The inseparability of the biotechnology industry and the state is a central theme in the analysis of the location and performance of biotechnology industry in the US and elsewhere. This paper reports on the results of a survey of US biotechnology companies looking particularly at their assessment of needs, barriers, strategies, and government programs. The paper shows that although there is an increasing level of federal and state intervention, there are considerable barriers faced by biotechnology firms, which may or may not be resolved in the near future because of the nature of the business of biotechnology, which involves uncertainties at every stage of innovation and commercialisation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArgyresN SLiebeskindJ P, 2002, “Governance inseparability and the evolution of the US biotechnology industry”Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization47197–219
2.
AudretschDBozemanBCombsKFeldmanMLinkA NSiegelD SStephanPTasseyGWessnerC, 2002, “The economics of science and technology”Journal of Technology Transfer27155–203
3.
Bagchi-SenS, 2004, “Firm-specific characteristics of R&D collaborators and non-collaborators in US biotechnology clusters and elsewhere”International Journal of Technology and Globalization forthcoming
4.
BMI/SSTI, 2001State Government Initiatives in Biotechnology 2001Battelle Memorial Institute and the State Science and Technology Institute, Columbus, OH
5.
BrittonJ N H, 1989, “A policy perspective on incremental innovation in small and medium sized enterprises”Entrepreneurship and Regional Development1179–190
CookeP, 2004, “The molecular biology revolution and the rise of bioscience megacentres in North America and Europe”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy22161–177
8.
CortrightJMayerH, 2002, “Signs of life: the growth of biotechnology centers in the US”, Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC
9.
DeedsD LDecarolisDCoombsJ, 1999, “Dynamic capabilities and new product development in high technology ventures; an empirical analysis of new biotechnology firms”Journal of Business Venturing15211–229
10.
DibnerM, 1999Biotechnology Guide USA (Institute for Biotechnology Information, Research Triangle Park, NC)
11.
DossaniRKenneyM, 2002, “Creating an environment for venture capital in India”World Development30227–253
12.
Ernst and Young, 2000The Economic Contributions of the Biotechnology Industry to the U.S. Economy prepared for the Bioindustry Organisation by Ernst and Young Economics Consulting and Quantitative Analysis, http://www.ey.com
13.
Ernst and Young, 2002Beyond Borders: The Global Biotechnology Report 2003 Ernst and Young Economics Consulting and Quantitative Analysis, http://www.ey.com
14.
FeldmanM A, 1985, “Biotechnology and local economic growth: the American pattern”, in Silicon Landscapes Eds HallPMarkusenA (Allen and Unwin, Winchester, MA) chapter 5
15.
FeldmanM AO'MalleyE, 1982, “The biotechnology industry in California”, California Commission on Industrial Innovation, Sacramento
16.
FeldmanM PRonzioC R, 2001, “Closing the loop: moving from the laboratory to the shop floor in biotechnology manufacturing”Entrepreneurship and Regional Development131–16
17.
FeldmanMSchreuderY, 1996, “Initial advantage: the origins of the geographic concentration of the pharmaceutical industry in the Mid-Atlantic region”Industrial and Corporate Change5839–862
18.
FloridaR, 2002, “The economic geography of talent”Annals of the Association of American Geographers92743–755
19.
FloridaRKenneyM, 1988, “Venture capital financed innovation and technological change in the US”Research Policy1719–137
20.
FreelM S, 2003, “Sectoral patterns of small firm innovation, networking and proximity”Research Policy32751–770
21.
GreisN PDibnerM DBeanA S, 1995, “External partnering as a response to innovation barriers and global competition in biotechnology”Research Policy24609–630
HallLBagchi-Sen, 2001, “An analysis of R&D, innovation and business performance in the US biotechnology industry”International Journal of Biotechnology3267–286
25.
HaughP, 1995, “Formation of biotechnology firms in the Greater Seattle region: an empirical investigation of entrepreneurial, financial, and educational perspectives”Environment and Planning A27249–276
26.
I.E.I., 1997North American Biotechnology Directory (I.E.I. Publishing Division, Houston, TX)
27.
KeebleDLawsonCLawton SmithHMooreBWilkinsonF, 1998, “Internationalisation processes, networking and local embeddedness in technology-intensive small firms”Small Business Economics11327–342
28.
KenneyM, 1986Biotechnology; The University—Industrial Complex (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT)
29.
LeeK BJrBurrillG S, 1996Biotech 97: AlignmentErnst and Young, LLP, Palo Alto, CA, http://www.ey.com
30.
MangematinVLemarieSBoissinJ-PCatherineDCorolleurFCoriniRTrommetterM, 2003, “Development of SMEs and heterogeneity of trajectories: the case of the biotechnology industry in France”Research Policy32621–638
31.
MoweryD CNelsonR RSampatB NZiedonisA A, 2001, “The growth of patenting and licensing by US universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh—Dole Act of 1980”Research Policy3099–119
32.
National Science Board, 2002Science and Engineering Indicators—2002 NSB-02-1, National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA
PisanoGShanWTeeceD J, 1988, “Joint ventures and collaboration in the biotechnology industry”, in International Collaborative Ventures in US Manufacturing Ed. MoweryD (Ballinger, Cambridge, MA) pp 183–222
35.
PowellW WKoputK WBowieJ ISmith-DoerrL, 2002, “The spatial clustering of science and capital; accounting for biotech firm-venture capital relationships”Regional Studies36291–305
36.
PrevezerM, 1998, “Clustering in biotechnology in the USA”, in The Dynamics of Industrial Clustering, International Comparisons in Computing and Biotechnology Eds SwannG MPrevezerMStoutD (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 124–193
RaiAEisenbergR, 2003, “The Bayh—Dole reform and the progress of biomedicine”American Scientist9152–59
39.
RothaermelF T, 2001, “Complementary assets, strategic alliances, and the incumbent's advantage: an empirical study of the industry and firm effects in the biopharmaceutical industry”Research Policy301235–1251
40.
SalterBSmithM E, 2002, “The UK's stake in the biotechnology debate: global competition and regulatory politics”, working paper, The Governance of Human Genetics, funded by the ESRC as part of its Innovative Health Technologies Programme, University of East Anglia, http://www.uea.ac.uk/∼x514/research/governance/UK'sstakeinthebiotechnologydebate.pdf
41.
SenkerJ, 1996, “National systems of innovation, organizational learning and industrial biotechnology”Technovation16219–229
42.
WalcottS, 2001, “Growing global: life cycle of a life science cluster”Growth and Change32511–532
43.
WalcottS, 2002, “Analysing an innovative environment: San Diego as a bioscience beachead”Economic Development Quarterly1699–114
44.
WoiceshynJHartelD, 1996, “Strategies and performance of Canadian biotechnology firms; an empirical investigation”Technovation16231–243
45.
ZuckerL GDarbyM RArmstrongJ S, 2002, “Commercializing knowledge; university science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology”Management Science48138–153
