美国生物医学研发的国有-公司-机构互补性及其全球影响

Felipe Penhorate Carvalho da Fonseca, Felipe Carvalho
{"title":"美国生物医学研发的国有-公司-机构互补性及其全球影响","authors":"Felipe Penhorate Carvalho da Fonseca, Felipe Carvalho","doi":"10.17265/2328-2134/2020.04.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Financial accumulation and technological dominance by transnational biopharmaceutical companies ― and its global consequences ― have been an important research topic at innovation economics, institutional economics, and international political economy literature. The United States is a privileged field for investigation, as it is home both for the companies that control the core of this industry and for the highest State-led investments on biomedical research and development (R & D). New analytical approaches that focus on State-Company interactions identify dysfunctional relations on risks and rewards. However, a neglected angle on this debate is the geopolitical dynamics surrounding market concentration, knowledge control, and technological asymmetry in the biopharmaceutical sector. This paper combines a qualitative analysis of State-Company institutional complementarities in the biopharmaceutical sector, comprised by analysis of selected official documents, review of empirical data and a case study, with a theoretical investigation inspired on the institutional thought of Torstein Veblen, the structuralism of Susan Strange and the realistic approach to international political economy of José Luis Fiori. We propose a new analytical framework in which State-Company interactions in the US are seen as symbiotic, taken under the systemic functioning of a “medical-technological-financial-complex”, what suggests “biopharmaceutical geopolitics” as an important field for future studies. The big circles represent the investments made by the selected government agencies (U$39.4 billion), by the eight largest US-based pharmaceutical companies (U$44.4 billion) and by small and medium US-based companies (U$45 billion). The small circles represents government funding through direct contracts, SBIR/STTR funds, NIH “extramural” grants, etc. The line represents joint development efforts, collaboration and technology transfer agreements, through CRADAs, NIH licenses, etc. The small triangles represents mergers & acquisitions (M & A).","PeriodicalId":70059,"journal":{"name":"国际关系与外交:英文版","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"State-Company Institutional Complementarities on Biomedical R & D in the US and Its Global Consequences\",\"authors\":\"Felipe Penhorate Carvalho da Fonseca, Felipe Carvalho\",\"doi\":\"10.17265/2328-2134/2020.04.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Financial accumulation and technological dominance by transnational biopharmaceutical companies ― and its global consequences ― have been an important research topic at innovation economics, institutional economics, and international political economy literature. The United States is a privileged field for investigation, as it is home both for the companies that control the core of this industry and for the highest State-led investments on biomedical research and development (R & D). New analytical approaches that focus on State-Company interactions identify dysfunctional relations on risks and rewards. However, a neglected angle on this debate is the geopolitical dynamics surrounding market concentration, knowledge control, and technological asymmetry in the biopharmaceutical sector. This paper combines a qualitative analysis of State-Company institutional complementarities in the biopharmaceutical sector, comprised by analysis of selected official documents, review of empirical data and a case study, with a theoretical investigation inspired on the institutional thought of Torstein Veblen, the structuralism of Susan Strange and the realistic approach to international political economy of José Luis Fiori. We propose a new analytical framework in which State-Company interactions in the US are seen as symbiotic, taken under the systemic functioning of a “medical-technological-financial-complex”, what suggests “biopharmaceutical geopolitics” as an important field for future studies. The big circles represent the investments made by the selected government agencies (U$39.4 billion), by the eight largest US-based pharmaceutical companies (U$44.4 billion) and by small and medium US-based companies (U$45 billion). The small circles represents government funding through direct contracts, SBIR/STTR funds, NIH “extramural” grants, etc. The line represents joint development efforts, collaboration and technology transfer agreements, through CRADAs, NIH licenses, etc. The small triangles represents mergers & acquisitions (M & A).\",\"PeriodicalId\":70059,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"国际关系与外交:英文版\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"国际关系与外交:英文版\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17265/2328-2134/2020.04.003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"国际关系与外交:英文版","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17265/2328-2134/2020.04.003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

跨国生物制药公司的金融积累和技术主导地位及其全球后果一直是创新经济学、制度经济学和国际政治经济学文献中的一个重要研究课题。美国是一个享有特权的调查领域,因为它既是控制该行业核心的公司的所在地,也是国家主导的生物医学研发投资最高的地方。专注于国有企业互动的新分析方法发现了风险和回报方面的功能失调关系。然而,这场辩论中一个被忽视的角度是围绕生物制药行业的市场集中、知识控制和技术不对称的地缘政治动态。本文结合对生物制药行业国有企业制度互补性的定性分析,包括对选定的官方文件的分析、对实证数据的回顾和案例研究,以及受Torstein Veblen制度思想启发的理论调查,苏珊·斯特兰奇的结构主义和何塞·路易斯·菲奥里的国际政治经济学的现实主义方法。我们提出了一个新的分析框架,在该框架中,美国国有企业的互动被视为共生的,在“医疗技术金融综合体”的系统功能下进行,这表明“生物制药地缘政治”是未来研究的一个重要领域。大圆圈代表选定的政府机构的投资(394亿美元)、美国八大制药公司的投资(440亿美元)和美国中小企业的投资(450亿美元)。小圆圈代表政府通过直接合同、SBIR/STTR基金、美国国立卫生研究院“校外”拨款等提供资金。线条代表联合开发努力、合作和技术转让协议,通过CRADA、美国国立医疗研究院许可证等。小三角形代表并购(M&A)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
State-Company Institutional Complementarities on Biomedical R & D in the US and Its Global Consequences
Financial accumulation and technological dominance by transnational biopharmaceutical companies ― and its global consequences ― have been an important research topic at innovation economics, institutional economics, and international political economy literature. The United States is a privileged field for investigation, as it is home both for the companies that control the core of this industry and for the highest State-led investments on biomedical research and development (R & D). New analytical approaches that focus on State-Company interactions identify dysfunctional relations on risks and rewards. However, a neglected angle on this debate is the geopolitical dynamics surrounding market concentration, knowledge control, and technological asymmetry in the biopharmaceutical sector. This paper combines a qualitative analysis of State-Company institutional complementarities in the biopharmaceutical sector, comprised by analysis of selected official documents, review of empirical data and a case study, with a theoretical investigation inspired on the institutional thought of Torstein Veblen, the structuralism of Susan Strange and the realistic approach to international political economy of José Luis Fiori. We propose a new analytical framework in which State-Company interactions in the US are seen as symbiotic, taken under the systemic functioning of a “medical-technological-financial-complex”, what suggests “biopharmaceutical geopolitics” as an important field for future studies. The big circles represent the investments made by the selected government agencies (U$39.4 billion), by the eight largest US-based pharmaceutical companies (U$44.4 billion) and by small and medium US-based companies (U$45 billion). The small circles represents government funding through direct contracts, SBIR/STTR funds, NIH “extramural” grants, etc. The line represents joint development efforts, collaboration and technology transfer agreements, through CRADAs, NIH licenses, etc. The small triangles represents mergers & acquisitions (M & A).
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
411
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信