制药(重新)捕获

Liza Vertinsky
{"title":"制药(重新)捕获","authors":"Liza Vertinsky","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3882091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Article makes the case that pharmaceutical companies, along with other powerful corporate actors in the pharmaceutical industry, are in effect designing their own markets, often at the expense of, rather than in pursuit of, public health. The influence exerted by these corporate actors extends beyond traditional forms of regulatory capture, rising to what this Article refers to as pharmaceutical capture—a concept that encompasses the exercise of holistic and systemic control over the operation of pharmaceutical markets and their regulation. After developing a framework for thinking about pharmaceutical capture, this Article uses the evolution of the opioid epidemic as a case study of capture at work. It argues that the patterns of corporate influence highlighted in the case study are not unique to opioids, but rather are structural features of U.S. pharmaceutical markets. A popular political response to concerns about the power exerted by corporate actors in the pharmaceutical industry has been to pin the blame on government regulation as impeding the discipline of the “free market.” But pharmaceutical markets rely on government regulations to function, and this push for deregulation is in many cases simply an effort to substitute one governance structure for another more favorable to incumbent corporate interests. This Article concludes that it is not deregulation, but rather a redesign of regulation, that is needed to improve the public health impact of the pharmaceutical industry. Drawing lessons from pharmaceutical capture, it suggests guidelines for a regulatory recapture.","PeriodicalId":393649,"journal":{"name":"BioRN: Intellectual Property (Topic)","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pharmaceutical (Re)capture\",\"authors\":\"Liza Vertinsky\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3882091\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This Article makes the case that pharmaceutical companies, along with other powerful corporate actors in the pharmaceutical industry, are in effect designing their own markets, often at the expense of, rather than in pursuit of, public health. The influence exerted by these corporate actors extends beyond traditional forms of regulatory capture, rising to what this Article refers to as pharmaceutical capture—a concept that encompasses the exercise of holistic and systemic control over the operation of pharmaceutical markets and their regulation. After developing a framework for thinking about pharmaceutical capture, this Article uses the evolution of the opioid epidemic as a case study of capture at work. It argues that the patterns of corporate influence highlighted in the case study are not unique to opioids, but rather are structural features of U.S. pharmaceutical markets. A popular political response to concerns about the power exerted by corporate actors in the pharmaceutical industry has been to pin the blame on government regulation as impeding the discipline of the “free market.” But pharmaceutical markets rely on government regulations to function, and this push for deregulation is in many cases simply an effort to substitute one governance structure for another more favorable to incumbent corporate interests. This Article concludes that it is not deregulation, but rather a redesign of regulation, that is needed to improve the public health impact of the pharmaceutical industry. Drawing lessons from pharmaceutical capture, it suggests guidelines for a regulatory recapture.\",\"PeriodicalId\":393649,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BioRN: Intellectual Property (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BioRN: Intellectual Property (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3882091\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BioRN: Intellectual Property (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3882091","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为,制药公司以及制药行业中其他强大的企业参与者实际上是在设计自己的市场,往往是以牺牲而不是追求公共卫生为代价的。这些企业行为者施加的影响超出了传统形式的监管捕获,上升到本文所称的“制药捕获”——这一概念包括对制药市场运作及其监管的整体和系统控制。在开发了一个思考药物捕获的框架之后,本文将阿片类药物流行的演变作为工作中捕获的案例研究。它认为,案例研究中强调的企业影响模式并不是阿片类药物所独有的,而是美国制药市场的结构性特征。对制药行业中企业行为者施加的权力的担忧,一种流行的政治回应是将责任归咎于政府监管,因为它阻碍了“自由市场”的纪律。但制药市场的运作依赖于政府监管,在很多情况下,推动放松管制只是为了用一种更有利于现有企业利益的治理结构来取代另一种治理结构。本文的结论是,要改善制药业对公众健康的影响,需要的不是放松管制,而是重新设计监管。从药物捕获中吸取教训,它提出了监管捕获的指导方针。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pharmaceutical (Re)capture
This Article makes the case that pharmaceutical companies, along with other powerful corporate actors in the pharmaceutical industry, are in effect designing their own markets, often at the expense of, rather than in pursuit of, public health. The influence exerted by these corporate actors extends beyond traditional forms of regulatory capture, rising to what this Article refers to as pharmaceutical capture—a concept that encompasses the exercise of holistic and systemic control over the operation of pharmaceutical markets and their regulation. After developing a framework for thinking about pharmaceutical capture, this Article uses the evolution of the opioid epidemic as a case study of capture at work. It argues that the patterns of corporate influence highlighted in the case study are not unique to opioids, but rather are structural features of U.S. pharmaceutical markets. A popular political response to concerns about the power exerted by corporate actors in the pharmaceutical industry has been to pin the blame on government regulation as impeding the discipline of the “free market.” But pharmaceutical markets rely on government regulations to function, and this push for deregulation is in many cases simply an effort to substitute one governance structure for another more favorable to incumbent corporate interests. This Article concludes that it is not deregulation, but rather a redesign of regulation, that is needed to improve the public health impact of the pharmaceutical industry. Drawing lessons from pharmaceutical capture, it suggests guidelines for a regulatory recapture.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信