Public–Private Collaboration for New Life Sciences Innovation and Regional Development: The Cases of Cambridge and Scotland

Abstract

Today, bioscientific research and commercialization are considered to be critical for improving a number of areas of social and economic life. Especially in the sector of human healthcare, the recent developments in new life sciences and biotechnology appear to constitute the main driving force of change. The most important characteristic of the new paradigm of technological change and innovation in life sciences is the close collaboration between all actors involved, including companies and research institutes, public policy initiatives and regional impacts. This paper examines in depth the complex collaborative relationships between public policy, public research and private firms in genomics and biotechnology, focusing on the cases of Cambridge and Scotland. On the basis of empirical evidence, it is argued that although these relationships are uneven and contradictory in both regions, they play significant roles in building firm-based and policy-making capabilities. Therefore, public–private collaborations in genomics and biotechnology are inevitable for regional innovation and development within the contemporary capitalist knowledge-based economy.

Acknowledgements

The research for this paper was carried out within the ESRC Innogen Centre (The Open University and Edinburgh University), in the Open University's Development and Practice (DPP) Group. I am grateful for the financial support from this centre and for the intellectual support from colleagues, particularly David Wield, Joyce Tait, Joanna Chataway and Alessandro Rosiello.

Notes

This implies transfer of knowledge management from the public sector to the private sector on the basis of contractual agreement.

This implies transfer of knowledge management from the public sector to the private sector and the reverse on the grounds of mutual co-operation.

This implies common ownership of IP for exploitation and mutual benefit.

The first five interviews in Scotland and the first six interviews in Cambridge have been conducted by Dr Alessandro Rosiello. I am indebted to him for his important contribution to this research.

As is well known, the Bayh–Dole Act was introduced in the US in 1980. The idea was to enable universities and other research institutions to control the patents that resulted from their research work, promoting knowledge transfer and commercialization.

This point was made by one of this journal's reviewers. We would like to thank him/her for his/her contribution.