More than IP law is needed for growth
This interview serves as a reminder that it isn’t just having IP laws, but a structure and climate to encourage businesses to create the IP in the first place, that is important to growth. The Scotsman has an interview with Aisling Burnand of the BioIndustry Association, in which she mentions the need for government support of clinical research.
According to Burnand, US biotech companies have a significant advantage because the Washington-based National Institutes for Health there spends £2.5bn a year supporting clinical research into drugs. “That effectively de-risks that early-stage for drugs firms and makes companies in the US much more investable.”
Despite her reservations, Burnand sees Scotland as a model for the rest of the UK, with Scottish Enterprise’s Proof of Concept and Co-Investment fund taking some of the risk out for early-stage businesses developing drugs. “SE recognised that there is a funding problem at the early stages,” she says. “These are really good initiatives. They may now need to be capitalised at higher levels because it takes 10 to 12 years to get a drug to market.”
As suggested in an earlier post, perhaps the Scottish Government could also evaluate the IP litigation advantages (if there are any) of locating in Scotland versus England and Wales in an effort to encourage investment.
![[Valid RSS]](valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
