Archives
Is the commercialisation of nanotechnology different?: A case study approach
Bruce Rasmussen
Deputy Director, Centre for Strategic Economic Studies, Victoria University, Melbourne VIC
Abstract
Nanotechnology is the latest in a series of general purpose technologies (GPT), earlier examples of which, have transformed household life, industry structure and firm performance. This paper traces the development to date of one of the first uses of nanotechnology to synthesise a new drug. Using an innovation systems framework, the paper compares the commercialisation process of this drug with that typically employed by a biotechnology company, to explore differences arising from the novel nature of the underlying technology.
The study finds that the commercialisation process, followed by the company developing the drug, conforms substantially to the empirical literature on biotechnology commercialisation. However it departs in two important ways. One is the absence of venture capital involvement and the second is the failure to date to form an alliance with a major pharmaceutical company. The evidence suggests that while both reflect factors that relate to conditions in the Australian market, the novel nature of the technology may be an issue in the latter.
Keywords
nanotechnology, biotechnology, innovation systems, intellectual property
References
Arora A and Gambardella A (1990) Complementarity and external linkages: the strategies of the large firms in biotechnology, The Journal of Industrial Economics 38: 361-379.
Bagchi-Sen S, Lawton Smith H and Hall L (2004) The US biotechnology industry: policy and practice, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 22: 199-216.
Baum J, Calabrese T and Silverman B (2000) Don't go it alone: alliance network composition and startups' performance in Canadian biotechnology, Strategic Management Journal 21: 267-294.
Biomolecular Research Institute (BRI) (1993) BRI Annual Report 1993, Melbourne.
Bergek A, Jacobsson S, Carlsson B, Lindmarki S and Rickne A (2005) Analyzing the dynamics and functionality of sectoral innovation systems: a manual. Paper: DRUID Tenth Anniversary Summer Conference Dynamics of Industry and Innovation: Organization, Networks and Systems, 27-29 June, Copenhagen.
Bresnahan TF and Trajtenberg M (1995) General purpose technologies: ‘engines of growth'? Journal of Econometrics 65: 83-108.
Calabrese T, Baum J and Silverman B (2000) Canadian biotechnology startups 1991-1997: the role of incumbents' patents and strategic alliances in controlling competition, Social Sciences Research 29: 503-534.
Carlsson B and Stankiewicz R (1991) On the nature, function and composition of technological systems, Journal of Evolutionary Economics 1(2): 93-118.
Carlsson B, Holmen M, Jacobsson S, Rickne A and Stankiewicz R (2002a) The analytical approach and methodology, in Carlsson B (ed.), Technological Systems in the Bio Industries: An International Study, Kluwer, Boston.
Carlsson B, Jacobsson S, Holmen M and Rickne A (2002b) Innovation systems: analytical and methodological issues, Research Policy 31(2): 233-245.
Chemical Engineering News (2005) Dendrimers branch out, Chemical Engineering News 13: 30-36.
Cooke P (2004) The molecular biology revolution and the rise of bioscience megacentres in North America and Europe, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 22: 161-177.
CSIRO (1994) CSIRO Annual Report 1994, Canberra.
CSIRO (2000) CSIRO Annual Report 2001, Canberra.
Dendritic Nanotechnologies Inc (DNT) (2005) Dendritic NanoTechnologies announces new low-cost family of precision nanostructures, press release, 18 May, Mount Pleasant, MI.
Edquist C and Johnson B (1997) ‘Institutions and organizations in systems of innovation, in Edquist C (ed.), Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, Pinter, London.
European Commission (2004) Towards a European Strategy for Nanotechnology, Brussels.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (2004) Guidance for Industry: Fast Track Drug Development Programs - Designation, Development and Applications Review, Centre for Drug Evaluation and Research, FDA, Washington DC, accessed at http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/5645fnl.htm on 20 July 2006.
Freeman C (1987) Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan, Pinter, London.
Galambos L and Sturchio JL (1998) Pharmaceutical firms and the transition to biotechnology: a study in strategic innovation, Business History Review 72: 250-278.
Grabowski H (2002) Patents and new product development in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Griliches Z (1990) Patent statistics as Economic indicators: a survey, Journal of Economic Literature 28: 1661-1707.
Helpman E (ed.) (1998) General Purpose Technologies and Economic Growth, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Heller M and Eisenberg R (1988) Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research, Science 280: 698-701.
Herpin T, Karuso H and Foley J (2005) ‘Australian biotech companies: navigating the maze, Journal of Commercial Biotechnology 11(2): 111-120.
In-PharmaTechnologist.com (2005) ‘Dow spins out dendrimer portfolio to nanotech firm, In-PharmaTechnologist.com, 26 January, accessed at http://www.in-pharmatechnologist.com/news/ng.asp?id=57592 on 20 July 2006.
Intersuisse Limited (2004) Starpharma Ltd., Intersuisse Investment Research, December.
Jacobsson S and Bergek A (2004) Transforming the energy sector: the evolution of technological systems in renewable energy technology, Industrial and Corporate Change 13(5): 815-849.
Jacobsson S and Johnson A (2000) The diffusion of renewable energy technology: an analytical framework and key issues for research, Energy Policy 28: 625-640.
Jackson RA (2005) Starpharma raises another AUD $15M to support VivaGel, NanoBiotech News 30 November: 9.
Jaffe A (1999) The US patent system in transition: policy innovation and the innovation process, NBER Working Paper No. 7280, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Mass.
Jaffe A and Lerner J (2004) How our Broken Patent System is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What to Do About It, Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ.
Jovanovic B and Rousseau PL (2003) General Purpose Technologies, Department of Economics, New York University.
Kenney M (1986) Biotechnology: The University-Industrial Complex, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
Lanjouw J and Schankerman M
(2004) Patent quality and research productivity:
measuring innovation with multiple indicators, The Economic Journal 114:
441-465.
Lerner J (1994) Venture capitalists and the decision to go public, Journal of Financial Economics 35(3): 293-316.
Lerner J (1995) Venture capitalists and the oversight of private firms, Journal of Finance 50(1): 301-318.
Lerner J (2002) Patent Protection and Innovation over 150 Years, NBER Working Paper No. 8977, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Mass.
Lundvall BA (1988) Innovation as an interactive process: from user-producer interaction to the National System of Innovation, in Dosi G, Freeman C, Nelson R, Silverberg G and Soete L (eds), Technical Change and Economic Theory, Pinter Publishers, London.
Lux Research (2005a) Why big pharma is missing the nanotech opportunity, NTS-B-001, New York.
Lux Research (2005b) Statement of findings: the nanotech IP landscape, New York.
McKelvey M (1996) Evolutionary Innovations: The Business of Technology, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
McKelvey M, Rickne A and Laage-Hellman J (2004) Stylized facts about innovation processes in modern biotechnology, in McKelvey M, Laage-Hellman J and Rickne A (eds), The Economic Dynamics of Modern Biotechnology, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
Mowery D and Sampat B (2005) Universities in national innovation systems, in Fagerberg J, Mowery D and Nelson R (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
NanoInvestorNews (2005) ‘Dendritic NanoTechnologies, Dow and Starpharma sign major three-way deal to commercialize nanotechnology, 25 January, available at www.nanoinvestornews.com accessed 12 April 2005.
National Science Foundation (NSF) (2002) Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science, Arlington, Virginia.
Nelson R (ed.) (1993) National Systems of Innovation, Oxford University Press, London.
Nelson R (1988) National systems of innovation: preface and institutions supporting technical change in the United States, in Dosi G et al. (eds), Technical Change and Economic Theory, Pinter, London.
OECD (1999) Managing National Innovation Systems, Paris.
OECD (2001) Innovative Clusters: Drivers of National Innovation Systems, Paris.
OECD (2002) Dynamising National Innovation Systems, Paris.
PANBIO (2001) PANBIO joins the nanotechnology revolution, PANBIO Ltd, Brisbane.
Penrose E (1951) The Economics of the International Patent System, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
Pisano GP (1991) The
governance of innovation: vertical integration and collaborative
arrangements in the biotechnology industry, Research Policy 20: 237-249.
Powell W, Koput K and Smith-Doerr L (1996) Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology, Administrative Science Quarterly 41: 116-145.
Powell W, Koput K, Bowie J and Smith-Doerr L (2002) The spatial clustering of science and capital: accounting for biotech firm-venture capital relationships, Regional Studies 36(3): 291-305.
Powell W, Koput K, Bowie J, Smith-Doerr L and Owen-Smith J (1999) Network position and firm performance: organizational returns to collaboration, Research in the Sociology of Organizations 16: 129-159.
Powell W, Koput K, White D and Owen-Smith J (2005) Network dynamics and field evolution: the growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences, American Journal of Sociology 110(4): 1132-1205.
Raff J (2005a) Starpharma Holdings (ASX: SPL). Paper: 2005 Emerging Growth Capital Annual Australian Biotechnology Expo, held in conjunction with the Australia Stock Exchange, 9 August, Sydney.
Raff J (2005b) Starpharma Holdings Limited Market Update, Starpharma, April 2005.
Rasmussen B (2006) Innovation and industry structure in the biomedical industry: role of alliances, in Grewal B and Kumnick M (eds), Engaging the New World: Responses to the Knowledge Economy, Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.
Rasmussen B (2004) Alliance Opportunities for Australian Biotechs, Pharmaceutical Industry Project Working Paper No. 23, June, CSES, Victoria University, Melbourne.
Rickne A (2000) New Technology-based Firms and Industrial Dynamics: Evidence from the Technological System of Biomaterials in Sweden, Ohio and Massachusetts. PhD Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg, Sweden.
Roco M and Bainbridge W (eds) (2005) Nanotechnology: Societal Implications, Maximizing Benefit for Humanity, Report of the National Nanotechnology Initiative Workshop, 3-5 December 2003, Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology, National Science Foundation, Washington DC.
Sadrieh N (2005) FDA perspectives on nanomaterial: containing products. Paper: Food and Drug Administration Nanobusiness Conference, May, accessed at http://www.fda.gov/NANOTECHNOLOGY/powerpoint_conversions/May05_files/800x600/slide40.html on 20 July 2006.
Samson D (2005) Intellectual Property Strategy and Business Strategy: Connections through Innovation Strategy, Working Paper No. 08/05, Intellectual Property Research Institute of Australia, Melbourne.
Shan W, Walker G and Kogut B (1994) Interfirm cooperation and startup innovation in the biotechnology industry, Strategic Management Journal 15: 387-394
Stankiewicz R (2002) The cognitive dynamics of biotechnology and the evolution of its technological systems, in Carlsson B (ed.), Technological Systems in the Bio Industries: An International Study, Kluwer, Boston.
Starpharma (1998) Starpharma Annual Report 1998, Melbourne.
Starpharma (1999) Starpharma Prospectus 1999, Melbourne.
Starpharma (2000a) Starpharma Prospectus 2000, Melbourne.
Starpharma (2000b) Starpharma Annual Report 2000, Melbourne.
Starpharma (2001) PANBIO to join Starpharma as investor in Dendritic Nanotechnologies Limited, press release, 10 September.
Starpharma (2003) Starpharma Prospectus 2003, Melbourne.
Starpharma (2004) Starpharma announces institutional share placement, press release, 18 March, Melbourne.
Starpharma (2005a) Development of VivaGelTM significantly accelerated with $US20m funding from NIH, press release, 3 October, Melbourne.
Starpharma (2005b) Starpharma Annual Report (2005), Melbourne.
Starpharma (2005c) Starpharma secures full ownership of core technology. Press release, 10 October, Melbourne.
Starpharma (2006) VivaGel receives fast tracks status from FDA, 9 January, Melbourne.
Strategic Industry Research Foundation (SIRF) (1991) SIRF Annual Report 1991, Melbourne.
Strategic Industry Research Foundation (SIRF) (1992) SIRF Annual Report 1992, Melbourne.
Strategic Research Foundation (SRF) (1991) Annual Report 1990-91, Melbourne.
Teece DJ (1986) Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy, Research Policy 16: 285-305.
The Royal Society (2004) Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties, The Royal Society and The Royal Academy of Engineering, London.
Till M, Simkin M and Maebius S (2005) Nanotech meets the FDA: A success story about the first nanoparticulate drugs approved by the FDA, Nanotechnology Law and Business 2: 163-167.
Uldrich J (2005) Starpharma: a ‘nano star' on the rise. NanoNovus, 17 March, accessed at http://nanonovusblog.blogspot.com/2005/03/starpharma-nano-star-on-rise.html on 20 July 2006.
Vitale M (2004) Commercialising Australian Biotechnology, Australian Business Foundation, Sydney.
Winter S (2000) Appropriating the gains from innovation, in Day G and Schoemaker P (eds), Wharton on Managing Emerging Technologies, John Wiley, New York.
Zucker LG, Darby M and
Armstrong J (1998a) Geographically localized knowledge:
spillovers or markets? Economic Inquiry 36: 65-86.
Zucker LG, Darby M and Brewer M (1998b) Intellectual human capital and the birth of us biotechnology enterprises, American Economic Review 88(1): 290-306.
eContent Home