IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v37y2008i4p673-689.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory policy, value of knowledge assets and innovation strategy: The case of the Orphan Drug Act

Author

Listed:
  • Rzakhanov, Zaur

Abstract

The U.S. Orphan Drug Act provides R&D incentives to drug-makers that go beyond statutory patent protection. The study explores the act's effect on financial returns to innovation and on the strategy of orphan drug development. Results indicate that the financial return to orphan drug development is positive. The findings suggest that when market size is small and cumulative innovation is an important phenomenon the policy that extends effective patent duration or subsidizes R&D activity improves incentives to innovate.

Suggested Citation

  • Rzakhanov, Zaur, 2008. "Regulatory policy, value of knowledge assets and innovation strategy: The case of the Orphan Drug Act," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 673-689, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:37:y:2008:i:4:p:673-689
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048-7333(08)00011-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hall, B.H., 1999. "Innovation and Market Value," Economics Papers 1999-w3, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    2. Hall, B. & Jaffe, A. & Trajtenberg, M., 2001. "The NBER Patent Citations Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," Papers 2001-29, Tel Aviv.
    3. Frank R. Lichtenberg & Joel Waldfogel, 2003. "Does Misery Love Company? Evidence from pharmaceutical markets before and after the Orphan Drug Act," NBER Working Papers 9750, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Daron Acemoglu & Joshua Linn, 2004. "Market Size in Innovation: Theory and Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(3), pages 1049-1090.
    5. Ted O'Donoghue & Suzanne Scotchmer & Jacques‐François Thisse, 1998. "Patent Breadth, Patent Life, and the Pace of Technological Progress," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(1), pages 1-32, March.
    6. Rosen, Sherwin, 1974. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(1), pages 34-55, Jan.-Feb..
    7. Brown, James N & Rosen, Harvey S, 1982. "On the Estimation of Structural Hedonic Price Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 765-768, May.
    8. Amy Finkelstein, 2004. "Static and Dynamic Effects of Health Policy: Evidence from the Vaccine Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(2), pages 527-564.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Philippe Gorry & Diego Useche, 2018. "Orphan Drug Designations as Valuable Intangible Assets for IPO Investors in Pharma-Biotech Companies," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Dimensions of Personalized and Precision Medicine, pages 305-334, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Olga Bruyaka & Hanko Zeitzmann & Isabelle Chalamon & Richard Wokutch & Pooja Thakur, 2013. "Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility and Orphan Drug Development: Insights from the US and the EU Biopharmaceutical Industry," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 45-65, September.
    3. Koh, Yumi & Lee, Gea M., 2023. "R&D subsidies in permissive and restrictive environment: Evidence from Korea," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    4. Angelo Kenneth S. Romasanta & Peter Sijde & Jacqueline Muijlwijk-Koezen, 2020. "Innovation in pharmaceutical R&D: mapping the research landscape," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 1801-1832, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Patricia M. Danzon & Eric L. Keuffel, 2014. "Regulation of the Pharmaceutical-Biotechnology Industry," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Regulation and Its Reform: What Have We Learned?, pages 407-484, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Beth Woods & James Lomas & Mark Sculpher & Helen Weatherly & Karl Claxton, 2024. "Achieving dynamic efficiency in pharmaceutical innovation: Identifying the optimal share of value and payments required," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(4), pages 804-819, April.
    3. Raphaël Godefroy, 2010. "The birth of the congressional clinic," PSE Working Papers halshs-00564921, HAL.
    4. Margaret K. Kyle & Anita M. McGahan, 2012. "Investments in Pharmaceuticals Before and After TRIPS," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(4), pages 1157-1172, November.
    5. Jeffrey P. Clemens & Parker Rogers, 2020. "Demand Shocks, Procurement Policies, and the Nature of Medical Innovation: Evidence from Wartime Prosthetic Device Patents," CESifo Working Paper Series 8781, CESifo.
    6. Agarwal, Ruchir & Gaule, Patrick, 2022. "What drives innovation? Lessons from COVID-19 R&D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    7. Jeffrey Clemens, 2012. "The Effect of U.S. Health Insurance Expansions on Medical Innovation," Discussion Papers 11-016, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    8. Bhattacharya, Jay & Packalen, Mikko, 2012. "The other ex ante moral hazard in health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 135-146.
    9. Yin, Wesley, 2008. "Market incentives and pharmaceutical innovation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 1060-1077, July.
    10. Jay Bhattacharya & Mikko Packalen, 2008. "Is Medicine an Ivory Tower? Induced Innovation, Technological Opportunity, and For-Profit vs. Non-Profit Innovation," NBER Working Papers 13862, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Bhattacharya, Jay & Packalen, Mikko, 2011. "Opportunities and benefits as determinants of the direction of scientific research," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 603-615, July.
    12. Jeffrey P. Clemens & Morten Olsen, 2021. "Medicare and the Rise of American Medical Patenting: The Economics of User-Driven Innovation," CESifo Working Paper Series 9008, CESifo.
    13. Brasington, D. M., 2003. "The supply of public school quality," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 367-377, August.
    14. Daron Acemoglu & Amy Finkelstein, 2008. "Input and Technology Choices in Regulated Industries: Evidence from the Health Care Sector," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(5), pages 837-880, October.
    15. Branstetter, Lee & Chatterjee, Chirantan & Higgins, Matthew J., 2022. "Generic competition and the incentives for early-stage pharmaceutical innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    16. Nicholas Bagley & Benjamin Berger & Amitabh Chandra & Craig Garthwaite & Ariel D. Stern, 2018. "The Orphan Drug Act at 35: Observations and an Outlook for the Twenty-First Century," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 19, pages 97-137, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Eric Budish & Benjamin Roin & Heidi Williams, 2013. "Do fixed patent terms distort innovation? Evidence from cancer clinical trials," Discussion Papers 13-001, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    18. Panayotis Dessyllas & Alan Hughes, 2005. "R&D and Patenting Activity and the Propensity to Acquire in High Technology Industries," Working Papers wp298, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    19. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2011. "Long Live Patents: the Increasing Life Expectancy of Patent Applications and its Determinants," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 2(3).
    20. Steve Gibbons & Stephan Heblich & Esther Lho & Christopher Timmins, 2016. "Fear of Fracking? The Impact of the Shale Gas Exploration on House Prices in Britain," SERC Discussion Papers 0207, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:37:y:2008:i:4:p:673-689. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.