IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/halshs-01987643.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Research funding and price negotiation for new drugs

Author

Listed:
  • Francesca Barigozzi

    (UNIBO - Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna = University of Bologna)

  • Izabela Jelovac

    (GATE Lyon Saint-Étienne - Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon - Saint-Etienne - ENS de Lyon - École normale supérieure de Lyon - UL2 - Université Lumière - Lyon 2 - UCBL - Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 - Université de Lyon - UJM - Université Jean Monnet - Saint-Étienne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Pharmaceutical innovations result from the successful achievement of basic research, produced by an upstream lab, and applied research, produced by a downstream lab. We focus on the negotiation process to finance basic research by setting public and private grants and to agree on the final price of a new drug. We show that exclusive funding of basic research is desirable. To increase consumers' surplus and reduce negotiated prices for new drugs, basic and applied research should be integrated if the lab producing applied research has a relatively large bargaining power. When instead the health authority has the larger bargaining power, integration with the producer of basic research increases negotiated prices for new drugs and should be avoided, unless the gain in bargaining power after the integration is extremely high. Abstract. Pharmaceutical innovations result from the successful achievement of basic research, produced by an upstream lab, and applied research, produced by a downstream lab. We focus on the negotiation process to finance basic research by setting public and private grants and to agree on the final price of a new drug. We show that exclusive funding of basic research is desirable. To increase consumers' surplus and reduce negotiated prices for new drugs, basic and applied research should be integrated if the lab producing applied research has a relatively large bargaining power. When instead the health authority has the larger bargaining power, integration with the producer of basic research increases negotiated prices for new drugs and should be avoided, unless the gain in bargaining power after the integration is extremely high.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesca Barigozzi & Izabela Jelovac, 2019. "Research funding and price negotiation for new drugs," Working Papers halshs-01987643, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-01987643
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01987643
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01987643/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Catalina Martínez & Sarah Parlane, 2018. "On the firms’ decision to hire academic scientists," Working Papers 1801, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    2. Bardey, D. & Bommier, A. & Jullien, B., 2010. "Retail price regulation and innovation: Reference pricing in the pharmaceutical industry," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 303-316, March.
    3. Philippe Aghion & Mathias Dewatripont & Jeremy C. Stein, 2008. "Academic freedom, private‐sector focus, and the process of innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 617-635, September.
    4. Pierre Dubois & Olivier de Mouzon & Fiona Scott-Morton & Paul Seabright, 2015. "Market size and pharmaceutical innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 46(4), pages 844-871, October.
    5. González, Paula & Macho-Stadler, Inés & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2016. "Private versus social incentives for pharmaceutical innovation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 286-297.
    6. Lacetera, Nicola & Zirulia, Lorenzo, 2012. "Individual preferences, organization, and competition in a model of R&D incentive provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 550-570.
    7. Izabela Jelovac, 2015. "On the relationship between the negotiated prices of pharmaceuticals and the patients' co-payment," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(1), pages 481-493.
    8. Billette de Villemeur, Etienne & Versaevel, Bruno, 2019. "One lab, two firms, many possibilities: On R&D outsourcing in the biopharmaceutical industry," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 260-283.
    9. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2003. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Gianni Fraja, 2016. "Optimal public funding for research: a theoretical analysis," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(3), pages 498-528, August.
    11. Luigi Siciliani & Anderson Stanciole, 2013. "Bargaining and the provision of health services," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(3), pages 391-406, June.
    12. Billette de Villemeur, Etienne & Versaevel, Bruno, 2019. "One lab, two firms, many possibilities: On R&D outsourcing in the biopharmaceutical industry," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 260-283.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Chris Sampson’s journal round-up for 28th December 2020
      by Chris Sampson in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2020-12-28 12:00:00

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Laura Grassi & Simone Fantaccini, 2022. "An overview of Fintech applications to solve the puzzle of health care funding: state-of-the-art in medical crowdfunding," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-27, December.
    2. Joan Costa‐Font & Rosella Levaggi, 2020. "Innovation, aging, and health care: Unraveling “silver” from “red” herrings?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(S1), pages 3-7, October.
    3. Thomas M. Fullerton & Steven L. Fullerton, 2022. "Aggregate Online Brand Name Pharmacy Price Dynamics for the United States and Mexico," Economies, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-5, May.

    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. Simeth, Markus & Raffo, Julio D., 2013. "What makes companies pursue an Open Science strategy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1531-1543.
    2. Catalina Martínez & Sarah Parlane, 2018. "On the firms’ decision to hire academic scientists," Working Papers 1801, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    3. Martínez, Catalina & Parlane, Sarah, 2023. "Academic scientists in corporate R&D: A theoretical model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(5).
    4. repec:wip:wpaper:6 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Branstetter, Lee & Chatterjee, Chirantan & Higgins, Matthew J., 2022. "Generic competition and the incentives for early-stage pharmaceutical innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    6. Le, Son & Sukhatme, Neel U., 2020. "Reaching for mediocrity: Competition and stagnation in pharmaceutical innovation," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    7. Heidi L. Williams, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from Health Care Markets," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 53-87.
    8. Kurt R. Brekke & Dag Morten Dalen & Odd Rune Straume, 2022. "The price of cost-effectiveness thresholds," NIPE Working Papers 5/2022, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    9. Bardey, David & Cremer, Helmuth & Lozachmeur, Jean-Marie, 2016. "The design of insurance coverage for medical products under imperfect competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 28-37.
    10. Dosi, Giovanni & Palagi, Elisa & Roventini, Andrea & Russo, Emanuele, 2023. "Do patents really foster innovation in the pharmaceutical sector? Results from an evolutionary, agent-based model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 564-589.
    11. Henry Sauermann & Michael Roach, 2011. "Not All Scientists pay to be Scientists:," DRUID Working Papers 11-03, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    12. Kurt R. Brekke & Dag Morten Dalen & Odd Rune Straume, 2024. "Competing with precision: incentives for developing predictive biomarker tests," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 126(1), pages 60-97, January.
    13. Brekke, Kurt R. & Dalen, Dag Morten & Straume, Odd Rune, 2023. "Taking the competitor’s pill: when combination therapies enter pharmaceutical markets," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 19/2023, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    14. Jullien, Bruno & Lefouili, Yassine, 2018. "Horizontal Mergers and Innovation," CEPR Discussion Papers 12773, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Broström, Anders & McKelvey, Maureen, 2009. "How do Organisational and Cognitive Distances Shape Firms’ Interactions with Universities and Public Research Institutes?," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 188, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    16. Timo Tohmo & Jutta Viinikainen, 2017. "Does intersectoral labour mobility pay for academics?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 83-103, October.
    17. Brekke, Kurt R. & Dalen, Dag Morten & Straume, Odd Rune, 2022. "Paying for pharmaceuticals: uniform pricing versus two-part tariffs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    18. Cisnetto, Valentina & Barlow, James, 2020. "The development of complex and controversial innovations. Genetically modified mosquitoes for malaria eradication," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(3).
    19. Kiri, Bralind & Lacetera, Nicola & Zirulia, Lorenzo, 2018. "Above a swamp: A theory of high-quality scientific production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 827-839.
    20. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Aldo Geuna & Federica Rossi, 2011. "University–Industry Interactions: The Unresolved Puzzle," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    21. Sam Arts & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2020. "Taste for science, academic boundary spanning, and inventive performance of scientists and engineers in industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(4), pages 917-933.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Pharmaceutical innovation; drug prices; negotiation; basic research; applied research;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:wpaper:halshs-01987643. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.