medical diagnostics, agriculture, bioen‐vironmental remediation, and chemical processing. Biotechnology has captured the imagination of ambitious scientific investigators and investors seeking high rates of return, as well as state economic development officials who hope to anchor the industry in their locality and reap the industry's economic and employment rewards. Biotech is still at an early stage of its development, and there are many competing hypotheses about its future development. Most importantly, biotechnology involves the commercialization of science resources in which the federal and state governments have made substantial investment. One key question is how to leverage this investment for future economic growth. This article explores the policy issue related to the commercialization of biotechnology, its role as an engine of economic development, and the appropriate public policy response.

Where science comes to life: University bioscience, commercial spin‐offs, and regional economic development

Biotechnology, rather than being defined as a distinct industry like steelmaking or shipbuilding, is instead a scientific knowledge base—a rapidly evolving technology—that has economically valuable applications in such diverse industries as pharmaceuticals, medical diagnostics, agriculture, bioenvironmental remediation, and chemical processing. Biotechnology has captured the imagination of ambitious scientific investigators and investors seeking high rates of return, as well as state economic development officials who hope to anchor the industry in their locality and reap the industry's economic and employment rewards. Biotech is still at an early stage of its development, and there are many competing hypotheses about its future development. Most importantly, biotechnology involves the commercialization of science resources in which the federal and state governments have made substantial investment. One key question is how to leverage this investment for future economic growth. This article explores the policy issue related to the commercialization of biotechnology, its role as an engine of economic development, and the appropriate public policy response.

Production of commercial valuable products using transgenic technology

Commercialization of animal biotechnology is a wide-ranging topic for discussion. In this paper, we will attempt to review embryo transfer (ET) and related technologies that relate to food-producing mammals. A brief review of the history of advances in biotechnology will provide a glimpse to present and future applications.Commercialization of animal biotechnology is presently taking two pathways. The first application involves the use of animals for biomedical purposes. Very few companies have developed all of the core competencies and intellectual properties to complete the bridge from lab bench to product.The second pathway of application is for the production of animals used for food. Artificial insemination (AI), embryo transfer, in vitro fertilization (IVF), cloning, transgenics, and genomics all are components of the toolbox for present and future applications. Individually, these are powerful tools capable of providing significant improvements in productivity. Combinations of these technologies coupled with information systems and data analysis, will provide even more significant change in the next decade.Any strategies for the commercial application of animal biotechnology must include a careful review of regulatory and social concerns. Careful review of industry infrastructure is also important. Our colleagues in plant biotechnology have helped highlight some of these pitfalls and provide us with a retrospective review.In summary, today we have core competencies that provide a wealth of opportunities for the members of this society, commercial companies, producers, and the general population. Successful commercialization will benefit all of the above stakeholders.

Privatizing the intellectual commons: Universities and the commercialization of biotechnology

This paper analyzes universities' recent attempts to adapt their policies and organizational arrangements in order to accommodate the commercialization of university biotechnology research. We argue that these attempts have been severely hampered because internal and external parties have sought to enforce universities' adherence to their historic commitment to create and sustain an `intellectual commons' for the benefit of society at large. The standardized organizational arrangements universities maintain to administer this intellectual commons have also served to impede adaptive efforts. We conclude that social–contractual commitments and organizational standards can significantly affect the shape and outcome of negotiations over property rights, and can place important limits on the scope of organizations, potentially leading to the generation of new organizational forms.

An analysis of biotechnology and non‐biotechnology R&D capabilities in the Indian pharmaceutical industry

The commercialization of biotechnology requires very serious and intense research capabilities. The pharmaceutical industry has been one of the early exploiters of biotechnology because of the existence of such capabilities. This feature has been observed worldover and the literature is replete with information on how firms have evolved various strategies to meet this requirement. The present paper is an attempt to assess the R&D capabilities in the pharmaceutical companies in India in the context of biotechnology commercialization. A study was made of the R&D capabilities of 33 companies. These companies represent 3 categories of the Indian industry: purely medicinal chemistry based pharmaceuticals; diversified (both medicinal chemistry and biotechnology); dedicated biotechnology companies. Discriminant analysis was performed (i) to understand the distinctiveness of the three groups of companies and (ii) to understand the characteristics of their R&D capabilities. With respect to eight of the ten chosen parameters like R&D intensity, skill intensity, linkages, output of R&D, size, age, R&D manpower as a proportion of total manpower and number of skilled R&D employees, the three groups are observed to be distinct from each other.

Influence of Industrial communications on public perceptions of biotechnology

The biotech industry spends significant time and funds in confronting negative public perceptions concerning acceptance of various biotechnology‐derived products prior to their commercialization. It is generally assumed that greater public awareness of a technology increases the public's comfort level, so industrial communications would be expected to lead to public acceptance of the technology. However, this study finds that throughout the world, increased public awareness and understanding of biotechnology are correlated not only with a greater appreciation of its benefits but also with increased worries about the technology. In the United States, even though the public perceives there are significant risks associated with biotechnology, public acceptance of the technology is relatively high. This may be due to the early rapid growth of the biotech industry in the United States. The U.S. biotech industry initially played a major role in addressing societal issues associated with commercialization of biotechnology. A continuing, proactive stance on the part of the U.S. biotech industry to discuss the issues may be related to public acceptance of the technology and the disproportionate growth of the industry in the United States.

Organizational Learning in Cooperative Alliances: Some Case Studies in Biotechnology

Dedicated biotechnology firms (DBFs) have played an important role in commercializing biotechnology. They emerged first in the US and, after a 5-year time lag, they also appeared in Europe. Faced with long and costly product lead times, DBFs raised money by entering into research contracts, mainly with large chemical and pharmaceutical companies. These coopertive research alliances have not vanished as biotechnology has matured and are more in evidence today than they were in the early dasy of the commercialization of biotechnology. This paper investigates how and why large and small companies enter research collaborations, what they learn from working together, and the effects on European competitiveness.

Some issues in biotechnology commercialization

Commercialization of biotechnology discoveries has many challenges. One of the major hurdles to commercialization is achieving regulatory approval. This includes not only approval for the drug but also the process by which it is produced. The costs for developing a drug and achieving approval for its release are enormous. They average nearly a quarter of a billion dollars per successful drug. Many of the start-up biotechnology companies fail or necessarily become consumed by the large pharmaceutical houses because their managers fail to factor the risk of not achieving approval, or at least gaining approval in a timely fashion, into their business plan. Further, they do not take an integrated approach to product and process development. For the most part emphasis has been on drug discovery. Process development has been neglected. In fact, the knowledge base for development, design, and validation exists only with the large pharmaceutical companies. Therefore, the opportunities for a start-up biotechnology company to become a full-scale drug producer are extremely rare. A deeper appreciation of these problems is needed by managers of start-up biotech companies if they are to be successful.

Small-firm formation in biotechnology: A comparison of France, Britain and Canada

A comparison is made of the pattern of emergence, survival and growth of small biotechnology firms in France, Britain and Canada, using surveys in the three countries. These data are compared in turn with what is known about US biotechnology firms from the literature. Although the literature suggests that the appearance of new industries based on the emergence of new, small high-technology firms is a US phenomenon, evidence is presented of a nearly comparable pattern of small firm commercialisation of biotechnology in the three countries studied, relative to the size of the countries. However, the Canadian, French and British firms appeared 1–4 years later than the US firms, and are still somewhat weaker. While the US is generally held to have an entrepreneurial culture and a supportive private finance industry providing venture capital, which provide a stimulus to new high-technology firm formation, in the other three countries public policy — to a greater or lesser extent — made up for the relative lack of an entrepreneurial culture and private-sector finance. Differences in the financial institutions and instruments of public policy in all four countries are analysed. In each of them, networks of cooperation between other organisations, including established firms, also played an important role in the survival of the small biotechnology firms. Unlike the microelectronics experience, there was a complementary role for new and established, large and small firms, and the large established firms in end-user industries have not been pushed aside by the new dedicated biotechnology firms. Some of the new firms have grown and been successful; in some cases the complementary role has now been overtaken, and some of the small firms have been taken over by established ones.