Quantifying the economic impact of government and charity funding of medical research on private research and development funding in the United Kingdom

Abstract

BackgroundGovernment- and charity-funded medical research and private sector research and development (R&D) are widely held to be complements. The only attempts to measure this complementarity so far have used data from the United States of America and are inevitably increasingly out of date. This study estimates the magnitude of the effect of government and charity biomedical and health research expenditure in the United Kingdom (UK), separately and in total, on subsequent private pharmaceutical sector R&D expenditure in the UK.MethodsThe results for this study are obtained by fitting an econometric vector error correction model (VECM) to time series for biomedical and health R&D expenditure in the UK for ten disease areas (including ‘other’) for the government, charity and private sectors. The VECM model describes the relationship between public (i.e. government and charities combined) sector expenditure, private sector expenditure and global pharmaceutical sales as a combination of a long-term equilibrium and short-term movements.ResultsThere is a statistically significant complementary relationship between public biomedical and health research expenditure and private pharmaceutical R&D expenditure. A 1 % increase in public sector expenditure is associated in the best-fit model with a 0.81 % increase in private sector expenditure. Sensitivity analysis produces a similar and statistically significant result with a slightly smaller positive elasticity of 0.68. Overall, every additional £1 of public research expenditure is associated with an additional £0.83–£1.07 of private sector R&D spend in the UK; 44 % of that additional private sector expenditure occurs within 1 year, with the remainder accumulating over decades. This spillover effect implies a real annual rate of return (in terms of economic impact) to public biomedical and health research in the UK of 15–18 %. When combined with previous estimates of the health gain that results from public medical research in cancer and cardiovascular disease, the total rate of return would be around 24–28 %.ConclusionOverall, this suggests that government and charity funded research in the UK crowds in additional private sector R&D in the UK. The implied historical returns from UK government and charity funded investment in medical research in the UK compare favourably with the rates of return achieved on investments in the rest of the UK economy and are greatly in excess of the 3.5 % real annual rate of return required by the UK government to public investments generally.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12916-016-0564-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Global mapping of randomised trials related articles published in high-impact-factor medical journals: a cross-sectional analysis

“…However, the scientific community is centred on a nucleus of scientists from Western countries, with the most intense global collaborations taking place among the United States, United Kingdom and Canada. The presence and influence that these countries have on biomedical research [64][65][66] may be due to their large multi-stakeholder research partnerships, greater financial investment in clinical research, and high population of active scientists and research centres compared to other countries.…”

Understanding the relative valuation of research impact: a best–worst scaling experiment of the general public and biomedical and health researchers

“…There is strong evidence that research makes a significant contribution to society, [8][9][10][11] and that contribution manifests itself in different ways. 12 13 For example, we know that the total economic return from biomedical and health research is between 24% and 28%, 9 11 and from analysis of the REF impact case studies that there are a wide variety of impact topics.…”

The Sharing Experimental Animal Resources, Coordinating Holdings (SEARCH) Framework: Encouraging Reduction, Replacement, and Refinement in Animal Research

“…However, these advances often come at a high cost to biomedical researchers both financially and in time spent in development. These research costs are increasing at a time when financial resources that governments, charities, and other funding organisations have available to support research remain static [8]. As it is unlikely that these financial restrictions will lift any time soon, researchers are encouraged to start thinking laterally about how they can increase the quality, depth, and impact of their research in a low-cost, sustainable way.…”