The globalisation of research in the pharmaceutical industry: A case of uneven development

Technology Analysis and Strategic Management

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 143-167

  Ramirez, Paulina ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GLOBALIZATION; PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT;

EURASIA; EUROPE; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33646703378     PISSN: 09537325     EISSN: 14653990     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09537320600624006     Document Type: Article

References (100)

1. It not assumed that the patterns of globalisation found in this particular historical period will necessarily continue in the same form in the future.
2. P. Patel & K. Pavitt, Large firms in the production of the world's technology: An important case of non-globalisation, Journal of International Business Studies, 22(1), 1991, pp. 1-21
3. P. Patel, Localised production of technology for global markets, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19, 1995, pp. 141-153
4. J. Cantwell, The internationalisation of technological activity and its implication for competitiveness, in: O. Granstrand, L. Hakanson & S. Sjolander (Eds), Technology Management and International Business (Chichester, UK, John Wiley, 1992). pp. 75-95
5. J. Cantwell, The globalisation of technology: What remains of the product cycle model?, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19, 1995, pp. 155-174.
6. Cantwell, 1992, 1995, op. cit., Ref. 2
7. J. Dunning, Alliance Capitalism and Global Business (London, Routledge, 1997)
8. R. Pearce, The Internationalisation of Research and Development by Multinational Enterprises, (London, MacMillan, 1989)
9. R. Pearce & S. Singh, Globalizing Research and Development (London, McMillan, 1992)
10. R. Pearce, Decentralising R&D and strategic Competitiveness: Globalised approaches to generation and use of technology in multinational enterprises (MNEs), Research Policy, 28, pp. 57-178, 1999.
11. Patel & Pavitt, op. cit., Ref. 2
12. F. Chesnais, National systems of innovation, foreign direct investment and the operations of multinational enterprises, in: B. A. Lundvall (Ed.), National Systems of Innovation (London, Pinter, 1992), pp. 265-295
13. OECD, Technology and the Economy: The Key Relationships (Paris, OECD, 1992)
14. J. Howells, The globalisation of research and development: A new era of change?, Science and Public Policy, 17(4), 1990a, pp. 273-285
15. J. Howells, The location and organisation of research and development: new horizons, Research Policy, 19, 1990b, pp. 133-146
16. L. K. Mytelka (Ed), Strategic Partnerships and the World Economy (London, Pinter, 1991)
17. J. Hagedoorn, The economics of cooperation among high-tech firms: Trends and patterns in strategic technology partnering since the early seventies, Paper presented at the Conference on 'The Economics of High Technology Competition and Cooperation in Global Markets', Hamburg, 2-3 February 1995
18. J. Hagedoorn & J. Schakenraad, Inter-firm partnerships and co-operative strategies in core technologies, in: C. Freeman & L. Soete (Eds), New Explorations in the Economics of Technical Change (London, Pinter, 1990).
19. Patel & Pavitt, op. cit., Ref. 2
20. K. Pavitt & P. Patel, Global corporations and national systems of innovation: Who dominates whom?, in: D. Archibugi & J. Micchie (Eds), Technology, Globalisation and Economic Performance (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999).
21. Though there are important differences between US and European large firms, between firms from different European countries as well as between different industries.
22. Cantwell, 1992, 1995, op. cit., Ref. 2
23. J. Cantwell & O. Janne, Technological globalisation and innovative centres: The role of corporate technological leadership and locational hierarchy, Research Policy, 28, 1999, pp. 119-144
24. Chesnais, op. cit., Ref. 4
25. Dunning, op. cit., Ref. 3.
26. Cantwell, 1992, 1995, op. cit., Ref. 2
27. Cantwell & Janne, op. cit., Ref. 7.
28. Cantwell, 1995, op. cit., Ref. 2.
29. Patel & Pavitt, op. cit., Ref. 2.
30. Cantwell, 1992, op. cit., Ref. 2.
31. Chesnais, op. cit., Ref 4
32. OECD, Technology and the Economy: The Key Relationships (Paris, OECD, 1992
33. Dunning, op. cit., Ref 3.
34. Chesnais, op. cit., Ref. 4.
35. Cantwell, 1992, 1995, op. cit., Ref. 2.
36. Chesnais, op. cit., Ref. 4.
37. Dunning, op. cit., Ref. 3.
38. Pearce & Singh, op. cit., Ref. 3
39. Pearce, 1999, op. cit., Ref. 3.
40. P. Patel, Are large firms internationalising the generation of technology? New evidence, IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management, 43(1), 1996, pp. 41-47
41. P. Patel & M. Vega, Patterns of internationalisation of Corporate technology: Location versus home country advantages, Research Policy 28, 1999, pp. 145-155
42. Pearce, 1989, 1999, op. cit. Ref. 3
43. Pearce & Singh, op. cit., Ref. 3
44. W. Kuemmerle, Foreign direct investment in industrial research in the pharmaceutical and electronics industries - results from a survey of multinational firms, Research Policy, 28, 1999, pp. 179-193
45. A. Gerybadze & G. Reger, Globalisation of R&D: Recent changes in the management of innovation in transnational corporations, Research Policy, 28, 1999, pp. 251-274.
46. Patel, op. cit., Ref. 18
47. Patel & Vega, op. cit., Ref. 18.
48. Patel & Vega, op. cit., Ref. 18.
49. Cantwell, 1995, op. cit., Ref. 2
50. Cantwell & Janne, op. cit., Ref. 7.
51. Pearce, 1999, op. cit., Ref. 2
52. R. Pearce & M. Papanastassiou, Overseas R&D and the strategic evolution of MNEs: Evidence from laboratories in the UK, Research Policy, 28, 1999, pp. 23-41.
53. Kuemmerle, op. cit., Ref. 18
54. Gerybadze & Reger, op. cit., Ref. 18.
55. Mytelka, op. cit., Ref. 4
56. L. K. Mytelka, Mergers, acquisitions, and inter-firm technology agreements in the global learning economy, in: D. Archibugi & B.A. Lundvall (Eds), The Globalising Learning Economy (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2001)
57. Hagedoorn, op. cit., Ref. 4
58. Hagedoorn & Schakenraad, op. cit., Ref. 4
59. L. Miotti & F. Scahwald, Co-operative R&D: Why and with whom? An integrated framework analysis, Research Policy, 32(8), 2003, pp. 1481-1499.
60. F. Chesnais, Technical co-operative agreements between firms, STI Review, No. 4, December 1988, pp. 51-119
61. J. Howells, The globalisation of research and technological innovation: a new agenda?, Paper presented to 'The Globalisation of Technology: Lessons for the Public and Business Sectors' Conference, Robinson College, University of Cambridge, 20-24 June, 1995.
62. Cantwell, 1995, op. cit., Ref. 2, argues that an increase in intra-firm coordination can result in the closure of a foreign R&D affiliate if it is perceived that such facility duplicates work already in existence in some other part of the networked MNC.
63. J. Dunning, Multinational and Technological Competitiveness (Unwin Hyman, 1988).
64. M. Sharp & P. Patel, Europe's pharmaceutical industry: An innovation profile, Draft Report prepared for the DGXIII-D4, 1996
65. Jungmittag, G. Reger & R. Thomas (Eds), Changing Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Industry - Globalization and New Ways of Drug Development (Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 2000).
66. C. Tarabusi & G. Vickery, Globalisation in the pharmaceutical industry, International Journal of Health Services, 28, 1998, pp. 67-105
67. Patel & Vega, op. cit., Ref. 18. These authors also recognised, however, that as a result of merger and acquisition activities there has been an increase in the internationalisation of these activities
68. Jungmittag et al., op. cit., Ref. 29
69. Howells, 1990b, op. cit., Ref. 4.
70. M. Sharp, The science of nations: European multinationals and American biotechnology, STEEP Discussion paper, No. 28, 1996
71. M. Sharp & I. Galimberti, Coherence and diversity: Europe's chemical giants and the assimilation of biotechnology, Steep Discussion paper No. 5, 1993
72. V. Walsh & I Galimberti, Firm strategy, globalisation and new technological paradigms: The case of biotechnology, in: M. Humbert (Ed), The Impact of Globalisation on Europe's Firms and Industries (London, Pinter, 1993).
73. J. Taggart, Determinants of the foreign R&D location decision in the pharmaceutical industry, R&D Management, 21(3), 1991, pp. 229-240
74. Jungmittag et al., op. cit., Ref. 29
75. V. Walsh, P. Ramirez & G. Tampubolon, Globalisation, technological change and the pharmaceutical industry, Paper presented EAPEE Conference, Lisbon, 5-8 November 1998.
76. J. Howells, The internationalisation of R&D and the development of global research networks, Regional Studies, 24(6), 1990, pp. 495-512.
77. Jungmittag et al., op. cit., Ref. 29.
78. Hagedoorn, op. cit., Ref. 4
79. Hagedoorn & Schakenraad, op. cit., Ref. 4
80. Jungmittag et al., op. cit., Ref. 29.
81. Ibid.
82. The data from interviews revealed that the MNCs visited had a larger number of research facilities abroad than appeared in US patent data. This suggests that US patent data underestimates the degree to which pharmaceutical MNCs locate research activities abroad.
83. This is also true of facilities located in the home country.
84. Due to the introduction of cost containment measures in healthcare spending, the rate of growth of world pharmaceutical sales slowed down from an average 15% in the mid 1980s to 7% in the mid to late 1990s. The exception is the USA where despite the 'managed-care revolution' sales have continued to grow. As a result in 1998 US prescription drug sales represented nearly 40% of total world market sales and the US market accounted for an estimated 60% of drug company profits (D. Pilling, Strong demand shows no sign of abating, Financial Times, 15 March 1999).
85. In many instances the US firms acquired by European MNCs specifically because of their scientific or technological expertise did not have a high patent count and did not make any major impact on the total US patent count of the European MNCs.
86. Patel & Pavitt, op. cit., Ref. 2.
87. Patel & Pavitt, op. cit., Ref. 2
88. Patel, op. cit., Ref. 18
89. Patel & Vega, op. cit., Ref. 18
90. Cantwell, 1995, op. cit., Ref. 2.
91. Cantwell & Janne, op. cit., Ref. 7.
92. Cantwell, 1995, op. cit., Ref. 2.
93. Cantwell, 1992, 1995, op. cit., Ref. 2
94. Pearce, 1989, 1999, op. cit., Ref 3.
95. Patel & K. Pavitt op. cit., Ref 2.
96. Patel & Pavitt, op. cit., Ref. 2
97. Patel, 1996, op. cit., Ref. 18
98. Patel & Vega, op. cit., Ref. 18.
99. The author would like to thank Pari Patel for making the database available and Gindo Tampubolon for his work the pharmaceutical subset of the database.
100. Patel & Pavitt, op cit., Ref. 2.