Denmark s biomedical innovation system

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Denmark s biomedical innovation system"

Maria Young
7 years ago
Views:

1 Denmark s biomedical innovation system Finn Valentin Copenhagen Business School (fv.ino@cbs.dk) Conference: Collaborative innovation in the life sciences: challenges and opportunities Organised by Un. of Oslo and TIC, 13 Dec

dk) Conference: Collaborative innovation in the life

2 A comparative view on Danish life science Strong patent productivity Pipeline 15,00% 10,00% 5,00% 0,00% Economic growth in biotech regions

3 Major players in Danish bio business Pharma Novo Nordisk Lundbeck Leo Pharma Bio discovery firms Zealand Pharm al Symphogen Santaris Industrial Bio Novozymes Christian Hansen Dupont (Danisco) Venture Capital Novo Nordisk A/S Sunstone Capital NB Capital Pension funds (indirectly)

Industrial Bio Novozymes Christian Hansen Dupont (Danisco) Venture

4 Historical origins of Danish biobusiness Breweries, Carlsberg (fermentaton, since 1860s) Dairy, meat and food processing (microbiology, process technology, since 1870s) Food ingredients, Chr. Hansen (since 1870s) Insulin: Novo and Nordisk Gentofte (1920s) Merged early 1990s: Novo Nordisk

(microbiology, process technology, since 1870s) Food ingredients, Chr.

5 Institutional factors: Foundations All major pharmaceutical firms are owned by foundations (Novo, Lundbeck, LEO Pharma) Control s made effective by differentiated shares, preventing hostile takeovers. Comp. Sweden who up to 1995 had a strong domestic phar al industry, fully matching that of Denmark. Foundations, in addition to preventing takeovers/dismantling of Danish pharma: Give major donations to Danish basic and strategic academic life science Through their venture branches the foundations provide equity to Danish (and internat al) biotech start-ups

Sweden who up to 1995 had a strong domestic phar al industry, fully matching that of Denmark.

6 SCANBIT: database architecture Inputs Venture Capital Public Science In-licensed technologies Firm Management,Board, Owners, Origin Nature of research Types of products/ deliverables Nature of research Types of products/ deliverables Outputs e.g. Revenues Contracts Patents Publications Note: Data in this presentation refer exclusively to Drug Discovery Biotech Firms (DDFs) Research Centre on Biotech Business Copenhagen Business School 6

7 Number of active firms Number of active DDF s in Scandinavian countries per year Denmark Sweden Norway Year Source: ScanBit 2008 Copenhagen Business School 7

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Year

8 Number of employees Total number of employees, per year Denmark Sweden Norway DK versus SE more firms fewer employees Year Source: ScanBit 2008 Copenhagen Business School 8

fewer employees 200 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

9 Number of new patents pr employee Number of new patents per employee 0,12 Denmark 0,1 Sweden 0,08 0,06 0,04 0,02 0 New patents average ratio DK/SE = Year Source: ScanBit 2008 Copenhagen Business School 9

10 Amount per employee Amount invested per employee in DK, SE Denmark Sweden Amount invested average ratio DK/SE = Year Source: ScanBit 2008 Copenhagen Business School 10

06 3 2 1 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

11 No of firms DDFs and their access to venture capital Notable differences appear in early VC-supply to Dk vs. SE firms No of firms obtaining first financing round within first year I.e. SE: 22% DK: 44% SE DK Research Centre on Biotech Business Copenhagen Business School yes 11 no

SE firms No of firms obtaining first financing round within first year 30 26 I.

12 Prior affiliation of founders DK SE Founders N % of total N % of total University 53 38,41% 75 68,81% DBF 24 17,39% 7 6,42% Pharma 36 26,09% 9 8,26% VC 3 2,17% 4 3,67% Other firm 15 10,87% 12 11,01% Not identified 7 5,07% 2 1,83% SUM ,00% ,00% Copenhagen Business School 12

8,26% VC 3 2,17% 4 3,67% Other firm 15 10,87% 12 11,01% Not identified 7

13 The role of founder s prior affiliation volume of VC financing achieved in first round VC-financing = f Number of founders by types of prior affiliation: Academics Managers Executives from an upcoming paper Reichstein & Valentin models: Research Centre on Biotech Business Copenhagen Business School 13

Academics Managers Executives from an upcoming paper Reichstein & Valentin

14 Venture Capital Secured Number of Academic Founders Number of Executive Founders Same breakdown of founders differentially affect also long-term performance of biotech firms (Feldman, Reichstein, Valentin, Number of Manager Founders forthc.) 14 Research Centre on Biotech Business Copenhagen Business School

differentially affect also long-term performance of biotech firms (Feldman, Reichstein, Valentin, 0 1 2

15 Essence of what we learn from Dk-SE comparison The virtuous circle of obtaining early VC Founder attributes (Early) financial ressources Early ramp-up; flexibility for failure /correction build-up of patent and project portfolios Research Centre on Biotech Business Copenhagen Business School

ramp-up; flexibility for failure /correction build-up of patent and project

16 Shifting focus to another part of the Copenhagen bioinnovation system: The role of research collaboration between university and hospital research Effects on medical innovations of combining academic and clinical expertise Lars l Alkærsig, Technical University of Denmark Finn Valentin, Copenhagen Business School 16

Effects on medical innovations of combining academic and clinical expertise

17 Exploring differences in value creation between of different relationships in the medical innovation system Key relationships in the medical innovation system Firms 2 Universities 3 1 Research Hospitals Focus on patents invented by university life-scientists Examine the value of these patents as affected by different inventor partners coming from Research hospitals Firms Check for different effects of collaboration on patent value across technologies 17

invented by university life-scientists Examine the value of these patents as affected by different inventor

18 Data Complete recording of researchers from three departments*) in life/medical science at Copenhagen University , regarding patents (inventors, fw citations etc) and journal publications (SCI): 453 researchers with at least one publication 2117 publications ; bibliometric records from SCI 315 patents with at least one university researcher as inventor. Identified in Derwent; citation records from OECD database 2012 In patents we identified co-inventors by their host organization, notably res. hospitals and firms. I.e. each patent representing an inventor network * 1) Molecular biology (IMB), Molecular pathology (IMP), 3) Molecular biochemistry and genetics (IMBG). 18

researcher as inventor. Identified in Derwent; citation records from OECD database 2012 In patents we identified co-inventors by their host organization, notably res.

19 Models Dependent variable: Patent value /impact. Patent forward citations (Forward_citations) (Harhoff et al, 2003) Key independent variables: Collaboration with Research Hospitals (co-inventors) Collaboration with firms ((co-) assignees) Innovation in drug vs. medico technologies (by IPC codes) Previous collab. with university and hospital researchers (based on co-author affiliations in prior publications) Focal (university) inventor in Med. School or Science dep. Controls patent family size, Tech. scope (number of IPC classes) designated states, the age of the patent. Patent assignees No. of inventors Total publications Total citations to pubs. Model: negative binomial regression, robust standard errors 19

assignees) Innovation in drug vs. medico technologies (by IPC codes) Previous collab.

20 Results Overall 20

21 Results: Effects on the value of university patents of collaborating with diff. types of partners Independent Variable Estimates Overall effect (no tech breakdown) n.s In drug discovery Neg. *** In medico tech Pos. *** Overall effect (no tech breakdown) In drug discovery In medico tech Pos* Pos** n.s. Focal un. inventor previous research collaboration with hospital researchers Pos. *** Focal un. inventor in Med School Neg. *** 21

22 Conclusions /implications for understanding and stimulating medical innovation systems Findings Inter-organizational collaboration generally pays off university <==> hospital (med.tech) university <==> firm (drugs) university with previous clinical collaboration Policy implications Incentivize and facilitate collaboration Reduced value when university and hospital collaborate on drug discovery How to organize translational research 22

23 Thank you 23

24 Conclusions /implications for policy Why does the involvement of hospital research negatively effect the value of innovations? 1) Does their particular type of information and experience have less to offer in the generation of innovations? NO. University researchers who have previously familiarized themselves with the knowledge pool of hospitals produce better innovations 2) Is the institutional difference/distance between universities and hospitals a hindrance? NO a. The same two institutions have positive complementarities when it come to medico innovations NO b. For the university researchers the institutional distance to firms is larger,- and still allows for positive complementarities 24

25 Conclusions /implications for policy Why does the involvement of hospital research negatively effect the value of innovations? (Cont.) 3) Do research hospitals lack incentives and innovation culture? NO. Hospital research contribute positively to medico innovation This exclusion of competing explanatory factor leave the possibility that positive contribution to drug innovation require a) Substantial and deep internal research b) Integration of a molecular medical science knowledge base. The funding, job and career structures of research hospitals do not provide an adequate framework The translational paradigm require a restructuring of hospital research before the (lab-) bench can reach the bedside. 25

Fit for Health 2.0 - International Strategy Development Training Innovative Business Solutions and Smart Financing

Fit for Health 2.0 - International Strategy Development Training Innovative Business Solutions and Smart Financing Thursday 08 October 2015 8-9 October 2015, Copenhagen (Denmark) Medicon Valley Alliance,