IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v61y2015i10p2281-2298.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can Private Money Buy Public Science? Disease Group Lobbying and Federal Funding for Biomedical Research

Author

Listed:
  • Deepak Hegde

    (Stern School of Business, New York University, New York, New York 10012)

  • Bhaven Sampat

    (Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York 10032)

Abstract

Private interest groups lobby politicians to influence public policy. However, little is known about how lobbying influences the policy decisions made by federal agencies. We study this through examining lobbying by advocacy groups associated with rare diseases for funding by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the world’s largest funder of biomedical research. Disease group lobbying for NIH funding has been controversial, with critics alleging that it distorts public funding toward research on diseases backed by powerful groups. Our data reveal that lobbying is associated with higher political support, in the form of congressional “soft earmarks” for the diseases. Lobbying increases with disease burden and is more likely to be associated with changes in NIH funding for diseases with higher scientific opportunity, suggesting that it may have a useful informational role. Only special grant mechanisms that steer funding toward particular diseases, which comprise less than a third of the NIH’s grants, are related to earmarks. Thus, our results suggest that lobbying by private groups influences federal funding for biomedical research. However, the channels of political influence are subtle, affect a small portion of funding, and may not necessarily have a distortive effect on public science. This paper was accepted by Bruno Cassiman, business strategy .

Suggested Citation

  • Deepak Hegde & Bhaven Sampat, 2015. "Can Private Money Buy Public Science? Disease Group Lobbying and Federal Funding for Biomedical Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(10), pages 2281-2298, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:61:y:2015:i:10:p:2281-2298
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2014.2107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.2107
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2014.2107?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    2. Sampat, Bhaven N., 2012. "Mission-oriented biomedical research at the NIH," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 1729-1741.
    3. 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.
    4. George J. Stigler, 1971. "The Theory of Economic Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 2(1), pages 3-21, Spring.
    5. Morris Fiorina, 1982. "Legislative choice of regulatory forms: Legal process or administrative process?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 33-66, January.
    6. Lauren Cohen & Joshua Coval & Christopher Malloy, 2011. "Do Powerful Politicians Cause Corporate Downsizing?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(6), pages 1015-1060.
    7. Grier, Kevin B. & Munger, Michael C. & Roberts, Brian E., 1994. "The Determinants of Industry Political Activity, 1978–1986," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(4), pages 911-926, December.
    8. Kroszner, Randall S & Stratmann, Thomas, 1998. "Interest-Group Competition and the Organization of Congress: Theory and Evidence from Financial Services' Political Action Committees," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1163-1187, December.
    9. David M. Cutler & Ellen Meara & Seth Richards-Shubik, 2012. "Induced Innovation and Social Inequality: Evidence from Infant Medical Care," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 47(2), pages 456-492.
    10. McCubbins, Mathew D & Noll, Roger G & Weingast, Barry R, 1987. "Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 243-277, Fall.
    11. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2001. "The Allocation of Publicly Funded Biomedical Research," NBER Chapters, in: Medical Care Output and Productivity, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Deepak Hegde, 2009. "Political Influence behind the Veil of Peer Review: An Analysis of Public Biomedical Research Funding in the United States," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(4), pages 665-690, November.
    13. William R. Kerr & William F. Lincoln & Prachi Mishra, 2014. "The Dynamics of Firm Lobbying," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 6(4), pages 343-379, November.
    14. Jordi Blanes i Vidal & Mirko Draca & Christian Fons-Rosen, 2012. "Revolving Door Lobbyists," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(7), pages 3731-3748, December.
    15. Sam Peltzman, 1989. "The Economic Theory of Regulation after a Decade of Deregulation," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 20(1989 Micr), pages 1-59.
    16. Weingast, Barry R & Moran, Mark J, 1983. "Bureaucratic Discretion or Congressional Control? Regulatory Policymaking by the Federal Trade Commission," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(5), pages 765-800, October.
    17. Barry Weingast, 1984. "The congressional-bureaucratic system: a principal agent perspective (with applications to the SEC)," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 147-191, January.
    18. David M. Cutler & Ernst R. Berndt, 2001. "Medical Care Output and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number cutl01-1.
    19. Santos Silva, J.M.C. & Tenreyro, Silvana, 2010. "On the existence of the maximum likelihood estimates in Poisson regression," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 310-312, May.
    20. Balla, Steven J., 1998. "Administrative Procedures and Political Control of the Bureaucracy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(3), pages 663-673, September.
    21. Toole, Andrew A, 2007. "Does Public Scientific Research Complement Private Investment in Research and Development in the Pharmaceutical Industry?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(1), pages 81-104, February.
    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. Miguel Espinosa, 2021. "Labor Boundaries and Skills: The Case of Lobbyists," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1586-1607, March.
    2. Martin Kenney & Donald Patton, 2018. "Sub-national technology policy and commerce: evaluating the impacts of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 47-68, February.
    3. Kok, Holmer & Faems, Dries & de Faria, Pedro, 2022. "Pork Barrel or Barrel of Gold? Examining the performance implications of earmarking in public R&D grants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    4. Graddy-Reed, Alexandra, 2020. "Getting ahead in the race for a cure: How nonprofits are financing biomedical R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    5. Coburn, Josie & Yaqub, Ohid & Ràfols, Ismael & Chataway, Joanna, 2024. "Cross-disease spillover from research funding: Evidence from four diseases," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 349(C).
    6. Madsen, Emil Bargmann & Aagaard, Kaare, 2020. "Concentration of Danish research funding on individual researchers and research topics: Patterns and potential drivers," SocArXiv j874c, Center for Open Science.
    7. Amitabh Chandra & Craig Garthwaite & Ariel Dora Stern, 2018. "Characterizing the Drug Development Pipeline for Precision Medicines," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Dimensions of Personalized and Precision Medicine, pages 115-157, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Wei-Fong Pan, 2023. "Does a firm’s lobbying activity respond to its peers’ lobbying activity?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 194(3), pages 297-324, March.
    9. Arzi Adbi & Chirantan Chatterjee & Anant Mishra, 2022. "How Do MNEs and Domestic Firms Respond Locally to a Global Demand Shock? Evidence from a Pandemic," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 9003-9025, December.
    10. Peter T. Leeson & Henry A. Thompson, 2023. "Public choice and public health," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 195(1), pages 5-41, April.
    11. Ming Jia & Zhe Zhang, 2018. "The Role of Corporate Donations in Chinese Political Markets," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 153(2), pages 519-545, December.
    12. Mancuso, Raffaele & Rossi-Lamastra, Cristina & Franzoni, Chiara, 2023. "Topic choice, gendered language, and the under-funding of female scholars in mission-oriented research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    13. Aslan, Yasemin & Yaqub, Ohid & Rotolo, Daniele & Sampat, Bhaven N., 2023. "Cross-category spillovers in medical research," SocArXiv hpmxd, Center for Open Science.
    14. Kyle Myers, 2020. "The Elasticity of Science," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 103-134, October.
    15. Kyle, Margaret K., 2022. "Incentives for pharmaceutical innovation: What’s working, what’s lacking," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    16. Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2018. "Does the NIH Fund Edge Science?," NBER Working Papers 24860, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Ohid Yaqub & Javier A Luna & Duncan Aq Moore & Alfredo Yegros-Yegros, 2022. "Responding to a disease with resources from other diseases: Evidence from Zika vaccine research dynamics [Protective Efficacy of Multiple Vaccine Platforms against Zika Virus Challenge in Rhesus Mo," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(6), pages 942-950.

    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. John M. de Figueiredo & Edward H. Stiglitz, 2015. "Democratic Rulemaking," NBER Working Papers 21765, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Kyle, Margaret K. & Ridley, David B. & Zhang, Su, 2017. "Strategic interaction among governments in the provision of a global public good," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 185-199.
    3. Ahmed Tahoun & Florin P. Vasvari, 2016. "Political Lending," Working Papers Series 47, Institute for New Economic Thinking.
    4. Alberto Batinti, 2016. "NIH biomedical funding: evidence of executive dominance in swing-voter states during presidential elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 239-263, September.
    5. Miltos Makris, 2003. "Administrative Bureaus with Standard Operating Procedures," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 03/062, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.
    6. Paul Lanoie & Jérôme Moreau & Georges A. Tanguay, 2001. "Environmental Policy, Public Interest and Political Market," CIRANO Working Papers 2001s-37, CIRANO.
    7. Jodi L. Short, 2021. "The politics of regulatory enforcement and compliance: Theorizing and operationalizing political influences," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 653-685, July.
    8. Rui J. P. De Figueiredo & Geoff Edwards, 2007. "Does Private Money Buy Public Policy? Campaign Contributions and Regulatory Outcomes in Telecommunications," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(3), pages 547-576, September.
    9. Thomas Groll & Christopher J. Ellis, 2017. "Repeated Lobbying By Commercial Lobbyists And Special Interests," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(4), pages 1868-1897, October.
    10. Xosé Carlos Arias & Gonzalo Caballero, 2003. "Instituciones, costos de transacción y políticas públicas: un panorama," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 5(8), pages 117-146, January-J.
    11. Marco Sorge, 2015. "Lobbying (strategically appointed) bureaucrats," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 171-189, June.
    12. Moser, Peter, 1999. "The impact of legislative institutions on public policy: a survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 1-33, March.
    13. Macher Jeffrey T & Mayo John W & Schiffer Mirjam, 2011. "The Influence of Firms on Government," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-27, January.
    14. Sampat, Bhaven N., 2012. "Mission-oriented biomedical research at the NIH," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 1729-1741.
    15. Papadimitri, Panagiota & Pasiouras, Fotios & Pescetto, Gioia & Wohlschlegel, Ansgar, 2021. "Does political influence distort banking regulation? Evidence from the US," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    16. Kyle, Margaret K., 2022. "Incentives for pharmaceutical innovation: What’s working, what’s lacking," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    17. Sanjay Patnaik, 2019. "A cross-country study of collective political strategy: Greenhouse gas regulations in the European Union," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(7), pages 1130-1155, September.
    18. Correia, Maria M., 2014. "Political connections and SEC enforcement," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 241-262.
    19. Georges A. Tanguay & Paul Lanoie & Jérôme Moreau, 2001. "Environmental Policy, Public Interest and Political Market," Cahiers de recherche 01-01, HEC Montréal, Institut d'économie appliquée.
    20. Abdul‐Rahman Khokhar & Hesam Shahriari, 2022. "Is the SEC captured? Evidence from political connectedness and SEC enforcement actions," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(2), pages 2725-2756, June.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:61:y:2015:i:10:p:2281-2298. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.