Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 30, 2025

Using Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems MEMS to Develop Diagnostic Tools
Published on: October 1, 2007
Should We Pay for Scientific Knowledge Spillovers? The Underappreciated Value of "Failed" R&D Efforts
Richard Z Xie1, Adrian Towse2, Louis P Garrison3
1The Innovation and Value Initiative, Alexandria, VA, USA.
Abstract:
Recent experience with COVID-19 has reminded us of the importance of scientific progress in enabling pharmaceutical innovation. Developing novel therapies is a highly risky but rewarding process: it not only produces innovative drugs, but also valuable scientific knowledge that benefits the community of innovators. This paper examines whether the existing reward system for pharmaceutical research and development (R&D) leads to socially optimal levels of scientific knowledge generation and sharing, with a particular focus on the value of failures in the pharmaceutical R&D efforts. We first outline a conceptual approach based on the idea that pharmaceutical R&D efforts produce both medicines and scientific knowledge, and illustrate this with some examples of how failures may generate information beneficial to concurrent and subsequent R&D efforts. We then summarize the relatively small literature on failures in pharmaceutical R&D and their impact on R&D decision making. Lastly, we discuss several market-based and nonmarket-based policy approaches that can address potential shortcomings in the current reward system which may lead to suboptimal R&D and knowledge sharing.
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error
Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?
There are two ways to indicate that the null hypothesis is not rejected. 'Accept' the null...
Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error
Hindsight Biases
Causality in Epidemiology

