Government lawyers are fighting a reproductive rights group's request for copies of White House e-mails and other records about the morning-after contraceptive known as Plan B...........
The center is seeking to determine whether the administration, for political purposes, tried to steer FDA regulators on how to handle a request to allow over-the-counter sales of the pills. The group supports such sales.
Friday, August 04, 2006
White House Records On Plan B Pill Sought
From today's Washington Post:
Thursday, August 03, 2006
"Plan A: Approve Plan B"
Read the full editorial in today's Washington Post, subtitled "It's past time for the FDA to allow over-the-counter sales of emergency contraception."
Readers of this blog already know that politics seems to have overruled science in the deliberations of the Food and Drug Administration about the "morning after pill". The Washington Post editorializes today, occassioned by the Congressional hearing on the nomination of a new chief of the FDA, including the following:
Readers of this blog already know that politics seems to have overruled science in the deliberations of the Food and Drug Administration about the "morning after pill". The Washington Post editorializes today, occassioned by the Congressional hearing on the nomination of a new chief of the FDA, including the following:
FUNNY HOW a confirmation hearing can prod the Food and Drug Administration into action. Almost-action, that is. The FDA has been dithering for more than three years about whether to allow the Plan B emergency contraceptive to be sold without a prescription, as it is in 45 countries and nine states. Now it may be, finally, on the verge of permitting such sales to those 18 and older, a move that could help prevent enormous numbers of unintended pregnancies every year. Or this could be just another FDA gambit, dangling the prospect of action in hopes of getting the acting commissioner confirmed -- and overcoming the threat of Democratic senators to hold up the nomination until there is a decision. We hope it's the former.......
Andrew C. von Eschenbach, on the eve of his own confirmation hearing this week, announced that he was junking the rulemaking and planned to talk to the manufacturer about how to make an 18-and-over restriction work. Given that retailers routinely require ID for selling alcohol and cigarettes, that should not be too difficult.
This could be good news -- or yet another feint. As Mr. von Eschenbach's letter ominously concluded, "If . . . we conclude that the . . . program isn't sufficiently rigorous" to prevent the over-the-counter product from being used by young girls, "Plan B will remain Rx-only for women of all ages."
That would be a shame. Making emergency contraception widely available could prevent up to 1.5 million unintended pregnancies and 600,000 abortions a year in the United States. Plan A for the FDA should be making Plan B available over the counter.
House of Reps Hot About Global Warming!
More Denial: "OVER THE PAST two weeks, a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee has held a pair of truly senseless hearings on global climate change. The purpose was not to figure out how to cut carbon emissions. It wasn't even to discuss the science of global climate change in general. Instead, the purpose was to pick at a single study of global temperature patterns, the so-called 'hockey stick' graph -- a trend line that purports to show a sudden and dramatic increase in global temperatures in the 1990s and therefore looks like a hockey stick. The graph is hardly central to the modern debate over climate change. Yet the subcommittee has investigated the scientists who dared produce it and hounded them for information. Now that a study of the graph by the National Academy of Sciences has largely backed up the hockey stick findings, the committee has been holding hearings to attack it some more.......
The reality is that nobody knows how bad global warming will be; responsible estimates vary from manageable to catastrophic. So the prudent move is to take action now as a kind of insurance policy. Yes, reducing carbon emissions substantially is a daunting prospect given American and world dependence on fossil fuels -- so daunting that it induces a kind of denial in many people. But it is a particularly ugly kind of denial that leads a congressional committee to spend this kind of energy attacking scientists, instead of confronting the problems their data suggest."
The reality is that nobody knows how bad global warming will be; responsible estimates vary from manageable to catastrophic. So the prudent move is to take action now as a kind of insurance policy. Yes, reducing carbon emissions substantially is a daunting prospect given American and world dependence on fossil fuels -- so daunting that it induces a kind of denial in many people. But it is a particularly ugly kind of denial that leads a congressional committee to spend this kind of energy attacking scientists, instead of confronting the problems their data suggest."
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
Thanks to SciDev.Net for soliciting my opinion!
Read "Warning over South's lack of nanotech regulations" by Sophie Hebden, SciDev.Net, 1 August 2006.
Nature and Science magazines provided a real service when they helped create this fine online magazine which brings news of science and technology developments of importance to the Third World to a global audience.
Nature and Science magazines provided a real service when they helped create this fine online magazine which brings news of science and technology developments of importance to the Third World to a global audience.
"Senators Prod FDA Nominee On Politicization of Agency"
Read the full article by Rick Weiss in The Washington Post, August 2, 2006.
Acting Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Andrew C. von Eschenbach testified before the Senate committee considering his confirmation yesterday. Apparently the members focused heavily on the "agency's flagging reputation and its snail's-pace review of the emergency contraceptive pill Plan B."
On Monday, von Eschenbach's announced that the agency is reviving a stalled effort to make Plan B available without a prescription. The article notes that "no case before the FDA has been subject to more political controversy than that of Plan B, a mix of contraceptives that can block pregnancy when taken within 72 hours of intercourse. In December 2003, an expert panel voted overwhelmingly in favor of allowing the drug -- long sold by prescription -- to be offered over the counter. But the agency has yet to make a final decision."
More generally, "more than 100 whistle-blower cases are pending at the agency, Mikulski noted -- an outgrowth, she said, of rock-bottom morale, much of it rooted in the perception that the Bush administration is imposing ideology over evidence.
"Several senators cited a recent survey by the Union of Concerned Scientists in which more than 40 percent of nearly 1,000 FDA employees said they knew of cases in which political appointees had interfered with agency decisions."
Acting Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Andrew C. von Eschenbach testified before the Senate committee considering his confirmation yesterday. Apparently the members focused heavily on the "agency's flagging reputation and its snail's-pace review of the emergency contraceptive pill Plan B."
On Monday, von Eschenbach's announced that the agency is reviving a stalled effort to make Plan B available without a prescription. The article notes that "no case before the FDA has been subject to more political controversy than that of Plan B, a mix of contraceptives that can block pregnancy when taken within 72 hours of intercourse. In December 2003, an expert panel voted overwhelmingly in favor of allowing the drug -- long sold by prescription -- to be offered over the counter. But the agency has yet to make a final decision."
More generally, "more than 100 whistle-blower cases are pending at the agency, Mikulski noted -- an outgrowth, she said, of rock-bottom morale, much of it rooted in the perception that the Bush administration is imposing ideology over evidence.
"Several senators cited a recent survey by the Union of Concerned Scientists in which more than 40 percent of nearly 1,000 FDA employees said they knew of cases in which political appointees had interfered with agency decisions."
Women are indeed getting better looking!
Read "Perfect 10s and the Odds of a Pink Nursery" by Richard Morin in The Washington Post, August 2, 2006.
According to a recent research study:
According to a recent research study:
Good-looking parents are 36 percent more likely to give birth to a girl than less-attractive couples -- which also explains why women are, on average, better looking than men......
Data (was) collected during in-home interviews with 2,972 randomly selected young adults in 2001 and 2002. All were parents 18 to 28 years old, and they participated in the ongoing National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. As part of the study, the interviewer rated the respondent's physical attractiveness on a five-point scale that ranged from "very unattractive" to "very attractive.".....
(The researchers) found that 56 percent of babies born to beautiful parents were girls. For parents in each of the other categories, fewer than half of the babies -- 48 percent -- were girls.
Why are beautiful people more likely to have girls?.....Scientists studying humans and other species have found that parents who possess any heritable trait that increases male reproductive success at a greater rate than female reproductive success will have more males than female babies, and vice versa.
Because men value physical attractiveness more than women do when looking for a mate, good looks increase the reproductive success of daughters much more than that of sons. So attractive people should have more daughters -- which is exactly what Kanazawa found.
His theory also suggests that, over time, women should have become more attractive than men. These data confirmed his hunch. More than half of all women in the sample -- 52 percent -- were rated as "attractive" or "very attractive," compared with 42 percent of the men.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
Bird Flu Continues To Be Difficult to Spread
Read the full article in the "Findings" section of today's Washington Post.
Lead:
Lead:
Scientists failed in multiple attempts to make a more contagious form of the H5N1 bird flu, suggesting the virus may have to undergo massive change to cause a human pandemic.The article also states:
After genes from human and bird influenzas were mixed to mimic a natural process that could lead to a pandemic, the virus remained hard to spread, said researchers led by Taronna Maines of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
CDC Director Julie L. Gerberding said: "This does not mean that H5N1 can't develop into a pandemic strain. We are far from out of the woods."
Also yesterday, Pennsylvania-based Novavax Inc. said it made the first experimental vaccine targeting the strain of avian flu that is spreading in Indonesia
Monday, July 31, 2006
Quotation: What is literal truth?
The way people defined literal truth said much about a culture.
Robert D. Kaplan
Eastward to Tartary: Travels in the Balkans, the Middle East and the Caucuses
(page 285)
Following Brain Research May Help Us Think Better
Read the full article "How the Brain Helps Partisans Admit No Gray" by Shankar Vedantam in The Washington Post of July 31, 2006.
"Psychological experiments in recent years have shown that people are not evenhanded when they process information, even though they believe they are.......When talking heads provide opinions after the debate, partisans regularly feel the people with whom they agree are making careful, reasoned arguments, whereas the people they disagree with sound like they have cloth for brains.......
"When Republicans saw Kerry (or Democrats saw Bush) there was increased activation in brain areas called the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, which is near the temple, and the anterior cingulate cortex, which is in the middle of the head. Both these regions are involved in regulating emotions.......More straightforwardly, Republicans and Democrats also showed activation in two other brain areas involved in negative emotion, the insula and the temporal pole. It makes perfect sense, of course, why partisans would feel negatively about the candidate they dislike, but what explains the activation of the cognitive regulatory system?
"Turns out, rather than turning down their negative feelings as they might do with the fallen ice cream, partisans turn up their negative emotional response when they see a photo of the opposing candidate, said Jonas Kaplan, a psychologist at the University of California at Los Angeles.
"In other words, without knowing it themselves, the partisans were jealously guarding against anything that might lower their antagonism. Turning up negative feelings, of course, is a good way to make sure your antagonism stays strong and healthy......
"The result reflects a larger phenomenon in which people routinely discount information that threatens their preexisting beliefs, said Emory University psychologist Drew Westen, who has conducted brain-scan experiments that show partisans swiftly spot hypocrisy and inconsistencies -- but only in the opposing candidate.
"When presented with evidence showing the flaws of their candidate, the same brain regions that Kaplan studied lighted up -- only this time partisans were unconsciously turning down feelings of aversion and unpleasantness.
"'The brain was trying to find a solution that would get rid of the distress and absolve the candidate of doing something slimy,' Westen said. 'They would twirl the emotional kaleidoscope until it gave them a picture that was comfortable.'"
Knowing that the brain tends to reject information that goes against our political beliefs, and to accept that which confirms our prejudices, we would be well advised to bring reason to bear on our emotional response to what we see in the media!
"Psychological experiments in recent years have shown that people are not evenhanded when they process information, even though they believe they are.......When talking heads provide opinions after the debate, partisans regularly feel the people with whom they agree are making careful, reasoned arguments, whereas the people they disagree with sound like they have cloth for brains.......
"When Republicans saw Kerry (or Democrats saw Bush) there was increased activation in brain areas called the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, which is near the temple, and the anterior cingulate cortex, which is in the middle of the head. Both these regions are involved in regulating emotions.......More straightforwardly, Republicans and Democrats also showed activation in two other brain areas involved in negative emotion, the insula and the temporal pole. It makes perfect sense, of course, why partisans would feel negatively about the candidate they dislike, but what explains the activation of the cognitive regulatory system?
"Turns out, rather than turning down their negative feelings as they might do with the fallen ice cream, partisans turn up their negative emotional response when they see a photo of the opposing candidate, said Jonas Kaplan, a psychologist at the University of California at Los Angeles.
"In other words, without knowing it themselves, the partisans were jealously guarding against anything that might lower their antagonism. Turning up negative feelings, of course, is a good way to make sure your antagonism stays strong and healthy......
"The result reflects a larger phenomenon in which people routinely discount information that threatens their preexisting beliefs, said Emory University psychologist Drew Westen, who has conducted brain-scan experiments that show partisans swiftly spot hypocrisy and inconsistencies -- but only in the opposing candidate.
"When presented with evidence showing the flaws of their candidate, the same brain regions that Kaplan studied lighted up -- only this time partisans were unconsciously turning down feelings of aversion and unpleasantness.
"'The brain was trying to find a solution that would get rid of the distress and absolve the candidate of doing something slimy,' Westen said. 'They would twirl the emotional kaleidoscope until it gave them a picture that was comfortable.'"
Knowing that the brain tends to reject information that goes against our political beliefs, and to accept that which confirms our prejudices, we would be well advised to bring reason to bear on our emotional response to what we see in the media!
Meanwhile, Back on Earth
Meanwhile, Back on Earth: "IN A MOVE AKIN to Dan Quayle invoking John F. Kennedy in 1988, President Bush attempted a Kennedyesque moment of his own 2 1/2 years ago when he called for a national effort to land Americans on the moon and Mars. It's not a clip they'll play on repeat in Mr. Bush's presidential library.
To few people's surprise, the president's soaring pronouncements flopped. But he still pushed NASA to carry on planning for new solar-system exploration. Now instead of just being an embarrassment for the president, Mr. Bush's astronautical ambitions are cutting deeply into NASA's budget to, among other things, monitor global climate change."
The Washington Post editorial today also notes:
While Al Gore is raising public consciousness about the environmental crisis with his great film, An Inconvenient Truth, the Bush Administration is cutting back on the research needed to better understand The Climate Crisis.
See the movie, which is already the fourth best selling documentary in history.
To few people's surprise, the president's soaring pronouncements flopped. But he still pushed NASA to carry on planning for new solar-system exploration. Now instead of just being an embarrassment for the president, Mr. Bush's astronautical ambitions are cutting deeply into NASA's budget to, among other things, monitor global climate change."
The Washington Post editorial today also notes:
According to the space agency, NASA is diverting a little over $3 billion from its science research budget over five years. Though it's not clear how much of that will come from earth science, NASA admits that the climate-monitoring funding has steadily decreased since fiscal year 2004.
While Al Gore is raising public consciousness about the environmental crisis with his great film, An Inconvenient Truth, the Bush Administration is cutting back on the research needed to better understand The Climate Crisis.
See the movie, which is already the fourth best selling documentary in history.
Sunday, July 30, 2006
Another Failure in the Wake of 9/11
The Doha Round of trade negotiations was started soon after 9/11. It was recognized by many leaders in many countries that the grinding poverty in much of the world and the obvious injustice of the global economic system were contributory factors to the anger that fueled terrorists and international terrorism. Many also realized that poor people in poor nations could improve their economic lot if they had freer access to the markets in rich nations. The trade in agricultural and other labor intensive products is constrained by tariffs (especially those by European countries) and by subsidies (notably by U.S. agricultural subsidies). The Doha Round offered to help developing countries to help themselves by leveling the playing field, and thus indirectly to reduce the pressures encouraging international terrorism.
In contrast to many of the other post-9/11 initiatives, this appeared to be an initiative in which all countries would benefit. Freer trade would produce significant increases in overall global production and efficiency, and appropriate negotiations would allow these benefits to be shared by all nations.
It now appears that the Doha Round has failed. It must be assumed that it did so because the negotiators didn't do a good enough job at their work. The U.S. negotiators were one of the "eight hundred pound gorillas" at the table, and must share a significant portion of the blame!
Lets remember that in the next elections!
Read the article in the current Economist about the failure of the Doha Round. (Subscription required.)
In contrast to many of the other post-9/11 initiatives, this appeared to be an initiative in which all countries would benefit. Freer trade would produce significant increases in overall global production and efficiency, and appropriate negotiations would allow these benefits to be shared by all nations.
It now appears that the Doha Round has failed. It must be assumed that it did so because the negotiators didn't do a good enough job at their work. The U.S. negotiators were one of the "eight hundred pound gorillas" at the table, and must share a significant portion of the blame!
Lets remember that in the next elections!
Read the article in the current Economist about the failure of the Doha Round. (Subscription required.)
The Bologna Declaration and Process
The Ministers of Education of the European nations made a joint declaration in 1999, calling for harmonization of higher education systems of the continent. The purpose was to facilitate university graduates' mobility in the region, and further to allow students in institutions of higher education to change schools more easily. Of course, there must also have been a hope that there would also be resultant improvements in the quality, efficiency and/or effectiveness of higher education. Their product is referred to as the Bologna Declaration because of the venue of their meeting. Click here for an explanation of the Bologna Declaration.
The Bologna process then was created for the European higher education area to harmonize academic degree standards and quality assurance standards throughout Europe. The basic framework adopted under the process is of three cycles of higher education qualification: bachelors, masters and doctoral degrees. In most cases, these will take 3, 2, and 3 years respectively to complete, but the framework is moving to defining qualifications in terms of learning outcomes.
There is a Bologna Secretariat in the United Kingdom, which seeks to provide information and news about developments in the Bologna Process and about how the work program will be taken forward.
A stocktaking in 2005 suggests that significant progress is being made in the harmonization.
Check out the Wikipedia entry for the Bologna Process.
The Bologna process then was created for the European higher education area to harmonize academic degree standards and quality assurance standards throughout Europe. The basic framework adopted under the process is of three cycles of higher education qualification: bachelors, masters and doctoral degrees. In most cases, these will take 3, 2, and 3 years respectively to complete, but the framework is moving to defining qualifications in terms of learning outcomes.
There is a Bologna Secretariat in the United Kingdom, which seeks to provide information and news about developments in the Bologna Process and about how the work program will be taken forward.
A stocktaking in 2005 suggests that significant progress is being made in the harmonization.
Check out the Wikipedia entry for the Bologna Process.
UNESCO Resources for Those Who Wish to Study Abroad
The book, "Study Abroad", is UNESCO's international guide to higher-education study opportunities and scholarships offered by higher education institutions and international organizations in over 145 countries. It includes some 3,000 entries on courses and scholarships in different higher-education academic and professional disciplines. There is information on: addresses (including Internet sites), admission requirements, application deadlines, financial aid, fees, living expenses and other topics. Entries are presented in English, French or Spanish according to the language of the country concerned.
UNESCO's online "Study Abroad Database" contains some 3,000 opportunities for post-secondary studies in all academic and professional fields in 147 countries and territories for the years 2005 and 2006.
UNESCO International Conventions on the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education
There are six regional conventions on the recognition of qualifications (Africa, Arab States, Asia and Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, and two European conventions) and one interregional convention (Mediterranean Convention).
UNESCO conventions are aimed at promoting the recognition of academic qualifications for academic purposes (e.g. to continue studies in a different institution). Nevertheless, the conventions sometimes hold a ‘de facto’ and ‘de jure’ role in recognizing diplomas for professional purposes (e.g. to get a job). It is important to check with the different conventions.
UNESCO conventions are aimed at promoting the recognition of academic qualifications for academic purposes (e.g. to continue studies in a different institution). Nevertheless, the conventions sometimes hold a ‘de facto’ and ‘de jure’ role in recognizing diplomas for professional purposes (e.g. to get a job). It is important to check with the different conventions.
NSF InfoBrief via CRA Bulletin: Decline in Foreign Student Registrations
CRA Bulletin ? NSF InfoBrief: "For the third year in a row, there was a drop in the number of first-time, full-time enrollments of foreign graduate students. Between 2003 and 2004, their number dropped over 7%, to 27,486. Between 2001 and 2004, the number of first-time, full-time foreign students fell nearly 20%. First-time, full-time graduate enrollments of US citizens and permanent residents also declined by about 1% in 2004, after having increased 29% over the previous three years."
Saturday, July 29, 2006
Some UNESCO Higher Education Initiatives
The UNESCO Higher Education Open and Distance Learning Knowledge Base
Mega Universities
The Open and Distance Learning (ODL) Knowledge Base project was set up to support decision makers and practitioners with ready access to information and tools that will assist them in more effective policy planning, development and management of ODL in higher education programmes. It provides Web-based knowledge base regional resources for:* AfricaIt also provides an Inter-Regional Decision Support Tool to assist decision makers to make first-level assessments about the viability and quality of distance education programs. The International Internet Forum on the Higher Education Open and Distance Learning Knowledge Base (HEODLKB) Project is also linked to this website.
* Asia and the Pacific and
* CIS/Baltic countries.
Mega Universities
A dozen or so Mega Universities (each of which has an enrolment in excess of 100,000 learners per year) utilize a combination of media to accommodate learners. U.S. Mega Universities include:The site also provides a link to the World Summit of Mega Universities held 23-25 September 2005.* City College of San Francisco
* University of Maryland University College and
* University of Phoenix
This UNESCO website provides links to Mega Universities in developing nations, including:* Allama Iqbal Open University (Pakistan)
* Bangladesh Open University
* China Central Radio & TV University
* Indira Gandhi National Open University (India)
* Indonesian Open Learning University
* Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México
* Payame Noor University (Iran)
* Korea National Open University
* Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University (Thailand)
* University of South Africa
* Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico
* Shanghai TV University
Intellectual Property Rights, Biotechnology And Developing Nations
By the term “biotechnology” I am referring to the applications of modern microbiology to develop technologies. The term would include genomics, proteomics, recombinant DNA technologies, etc.
How can biotechnology help us to reduce the burden of disease? How can it increase food and agricultural production? There are other applications, including waste processing, environmental reclamation, mineral beneficiation, biomass conversion, and other industrial processes. However, let me focus on health, food and agriculture.
In a global perspective, the burden of disease falls most heavily on poor people, and those people are concentrated in developing nations. Similarly, the most pressing needs to increase food and agricultural productivity are found in meeting the food and economic needs of poor people in developing nations. Thus I believe the priority applications of biotechnology should be to meet critical needs of poor people in developing nations.
Key Technologies
In the health field, we look to biotechnology to contribute to the development of new diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutic pharmaceuticals. Other health applications exist, such as in the control of disease vectors. The biotechnology involved can be applied to animal as well as human health, and thus can benefit productivity of livestock.
In agriculture, we also look to biotechnology for development of improved crops (including the creation of genetically modified crop varieties). There are also applications in crop disease control, reducing post harvest losses, and biological nitrogen fixation. There is a significant field of application of biotechnology to food processing.
Scientific Research versus Technology Development
For convenience, one can distinguish between:
A linear model of progression from fundamental science to applied research and then to technology development and commercialization was once widely used. However, most recognize that the processes involved are more complex than implied by the linear model, and that there is a complex interplay between fundamental and applied research and technology development.
Comparative Advantage
Economists have long known that countries should produce goods and services for which they have comparative advantage. They should trade the surplus production with other countries to obtain the additional goods and services that they need. If the system of international commerce works correctly, the patterns of production match the patterns of comparative advantage, and every country does better through specialization and trade than it would by closing its borders and producing solely for domestic markets.
Biotechnology, as described above, is a new field. As far as I know, the first study of research priorities in biotechnology for developing nations was done by the National Academy of Sciences in 1982. However, biotechnology capacity is developing rapidly in many countries. Thus the pattern of comparative advantage in biotechnology is evolving. However, I suggest that we can understand some aspects of that evolution, and make some useful suggestions as to where efforts in building biotechnology capacity are likely to be useful.
Of course, if international transactions are too expensive (due for example to the cost of transportation), then countries can’t exploit their comparative advantages through trade. The improvement of information infrastructure and the reduction of transportation costs have radically increased the variety of goods and services that can be traded profitably, and globalization has resulted. Thus not only is the capacity to do biotechnology evolving, but the costs of international transactions in biotechnology are also changing rapidly.
As an aside, let me remind you of the difference between “competitive advantage” and “comparative advantage”. Competitive advantage refers to the advantage that a country obtains by producing some product at a lower cost or with higher quality than others can produce that product. Comparative advantage in contrast depends on the ratios of production costs for products in different countries. When the ratios are different, two countries can both prosper by trading the products they produce with more comparative efficiency for those they produce with less comparative efficiency. Of course, countries tend to have a comparative advantage in producing those products for which they have the greatest competitive advantage.
A recent report by RAND illustrates the complexity of the factors that combine to create the competitive advantage. In general, the report finds that richer countries, with more advanced scientific and technological capacities, enjoy competitive advantages in high technologies, including biotechnology.
The experience of the various tigers suggests that building competitive advantage in high technology areas is a long process. Highly qualified human resources are needed, and it takes time to build a system to educate and train the scientists and technicians needed; those trained before they can be utilized in their fields leave. Clusters effects from the multitude of firms that are involved in producing high tech products and supporting the producing firms take a long time to evolve. Institutional development also takes time.
The Geography of Comparative Advantage
It was once assumed that comparative advantage came largely from natural resources, while today it is often assumed that it derives from knowledge resources. In the case of biotechnology, comparative advantage is also based on facilities and institutions.
New crop varieties must be developed under the conditions similar to those in which they will be grown, and thus there is a comparative advantage for at least part of the product development to be done in developing countries. So too must new vaccines and drugs be tested in the populations they are to serve, against the local varieties of the diseases. Here too, there is a comparative advantage for part of the research and development process to be completed in developing countries.
On the other hand, fundamental research is best done where there is strong funding for such efforts, as well as a strong cadre of researchers, well-established research teams, well-equipped laboratories and good scientific libraries. Thus there is a comparative advantage for parts of the biotechnology R&D enterprise to be conducted in scientifically-advanced, developed nations.
Specific pharmaceutical firms and specific agro-industries have technological expertise developed from decades of experience in biotechnology and related industrial processes, suites of relevant intellectual property rights, and linkages with firms providing complementary inputs (in biotechnology clusters). These factors together also create comparative advantages in parts of the biotechnology R&D process.
Still another part of the biotechnology R&D network are the research intensive universities, which not only carry out part of the R&D, but which train the people needed in the other R&D laboratories. These too are a geographically localized resource, mostly occurring in scientifically-advanced countries.
I would suggest a key problem is the articulation among the organizations carrying out these different biotechnology R&D functions. Most obviously, the critical capacities located in developed countries are not adequately brought to bear on the priority problems centered in less developed nations.
How to Improve the Situation
Clearly a mixed solution is required, combining many factors.
Some governments and foundations are subsidizing researchers doing upstream biotechnology research in ways that encourage them to focus on topics relevant to global priority concerns. The innovations by the Gates Foundation illustrate the power of this approach. Linkages between such researchers and corporations with downstream development capabilities have been improved by changes in policy and laws. Efforts have been made to assure market demand for commercial biotech products in developing countries. Such efforts appear important, and I think they should be continued.
Foreign direct investment in agro-biotech and pharmaceutical industries in developing countries seems to me a critical ingredient that should be stimulated and enhanced. Not only does FDI provide needed capital for the expansion of biotechnology capacity, but it enhances technology transfer to the developing world for those many techniques dominated by industrial firms.
Developing countries should create first the biotech R&D capacity to field test new medications and vaccines, to adapt new crop varieties to local conditions, and to produce products for local and regional markets. From this base, they may well expand into other areas of biotechnology capacity. Thus did the newly industrialized countries often start with simple technological functions in the information and communications technology field, and move upstream to more innovative research and development as they deepened technological capacity.
It would also seem important to develop a cadre of biotechnology experts for each developing nation, at least adequate to serve as gatekeepers. Nations with aspirations to move up in biotechnology capacity might also consider not only developing the basic industries, but also developing the capacity to train people in biotechnology. This may but need not involve research training to the PhD level.
Intellectual Property Rights
Various kinds of intellectual property rights (IPR) influence the field of biotechnology, including patent rights for products and processes, plant breeder rights, and trademarks.
Countries can be characterized by their balance of payments for intellectual property. Some countries receive more income from the licensing of intellectual property abroad than they pay for licensing intellectual property from abroad. Similarly, industry in some countries makes more money from selling protected products abroad than is spent on products from abroad in those countries. Not surprisingly, countries with the most to gain from IPR have been the most active in promoting globalization of IPR. Indeed, historically only as countries went through the industrialization process did they strengthen IPR protection.
In recent years, international trade agreements have resulted in increased pressures for and interest in strengthening IPR regimes in developing nations. In the newly industrializing nations, this factor has been added to the increasing self-interest in strong IPR regimes, while in the least developed nations it has been hoped that any added costs to the country due to increased respect for foreign IPR would be balanced by advantages due to improved exports of products for which those nations have comparative advantage.
There has been an interest in harmonization of IPR. This seems to make sense in a number of situations. In the case of the European Union, it may contribute to the overall economic integration of the countries of Europe. In Francophone Africa, which already has a considerable integration of IPR systems, harmonization may offer some efficiency to poor countries helping them avoid duplication of efforts.
I suspect that countries seeking to attract investment from multinational corporations will benefit by having IPR regimes that enable corporation executives to feel comfortable that their companies intellectual property will be safe. There might be a small additional benefit if such countries provide IPR regimes that are also familiar to those corporate executives and their lawyers.
Ultimately, however, harmonization of IPR will provide only limited advantages to countries seeking to build the capacity to bring biotechnology to bear on development priorities, and then only in the presence of other supporting factors. A strong IPR regime is not a panacea.
How can biotechnology help us to reduce the burden of disease? How can it increase food and agricultural production? There are other applications, including waste processing, environmental reclamation, mineral beneficiation, biomass conversion, and other industrial processes. However, let me focus on health, food and agriculture.
In a global perspective, the burden of disease falls most heavily on poor people, and those people are concentrated in developing nations. Similarly, the most pressing needs to increase food and agricultural productivity are found in meeting the food and economic needs of poor people in developing nations. Thus I believe the priority applications of biotechnology should be to meet critical needs of poor people in developing nations.
Key Technologies
In the health field, we look to biotechnology to contribute to the development of new diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutic pharmaceuticals. Other health applications exist, such as in the control of disease vectors. The biotechnology involved can be applied to animal as well as human health, and thus can benefit productivity of livestock.
In agriculture, we also look to biotechnology for development of improved crops (including the creation of genetically modified crop varieties). There are also applications in crop disease control, reducing post harvest losses, and biological nitrogen fixation. There is a significant field of application of biotechnology to food processing.
Scientific Research versus Technology Development
For convenience, one can distinguish between:
· Fundamental science, the results of which are generally published in scientific journals and become common property;
· Applied research, which involves the application of scientific methods to solve practical problems, and which may result in public goods or privately held intellectual property;
· Technology development, which includes the development of new products or processes.
A linear model of progression from fundamental science to applied research and then to technology development and commercialization was once widely used. However, most recognize that the processes involved are more complex than implied by the linear model, and that there is a complex interplay between fundamental and applied research and technology development.
Comparative Advantage
Economists have long known that countries should produce goods and services for which they have comparative advantage. They should trade the surplus production with other countries to obtain the additional goods and services that they need. If the system of international commerce works correctly, the patterns of production match the patterns of comparative advantage, and every country does better through specialization and trade than it would by closing its borders and producing solely for domestic markets.
Biotechnology, as described above, is a new field. As far as I know, the first study of research priorities in biotechnology for developing nations was done by the National Academy of Sciences in 1982. However, biotechnology capacity is developing rapidly in many countries. Thus the pattern of comparative advantage in biotechnology is evolving. However, I suggest that we can understand some aspects of that evolution, and make some useful suggestions as to where efforts in building biotechnology capacity are likely to be useful.
Of course, if international transactions are too expensive (due for example to the cost of transportation), then countries can’t exploit their comparative advantages through trade. The improvement of information infrastructure and the reduction of transportation costs have radically increased the variety of goods and services that can be traded profitably, and globalization has resulted. Thus not only is the capacity to do biotechnology evolving, but the costs of international transactions in biotechnology are also changing rapidly.
As an aside, let me remind you of the difference between “competitive advantage” and “comparative advantage”. Competitive advantage refers to the advantage that a country obtains by producing some product at a lower cost or with higher quality than others can produce that product. Comparative advantage in contrast depends on the ratios of production costs for products in different countries. When the ratios are different, two countries can both prosper by trading the products they produce with more comparative efficiency for those they produce with less comparative efficiency. Of course, countries tend to have a comparative advantage in producing those products for which they have the greatest competitive advantage.
A recent report by RAND illustrates the complexity of the factors that combine to create the competitive advantage. In general, the report finds that richer countries, with more advanced scientific and technological capacities, enjoy competitive advantages in high technologies, including biotechnology.
The experience of the various tigers suggests that building competitive advantage in high technology areas is a long process. Highly qualified human resources are needed, and it takes time to build a system to educate and train the scientists and technicians needed; those trained before they can be utilized in their fields leave. Clusters effects from the multitude of firms that are involved in producing high tech products and supporting the producing firms take a long time to evolve. Institutional development also takes time.
The Geography of Comparative Advantage
It was once assumed that comparative advantage came largely from natural resources, while today it is often assumed that it derives from knowledge resources. In the case of biotechnology, comparative advantage is also based on facilities and institutions.
New crop varieties must be developed under the conditions similar to those in which they will be grown, and thus there is a comparative advantage for at least part of the product development to be done in developing countries. So too must new vaccines and drugs be tested in the populations they are to serve, against the local varieties of the diseases. Here too, there is a comparative advantage for part of the research and development process to be completed in developing countries.
On the other hand, fundamental research is best done where there is strong funding for such efforts, as well as a strong cadre of researchers, well-established research teams, well-equipped laboratories and good scientific libraries. Thus there is a comparative advantage for parts of the biotechnology R&D enterprise to be conducted in scientifically-advanced, developed nations.
Specific pharmaceutical firms and specific agro-industries have technological expertise developed from decades of experience in biotechnology and related industrial processes, suites of relevant intellectual property rights, and linkages with firms providing complementary inputs (in biotechnology clusters). These factors together also create comparative advantages in parts of the biotechnology R&D process.
Still another part of the biotechnology R&D network are the research intensive universities, which not only carry out part of the R&D, but which train the people needed in the other R&D laboratories. These too are a geographically localized resource, mostly occurring in scientifically-advanced countries.
I would suggest a key problem is the articulation among the organizations carrying out these different biotechnology R&D functions. Most obviously, the critical capacities located in developed countries are not adequately brought to bear on the priority problems centered in less developed nations.
How to Improve the Situation
Clearly a mixed solution is required, combining many factors.
Some governments and foundations are subsidizing researchers doing upstream biotechnology research in ways that encourage them to focus on topics relevant to global priority concerns. The innovations by the Gates Foundation illustrate the power of this approach. Linkages between such researchers and corporations with downstream development capabilities have been improved by changes in policy and laws. Efforts have been made to assure market demand for commercial biotech products in developing countries. Such efforts appear important, and I think they should be continued.
Foreign direct investment in agro-biotech and pharmaceutical industries in developing countries seems to me a critical ingredient that should be stimulated and enhanced. Not only does FDI provide needed capital for the expansion of biotechnology capacity, but it enhances technology transfer to the developing world for those many techniques dominated by industrial firms.
Developing countries should create first the biotech R&D capacity to field test new medications and vaccines, to adapt new crop varieties to local conditions, and to produce products for local and regional markets. From this base, they may well expand into other areas of biotechnology capacity. Thus did the newly industrialized countries often start with simple technological functions in the information and communications technology field, and move upstream to more innovative research and development as they deepened technological capacity.
It would also seem important to develop a cadre of biotechnology experts for each developing nation, at least adequate to serve as gatekeepers. Nations with aspirations to move up in biotechnology capacity might also consider not only developing the basic industries, but also developing the capacity to train people in biotechnology. This may but need not involve research training to the PhD level.
Intellectual Property Rights
Various kinds of intellectual property rights (IPR) influence the field of biotechnology, including patent rights for products and processes, plant breeder rights, and trademarks.
Countries can be characterized by their balance of payments for intellectual property. Some countries receive more income from the licensing of intellectual property abroad than they pay for licensing intellectual property from abroad. Similarly, industry in some countries makes more money from selling protected products abroad than is spent on products from abroad in those countries. Not surprisingly, countries with the most to gain from IPR have been the most active in promoting globalization of IPR. Indeed, historically only as countries went through the industrialization process did they strengthen IPR protection.
In recent years, international trade agreements have resulted in increased pressures for and interest in strengthening IPR regimes in developing nations. In the newly industrializing nations, this factor has been added to the increasing self-interest in strong IPR regimes, while in the least developed nations it has been hoped that any added costs to the country due to increased respect for foreign IPR would be balanced by advantages due to improved exports of products for which those nations have comparative advantage.
There has been an interest in harmonization of IPR. This seems to make sense in a number of situations. In the case of the European Union, it may contribute to the overall economic integration of the countries of Europe. In Francophone Africa, which already has a considerable integration of IPR systems, harmonization may offer some efficiency to poor countries helping them avoid duplication of efforts.
I suspect that countries seeking to attract investment from multinational corporations will benefit by having IPR regimes that enable corporation executives to feel comfortable that their companies intellectual property will be safe. There might be a small additional benefit if such countries provide IPR regimes that are also familiar to those corporate executives and their lawyers.
Ultimately, however, harmonization of IPR will provide only limited advantages to countries seeking to build the capacity to bring biotechnology to bear on development priorities, and then only in the presence of other supporting factors. A strong IPR regime is not a panacea.
Two Reports from UNCTAD
These two reports from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development seem interesting:
* WORLD INVESTMENT REPORT 2005 (Part Two assesses the implications of the surge in R&D internationalization by trans-national corporations.
* THE LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES REPORT, 2006: Developing Productive Capacities
Friday, July 28, 2006
"A New Model For Getting Rich Online"
Read "A New Model For Getting Rich Online: Investors Not Needed, Just a Site With Ads" by Yuki Noguchi online in The Washington Post (July 28, 2006).
This article describes how some personal and small-business Web pages are generating substantial income from Google Inc. or Yahoo Inc. placed advertisements. PodcastDirectory.com, a search engine for podcasts, rose from a hundred hits a month in 2004 to nearly a million now; it started earning $30,000 to $40,000 a year from Google's AdSense simply because people clicked on ads. The site owner is now trying to make more money by attracting still more traffic to his site.
I included ads placed by Google Adsense on this blog primarily because I hoped they would provide content complementary to my postings that would interest readers. I haven't made any money on it yet, but if the kind readers would visit the blog more often and click through on the AdSense links, maybe I would make some money in the future!
This article describes how some personal and small-business Web pages are generating substantial income from Google Inc. or Yahoo Inc. placed advertisements. PodcastDirectory.com, a search engine for podcasts, rose from a hundred hits a month in 2004 to nearly a million now; it started earning $30,000 to $40,000 a year from Google's AdSense simply because people clicked on ads. The site owner is now trying to make more money by attracting still more traffic to his site.
David Miles Jr. and Kato Leonard, two 20-year-olds in Louisville, say they collect $100,000 a month from their year-old site, Freeweblayouts.net, which gives away designs that people can use on MySpace social-networking pages.SeatGuru, which gets 700,000 visitors a month, generates $10,000 to $20,000 a month through AdSense, and a comperable amount from ad deals make with companies directly.
I included ads placed by Google Adsense on this blog primarily because I hoped they would provide content complementary to my postings that would interest readers. I haven't made any money on it yet, but if the kind readers would visit the blog more often and click through on the AdSense links, maybe I would make some money in the future!
Thursday, July 27, 2006
Business Day - News Worth Knowing
Business Day - News Worth Knowing: "At Microsoft’s Government Leaders Forum in Cape Town this week numerous leaders pledged their commitment to fast-tracking information and communications technologies (ICT)."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
