A Breath of Fresh Air? Firm Type, Scale, Scope, and Selection Effects in Drug Development

References

• Abrantes-Metz R., Adams C., Metz A. Pharma development phases: A duration analysis. J. Pharma Finance, Econom. Policy (2006) 14(4):19–41Crossref, Google Scholar
• Acemoglu D., Linn J. Market size in innovation: Theory and evidence from the pharmaceutical industry. Quart. J. Econom. (2004) 119(3):1049–1090Crossref, Google Scholar
• Acs Z., Audretsch D.Innovation and Small Firms (1990) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adams C., Brantner V. New drug development: Estimating entry from human clinical trials. (2003) . FTC Bureau of Economics Working Paper 262, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
• Akerlof G. A. The market for “lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quart. J. Econom. (1970) 84(3):488–500Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A., Gambardella A. Evaluating technological information and utilizing it. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. (1994) 24(1):91–114Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora A., Fosfuri A., Gambardella A.Markets for Technology: The Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy (2001) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arrow K. J., Nelson R. R. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity (1962) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) 609–624Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arrow K. J., Ronen J. Innovation in large and small firms. Entrepreneurship (1983) (Lexington Books, Lexington, MA) 15–28Google Scholar
• Braunwald E., Fauci A. S., Kasper D. L., Hauser S. L., Longo D. L., Jameson J. L.Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine (2001) 15th ed.(McGraw-Hill, New York) Google Scholar
• Chandy R., Hopstaken B., Narasimhan O., Prabhu J. From invention to innovation: Conversion ability in product development. J. Marketing Res. (2006) 43(3):494–508Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chesbrough H.Open Innovation (2003) (Harvard Business School Press, Boston) Google Scholar
• Chesbrough H., Teece D. J. When is virtual virtuous? Organizing for innovation. Harvard Bus. Rev. (1996) 74(1):65–72Google Scholar
• Christensen C.The Innovator's Dilemma (1997) (Harvard Business School Press, Boston) Google Scholar
• Cohen W. M., Levinthal D. Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. Econom. J. (1989) 99(397):569–596Google Scholar
• Dahan E., Mendelson H. An extreme-value model of concept testing. Management Sci. (2001) 47(1):102–116Link, Google Scholar
• Danzon P. M., Nicholson S., Pereira N. S. Productivity in pharma-biotechnology R&D: The role of experience and alliances. J. Health Econom. (2005) 24(2):317–339Crossref, Google Scholar
• DiMasi J. A., Hansen R. W., Grabowski H. G. The price of innovation: New estimates of drug development costs. J. Health Econom. (2003) 22(2):151–186Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gambardella A.Science and Innovation in the U.S. Pharma Industry (1995) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Giarratana M. S. The birth of a new industry: Entry by start-up and the drivers of firm growth. The case of encryption software. Res. Policy (2004) 33(5):787–806Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grabowski H., Vernon J., DiMasi J. Returns on R&D for 1990s new drug introductions. Pharmacoeconomics (2002) 20(Supplement 3):11–29Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guedj I. Ownership vs. contract: How vertical integration affects investment decisions in pharmaceutical R&D. (2005) . Working paper, University of Texas, Austin. http://www.aeaweb.org/annual_mtg_papers/2006/0106_0800_0202.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Guedj I., Scharfstein D. Organizational scope and investment: Evidence from the drug development strategies and performance of biopharmaceutical firms. (2005) . NBER Working Paper 10933, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Henderson R., Clark K. Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1990) 35(1):9–30Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson R., Cockburn I. Scale, scope, and spillovers: The determinants of research productivity in drug discovery. RAND J. Econom. (1996) 27(1):32–59Crossref, Google Scholar
• Higgins M. J., Rodriguez D. The outsourcing of R&D through acquisition in the pharmaceutical industry. J. Financial Econom. (2006) 80(2):351–383Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holmstrom B. Agency costs and innovation. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. (1989) 12(3):305–327Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klepper S., Thompson P. Submarkets and the evolution of market structure. RAND J. Econom. (2006) 37(4):861–886Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levinthal D., March J. The myopia of learning. Strategic Management J. (1993) 14(S2):95–112Crossref, Google Scholar
• Macher J. T., Boerner C. S. Experience and scale and scope economies: Trade-offs and performance in development. Strategic Management J. (2006) 27(9):845–865Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nerkar A. The folly of rewarding patents and expecting FDA approved drugs. (2003) . Working paper, Columbia University, New York. http://bschool.washington.edu/departments/mo/PDF/Nerkar_UW.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Nerkar A., Roberts P. Technological and product-market experience and the success of new product introductions in the pharma industry. Strategic Management J. (2004) 25(8–9):779–799Crossref, Google Scholar
• Owen-Smith J., Powell W., Braunerhjelm P., Feldman M. Accounting for emergence and novelty in Boston and Bay Area biotechnology. Cluster Genesis: The Emergence of Technology Clusters and Their Implications for Government Policy (2006) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) 61–85Google Scholar
• Pisano G. R&D performance, collaborative arrangements, and the market for know-how: A test of the “lemons” hypothesis in biotechnology. (1997) . Working paper, Harvard Business School, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Pisano G. Can science be a business? Lessons from biotech. Harvard Bus. Rev. (2006) 84(10):114–124Google Scholar
• Reddy K. A. The agony and ecstasy of drug discovery. CRIPS (2003) 4(1):10–12Google Scholar
• Rosenberg N. Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)? Res. Policy (1990) 19(2):165–174Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shaver J. M. Accounting for endogeneity when assessing strategy performance: Does entry mode choice affect FDI survival? Management Sci. (1998) 44(4):571–585Link, Google Scholar
• Stiglitz J. E., Weiss A. Credit rationing in markets with imperfect information. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1981) 71(3):393–410Google Scholar
• Thompke S., Kuemmerle W. Asset accumulation, interdependence and technological change: Evidence from pharmaceutical drug discovery. Strategic Management J. (2002) 23(7):619–635Crossref, Google Scholar
• U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) Pharmaceutical R&D: Costs, risks and rewards. (1993) (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC) Google Scholar
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Center for Drug Evaluation and Research From test tube to patient: Improving health through human drugs (special report). (1999) (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC) Google Scholar
• Zeckhauser R. The challenge of contracting for technological information. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (1996) 93(23):12743–12748Crossref, Google Scholar