James C. Robinson (
Health Aff (Millwood). 2023 Aug;42(8):1045-1053. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2023.00047.
The US is expanding public investment in the technology-based industries, including the life sciences, in a move driven by anger, fear, and hope. Anger at high drug prices is leading to downward pressures and eroding traditional private-sector funding for research and development, fear of China's technological and political ambitions is creating bipartisan support for intervention, and the successful development of COVID-19 vaccines has spurred hope for analogous publicly funded breakthroughs in other therapeutic domains. The instruments of industrial policy used by other nations include grants for scientific research, equity investments in start-ups, tax incentives for corporate research and development, credit guarantees for asset-intensive sectors, governmental procurement, and product pricing. In the face of ever-stronger competition, if the US is to retain its leading position in the life sciences, public policy must consider competition among nations as well as among firms. This article analyzes emerging innovation and industrial policy in the three principal sectors in the life sciences: research universities and laboratories; entrepreneurial startups and "scale-ups," and large pharmaceutical and medical device corporations.
美国正在扩大对生命科学等基于技术的产业的公共投资，这一举措的背后是愤怒、恐惧和希望。对高药价的愤怒导致了研发的传统私人资金的减少，对中国技术和政治野心的恐惧促使两党支持干预，COVID-19 疫苗的成功开发激发了人们对其他治疗领域类似的公共资助突破的希望。其他国家使用的产业政策手段包括科学研究拨款、初创企业股权投资、企业研发税收激励、资产密集型部门信贷担保、政府采购和产品定价。面对日益激烈的竞争，如果美国要保持在生命科学领域的领先地位，公共政策必须考虑国家之间以及企业之间的竞争。本文分析了生命科学的三个主要领域——研究型大学和实验室、创业型初创企业和“规模化”企业以及大型制药和医疗器械公司——新兴的创新和产业政策。
