Regulation of the United Kingdom biotechnology industry and global competitiveness.

  • Great Britain. Parliament. House of Lords. Science and Technology Committee.
Date:
[1993]
Catalogue details

Licence: Open Government Licence

Credit: Regulation of the United Kingdom biotechnology industry and global competitiveness. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    27/100 (page 21)
    between $30 and $50 billion in the year 2000 for biotechnology derived products excluding fermented food and drinks (RAE p 157). From BIA projections we might expect a world market size of $90 billion world wide by the year 2000. SAGB in their brochure Economic Benefits and European Competitiveness project the total value of biotechnology products and processes by the year 2000 at $100 billion. , 3.14 Insum, evidence tells us that the estimated size of the current market for biotechnology derived products in the United Kingdom lies between $4 and 8 billion a year: the estimated size of those markets in the year 2000 are, respectively, $2 - 4 billion for the United Kingdom and up to $100 billion for the USA. 3.15 Notall industrial sectors are expected to find applications for biotechnology at the same rate. In the preceding paragraphs we saw that applications were uneven and this is expected to continue. Thus SAGB, in its brochure Economic Benefits and European Competitiveness, states that most advanced current commercial applications of biotechnology are in the chemical, pharmaceutical and instrumentation (including diagnostics and specialised equipment) sectors because the technical hurdles have been more rapidly overcome. It suggests that commercial applications in food and agriculture will develop more slowly until the mid 1990s because of significant technical hurdles. Biotechnology and the United Kingdom economy 3.16 A recent study by the Centre for Exploitation of Science and Technology (CEST), entitled Biotechnology as a Competitive Advantage (Draft Version 3, 22 April 1993), has considered the changes likely to be brought to United Kingdom industry by biotechnology (CEST PP 217-221). The conclusion drawn by the author is that the agriculture and food, chemical, and healthcare industries which do or could use biotechnology account for 12 per cent of United Kingdom GDP. However some 10 per cent of this is food and agriculture based. Thus the likely impact of biotechnology at the macro-economic level may well be only marginal. Indeed the author concludes that “a 10 per cent increase in the value added due to biotechnology will only add 0.15 per cent to the United Kingdom annual growth [of GDP]” (CEST Biotechnology as a Competitive Advantage p 17). At current rates of growth some might say that 0.15 per cent was by no means insignificant. But some witnesses considered the CEST assessment was unduly pessimistic and based on data which was now out of date. They preferred to use recent projections from other sources as a measure of likely impact on GDP (Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) Q 844). 3.17. Nonetheless at the level of the individual firm the CEST study concludes that ‘In microeconomics at the firm and industry levels biotechnology is crucial and a core technology. Firms that do not use it effectively will be at a competitive disadvantage’. (CEST P 221). ‘If biotechnologies are chosen well and used to add variety together with good logistics and distribution, they are a force for the development of a real innovative economy' (CEST P 220).