Does Biotech Reflect a New Science-based Innovation Regime?

The purpose of this paper is to enter into the ""black box'' of science-based sectors, to seek a better understanding of the nature of the dynamics of such technological regimes in their different forms. Special attention is given to the institutional dimensions, which, in the authors' view, play a major role in structuring technological regimes and organizational trajectories. After a short review of the literature on science-based sectors and technological regimes, some specificities of the new emerging biotech sector are focused on, aiming to show how and why it can be regarded as a new type of science-based technological regime, referred to in this paper as the science-based ""type 2'' model. In a short final conclusion, some of the consequences of the existence of this basic distinction between two types of ""science-based'' regime are explored.

[1]  Luigi Orsenigo,et al.  The emergence of biotechnology , 1989 .

[2]  Rebecca Henderson,et al.  Sources of Industrial Leadership: The Pharmaceutical Industry and the Revolution in Molecular Biology: Interactions Among Scientific, Institutional, and Organizational Change , 1999 .

[3]  Stakes and Stars: the Effect of Intellectual Human Capital on the Level and Variability of High-Tech Firms&Apos; Market Values , 1999 .

[4]  B. Sampat,et al.  University patenting : an assessment of the causes and consequences of recent changes in strategies and practices , 2002 .

[5]  George Strauss,et al.  Tracking the Giant Corporation@@@Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism. , 1991 .

[6]  Benjamin Coriat,et al.  Establishing a new intellectual property rights regime in the United States: Origins, content and problems , 2002 .

[7]  Richard Florida,et al.  Industrializing Knowledge: University-Industry Linkages in Japan and the United States , 1999 .

[8]  L. Zucker,et al.  Star scientists and institutional transformation: patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  P. Hall,et al.  Varieties of Capitalism , 2001 .

[10]  R. Levin.  Appropriability, R&D Spending, and Technological Performance , 1988 .

[11]  K. Arrow.  Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention , 1962 .

[12]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[13]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science , 1997 .

[14]  R. Nelson.  The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research , 1959, Journal of Political Economy.

[15]  M. Heller,et al.  Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research , 1998, Science.

[16]  Staffan Jacobsson,et al.  Innovation systems: analytical and methodological issues , 2002 .

[17]  N. Rosenberg.  Why do firms do basic research (with their own money) , 1990 .

[18]  Michel Quéré,et al.  KNOWLEDGE DYNAMICS: BIOTECHNOLOGY’S INCURSION INTO THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY , 2003 .

[19]  A. Rai.  Fostering Cumulative Innovation in the Biopharmaceutical Industry: The Role of Patents and Antitrust , 2002 .

[20]  青木 昌彦,et al.  比較制度分析 = Towards a comparative institutional analysis , 2001 .

[21]  K. Pavitt.  Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change : Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory : Research Policy , 1984 .

[22]  Abdelhak Senhadji,et al.  Sources of Economic Growth: An Extensive Growth Accounting Exercise , 1999, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[23]  Masahiko Aoki,et al.  Information, Corporate Governance, and Institutional Diversity: Competitiveness in Japan, the USA, and the Transitional Economies , 2001 .

[24]  K. Pavitt.  SPRU Electronic Working Paper No 5 The Social Shaping of the National Science Base , 1998 .

[25]  P. Cooke.  NEW ECONOMY INNOVATION SYSTEMS: BIOTECHNOLOGY IN EUROPE AND THE USA , 2001 .

[26]  H. Grupp.  Spillover effects and the science base of innovations reconsidered: an empirical approach , 1996 .

[27]  R. Hunt,et al.  Patent reform: a mixed blessing for the U.S. economy? , 1999 .

[28]  W. Powell,et al.  To Patent or Not: Faculty Decisions and Institutional Success at Technology Transfer , 2001 .

[29]  David Dickson.  Genentech makes splash on Wall Street , 1980, Nature.

[30]  Richard R. Nelson,et al.  On the Sources and Significance of Interindustry Differences in Technological Opportunities , 1995 .

[31]  Richard R. Nelson,et al.  Appropriating the Returns from Industrial R&D , 1988 .

[32]  P. David,et al.  Toward a new economics of science , 1994 .

[33]  Franco Malerba,et al.  Technological Regimes and Sectoral Patterns of Innovative Activities , 1997 .

[34]  Scott Stern,et al.  The Diffusion of Science-Driven Drug Discovery: Organizational Change in Pharmaceutical Research , 1999 .

[35]  D. Jorgenson.  The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. , 1963 .

[36]  G. I. Bell.  The Human Genome Program , 1989 .

[37]  B. Coriat,et al.  Organizations, firms and institutions in the generation of innovation , 2002 .

[38]  Bruno Amable,et al.  Institutional complementarity and diversity of social systems of innovation and production , 2000 .

[39]  O. Marsili,et al.  The Anatomy and Evolution of Industries , 2001 .

[40]  Carl Shapiro,et al.  Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting , 2000, Innovation Policy and the Economy.

[41]  Alfred Dupont Chandler,et al.  战略与结构 : 美国工商企业成长的若干篇章=strategy and structure : chapters in the history of the American industrial enterprise , 1962 .