The dismal science, the crown jewel and the endless frontier

The New Economics of Technology Policy

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 148-162

  Sampat, Bhaven N ^a  

^a Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84865410816     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (40)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (2007), 'NIH Funding Falls in 2008 Budget', available at: http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/nih08p. pdf.
2. Angell, M. (2004), The Truth About Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to do About It, New York: Random House.
3. Arrow, K. (1962), 'Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention', in NBER (ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 609-25.
4. Azoulay, P., R. Michigan and B. Sampat (2007), 'The anatomy of medical school patenting', Working Paper.
5. Cook-Deegan, R. and M. McGeary (2006), 'The jewel in the federal crown? History, politics, and the National Institutes of Health', in R.A. Stevens, C.E. Rosenberg and L.R. Burns, History and Health Policy: Putting the Past Back In, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
6. Cutler, D., A. Deaton and A. Lleras-Muney (2006), 'The determinants of mortality', NBER Working Paper 11963.
7. Cutler, D.M. and S. Kadiyala (2003), 'The return to biomedical research: treatment and behavioral eff ects', in K.M. Murphy and R.H. Topel (eds), Measuring the Gains from Medical Research: An Economic Approach, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 110-62.
8. David, P.A., D.C. Mowery and W.E. Steinmueller (1992), 'Analyzing the economic payoff s from basic research', Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 2 (4), 73-90.
9. Dresser, R. (2001), When Science Off ers Salvation: Patient Advocacy and Research Ethics, New York: Oxford University Press.
10. Eisenberg, R.S. (2002), 'How can you patent genes?', American Journal of Bioethics, 2 (3), 3-11.
11. Eisenberg, R.S. (2005), 'The problem of new uses', Yale Journal of Health Policy Law Ethics, 5 (2), 717-39.
12. Eisenberg, R.S. and R.R. Nelson (2002), 'Public vs. proprietary science: a fruitful tension', Daedalus, 131 (2), 89-101.
13. Greenberg, D. (1998), 'Disease lobbies', Washington Post, 27 October.
14. Gross, C.P., G.F. Anderson and N.R. Powe (1999), 'The relation between funding by the National Institutes of Health and the burden of disease', New England Journal of Medicine, 340 (24), 1881-7.
15. Heidenreich, P. and M. McClellan (2003), 'Biomedical research and then some: the causes of technological change in heart attack treatment', in K.M. Murphy and R.H. Topel (eds), Measuring the Gains from Medical Research: An Economic Approach, Chicago: University of Chicago Press pp. 163-205.
16. Institute of Medicine (1998), Scientifi c Opportunities and Public Needs: Improving Priority Setting and Public Input at the National Institutes of Health, Washington, DC: National Academy, Press.
17. Jaff e, A. (1998), 'Measurement issues', in L. Branscomb and J. Keller, Investing in Innovation: Creating a Research and Innovation Policy That Works, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 64-84.
18. Jaff e, A. (2002), 'Building program evaluation into the design of public research support programs', Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18 (1), 22-34.
19. Kleinman, D.L. (1994), 'Layers of interests, layers of infl uence: business and the genesis of the National Science Foundation', Science, Technology, and Human Values, 19, 259-82.
20. Lichtenberg, F. (2000), The Allocation of Funds for Biomedical R&D, Washington, DC: AEI Press.
21. Lichtenberg, F.R. (2003), 'Pharmaceutical innovation, mortality reduction, and economic growth', in K.M. Murphy and R.H. Topel, Measuring the Gains from Medical Research: An Economic Approach, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 74-109.
22. Mansfi eld, E. (1995), 'Academic research underlying industrial innovations: sources, characteristics, and fi nancing', Review of Economics and Statistics, 77 (1), 55-65.
23. Merges, R. and R.R. Nelson (1990), 'On the complex economics of patent scope', Columbia Law Review, 90 (4), 839-916.
24. Moses, H., R. Dorsey, D. Matheson and S. Thier (2005), 'Financial anatomy of biomedical research', Journal of the American Medical Association, 294 (11), 1333-42.
25. Mowery, D.C. (1997), 'What does economic theory tell us about mission-oriented R&D?', Paper prepared for Monte Verità conference on The Economics of Technology Policy.
26. Mowery, D., R. Nelson, B. Sampat and A. Ziedonis (2004), Ivory Tower and Industrial Innovation, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
27. Nathan, D.G. and A.N. Schechter (2006), 'NIH support for basic and clinical research', Journal of the American Medical Association, 295 (22), 2656-8.
28. National Institutes of Health (NIH) (2009), 'About NIH: NIH mission', available at: http://www.nih.gov/about.
29. Nelson, R.R. (1997), 'Building eff ective innovation systems versus dealing with market failures as ways of thinking about technology policy', Paper prepared for Monte Verità conference The Economics of Technology Policy.
30. Nelson, R. (1959), 'The simple economics of basic scientifi c research', Journal of Political Economy, 67 (3), 297-306.
31. Rai, A. and R. Eisenberg (2003), 'Bayh-Dole reform and the progress of biomedicine', Law and Contemporary Problems, 66 (1), 289-314.
32. Rettig, R. (1977), Cancer Crusade: The Story of the National Cancer Act of 1971, Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.
33. Sampat, B. and F. Lichtenberg (2007), 'The roles of the public and private sectors in new drug development', Working Paper, Columbia University.
34. Sapolsky, H. (1990), Science and the Navy: The History of the Offi ce of Naval Resarch, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
35. Stokes, D. (1997), Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation, Washington, DC: Brookings.
36. Strickland, S.P. (1972), Politics, Science, and Dread Disease: A Short History of United States Medical Research Policy, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37. Toole, A.A. (2000), 'The impact of public basic research on industrial innovation: evidence from the pharmaceutical industry', SIEPR Discussion Paper No. 00-07, Stanford, CA.
38. US Government Accountability Offi ce (GAO) (2002), Clinical Research: NIH has Implemented Key Provisions of the Clinical Research Enhancement Act: Report to Congressional Committees, Washington, DC: US Government Accountability Offi ce, 18 September.
39. Varmus, H. (1999), 'Evaluating the burden of disease and spending the research dollars of the National Institutes of Health', New England Journal of Medicine, 340 (24), 1914-15.
40. Walsh, J., A. Arora and W. Cohen (2003), 'Eff ects of research tool patents and licensing on biomedical innovation', in W. Cohen and S. Merrill (eds), Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy, Washington, DC: National Academies Press, pp. 285-340.