Australian Biotechnology: Promissory Expectations and Ecosystem Performance far From the Global Superclusters

Authors

  • Peter Molloy

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5912/jcb970

Abstract

Australia is an interesting case study of biotechnology ecosystem development. Despite its distance from the US biotechnology superclusters, the country has had high expectations for its potential development into a biotechnology superpower. These expectations have not been met over the last two decades. Despite generous R&D tax incentives and a robust network of public research organizations (PROs), the local biotechnology industry has remained small and weak, without a single ‘big biotech’ emerging. Cluster analysis over 11 years of all private and public DBFs indicated that the PRO network output failed to translate to the development by the local biotech industry of drug candidates that could attract Big Pharma deals. Analysis of the investor returns over 15 years from all public drug development biotech firms (DDBs) showed that not a single firm produced attractive long-term investor returns and the sector overall generated negative returns for investors. Despite high promissory expectations, favorable government policies and an inflated view of the quality of the country’s science output, Australia has failed to create a sustainable biotechnology ecosystem. Some of the reasons are identified and suggestions are offered for changes in government policy that could improve value creation by the local biotech sector.  

Downloads

Published

2021-03-16

Issue

Vol. 26 No. 1 (2021): Building and Leveraging Ecosystems and Clusters

Section

Articles

License

Unless specified by prior arrangement, the author agrees to the following terms and assurances:

  1. For myself and on behalf of the other authors listed on this work, I assign to thinkBiotech LLC the copyright* in the contribution for the full term throughout the world.
  2. I/we further give to the following assurances
    1. I am the sole author of the contribution, or, if not, I have the written authority of the other authors to transfer the copyright* to thinkBiotech LLC and give these warranties;
    2. I and (where appropriate) the other authors are entitled to transfer the copyright to thinkBiotech LLC and no one else would be entitled to prevent us from publishing the contribution;
    3. To the best of my/our knowledge, all the facts in the contribution are true and accurate;
    4. The content of the contribution is entirely original to me (and where appropriate to the other authors) or, if not, the written permission of the owner of the copyright in any material copied from elsewhere has been obtained for all media (all such permissions to be attached to the contribution as supplementary files);
    5. Nothing in the contribution is obscene or libellous;
    6. Nothing in the contribution infringes any duty of confidentiality which I/or the other authors may owe to anyone else.
    7. I and/or the other authors have obtained the appropriate clearances from my/our employer(s) or other concerned institution(s).
* Works by US government employees prepared as part of official duties are in the public domain and the authors are therefore exempt from copyright assignment.