IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/chy/respap/163chedp.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economics and public policy 0 NHS research and development as a public good

Author

Listed:
  • Tony J Culyer

Abstract

This paper analyses National Health Service R&D as a Samuelsonian public good. It also identifies other characteristics of NHS R&D: supplier-induced demand; information asymmetries; jointness in production of R&D, medical education and health care; multiplicity in research funding sources; uncertainty about research outcomes; the difficulty of measuring and valuing research outcomes; and the behavioural characteristics of the institutions which produce R&D. The principal conclusion is that a centrally planned approach is unlikely to solve the problems arising from these characteristics, whereas the creation of an appropriate institutional and behavioural framework is more promising. The recent reforms in the arrangements for supporting R&D in the NHS can be seen as a response consistent with this analysis, are outlined and set in their historical context.

Suggested Citation

  • Tony J Culyer, 1998. "Economics and public policy 0 NHS research and development as a public good," Working Papers 163chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    • Handle: RePEc:chy:respap:163chedp
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.york.ac.uk/media/che/documents/papers/discussionpapers/CHE%20Discussion%20Paper%20163.pdf
    File Function: First version, 1998
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Culyer, A J, 1970. "A Utility-Maximising View of Universities," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 17(3), pages 349-368, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sakakibara, Mariko, 1997. "Evaluating government-sponsored R&D consortia in Japan: who benefits and how?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 447-473, December.
    2. Gersbach, Hans & Schneider, Maik & Schneller, Olivier, 2010. "Optimal Mix of Applied and Basic Research, Distance to Frontier, and Openness," CEPR Discussion Papers 7795, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Dirk Czarnitzki & Hanna Hottenrott & Susanne Thorwarth, 2011. "Industrial research versus development investment: the implications of financial constraints," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 35(3), pages 527-544.
    4. Ali-Yrkkö, Jyrki, 2004. "Impact of Public R&D Financing on Private R&D - Does Financial Constraint Matter?," Discussion Papers 943, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    5. Jarle Moen, 2005. "Is Mobility of Technical Personnel a Source of R&D Spillovers?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(1), pages 81-114, January.
    6. Hans K. Hvide & Benjamin F. Jones, 2018. "University Innovation and the Professor's Privilege," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(7), pages 1860-1898, July.
    7. Persson, Bo, 2008. "The Development of a New Swedish Innovation Policy A Historical Institutional Approach," Papers in Innovation Studies 2008/2, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    8. Aiello, Francesco & Albanese, Giuseppe & Piselli, Paolo, 2019. "Good value for public money? The case of R&D policy," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1057-1076.
    9. Inglesi-Lotz, Roula, 2017. "Social rate of return to R&D on various energy technologies: Where should we invest more? A study of G7 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 521-525.
    10. Thomas Bolli & Martin Woerter, 2013. "Technological Diversification and Innovation Performance," KOF Working papers 13-336, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    11. Kim, Jongwook & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2008. "A Strategic Theory of the Firm as a Nexus of Incomplete Contracts: A Property Rights Approach," Working Papers 08-0108, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    12. Daniel P. Gross & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2021. "The Economics of Crisis Innovation Policy: A Historical Perspective," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 111, pages 346-350, May.
    13. Barge-Gil, Andrés & López, Alberto, 2014. "R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1634-1648.
    14. Pal, Rupayan, 2010. "Technology adoption in a differentiated duopoly: Cournot versus Bertrand," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 128-136, June.
    15. Serhat Burmaoglu & Ozcan Saritas, 2019. "An evolutionary analysis of the innovation policy domain: Is there a paradigm shift?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 823-847, March.
    16. Bakari, Sayef, 2021. "Do researchers affect economic growth?," MPRA Paper 108788, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Polemis, Michael & Tselekounis, Markos, 2019. "Does deregulation drive innovation intensity? Lessons learned from the OECD telecommunications sector," MPRA Paper 92770, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Bronwyn Hall & Alessandro Maffioli, 2008. "Evaluating the impact of technology development funds in emerging economies: evidence from Latin America," The European Journal of Development Research, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 172-198.
    19. Kumar, Nagesh & Saqib, Mohammed, 1996. "Firm size, opportunities for adaptation and in-house R & D activity in developing countries: the case of Indian manufacturing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 713-722, August.
    20. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2017. "Digital knowledge generation and the appropriability trade-off," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 991-1002.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    R&D; supply and demand;

    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:chy:respap:163chedp. 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: Gill Forder (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/chyoruk.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.