The new framework for innovation:
Has the time come to amend the regulation in Europe?
Madrid, 25th May 2009.
Ernst Lluch Auditorium
Carlos III Health Institute
Sinesio Delgado, 10
28029 – Madrid
Why does this matter?
In 1965, European companies developed 65% of new molecules marketed in the world. Forty-five years later that percentage had fallen to 33%, primarily in U.S.
Few analysts would last from the need to strengthen the competitiveness of the pharmaceutical industry in Europe to promote the attraction of innovative companies through tax incentives, improving the entry of the innovations that really worthwhile and laying the foundations for a scientific system of high quality. Of course, with the necessary financial stability of health policies of member states.
In the current model, the cooperation between EU member countries for the promotion of innovation is difficult. National governments control prices, and although there is a certain tendency towards homogenization, there is still a way to go. Transparency Directive in 1989 which provided guidelines for the pricing and reimbursement mechanisms at the national level is taking longer to become operational. Decisions remain opaque in most countries except the UK and Germany. The issue of parallel trade, but not considered legal in terms of economics and innovation seems to have no solution. The use of economic evaluation techniques to aid the fixing of prices is neglected in many EU countries to the field of good intentions.
Referred to Spain, the performance of innovation produced by institutions of higher education is still low, averaging 3.6 per university licenses a year, generating 45,000 € / year / college, compared to 11.2 at the European level , which generate 266,800 € / year / college, and 26.3 in the U.S., which in turn generate 7 million euros per year for each university. Moreover, the knowledge generated in R & D by the major Spanish companies is low compared to other EU countries.
Europe needs to emerge stronger from the deep economic crisis through the conviction and faith of its citizens in the benefits of integration. Our commitment to innovation as an engine of growth in a continent with few natural resources is imperative. Reinforce how much built in terms of social welfare requires robust and sustained economic growth, an improvement of the competitiveness of businesses and governments.
Lastly, the business environment can be managed so as to assist innovators to capture value of innovation. Management actions, whether from businesses large and small, can set the role of intellectual property and the technology to define the appropriate system architecture sector. There is no doubt that the future goals, strategy and resources, helping to determine the distribution of benefits from innovation. For example, a company that supports making public the sequences of human genes expressed, prevents the privatization of the genes that could block their future research goals, so it is not always the system design of appropriate means to strengthen intellectual property rights. These and other topics will be discussed in an open, relaxed and friendly as it has been doing the past four years.
José J. Navas