ASM International Conference - Global and Local Biotechnology Industry


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • APAC here includes India
  • . In 1976, Swanson and Boyer founded Genentech in California
  • In the northern part of Taiwan, the Taipei area, specifically the NangGang Biotech Plaza, has 2 incubation centers: the Biotech IncubationCenter, Small and Medium Enterprise Administration, MOEA and the Incubation Center, Genomic Research Center, Academia Sinica. More than 50 biotech companies are located here, thereby making it a biotech clusterHsinchu county is the home to Taiwan’s first science-based industrial park, set up to help the development of high-tech industries. A newBiomedical Science Park is underway and will be managed by the Hsinchu Science Park Administration Office.
  • ASM International Conference - Global and Local Biotechnology Industry

    1. 1. The Global and Local Biotechnology Industry<br />ASMIC, June 2010<br /><ul><li>© 2010 Frost & Sullivan. All rights reserved. This document contains highly confidential information and is the sole property of Frost & Sullivan. No part of it may be circulated, quoted, copied or otherwise reproduced without the prior written approval and consent of Frost & Sullivan.</li></li></ul><li>“Sometimes people ask me what field I'd be in if not computers. I think I'd be working in biotechnology”<br />Bill Gates New York Times, June 18, 1996 <br />
    2. 2. AGENDA<br />Global Biotechnology Overview<br />1<br />Benchmarking successful biotechnology clusters<br />2<br />Malaysia in the context of biotechnology<br />3<br />
    3. 3. Global Industry Profile The development of a global market and emergence of new players will drive growth in the market<br />The Driving factors for Global Biotech growth<br /> Beyond Geographic Borders<br /> Pricing Pressure & Asia’s emergence leads to global extension of companies<br />Beyond Industry Borders<br /> Agricultural & Industrial Biotechnology approach critical mass<br />Beyond Product Borders<br /> Monoclonal Antibodies & Personalized medicines bring new applications of drugs to the market<br />Proprietary/<br />Innovation<br />High Margin<br />Stage of development:<br /><ul><li> Countries in Asia exist across the entire biotechnology value chain
    4. 4. Japan has long held a global position of strength in the biotechnology market and is a world leader in segments of the market (e.g: food processing)</li></ul>JAPAN<br />US & EU<br />TAIWAN<br />AUSTRALIA<br />CHINA<br />NEW ZEALAND<br />MALAYSIA<br />Time<br />Commodity<br />Low Margin<br />Source: Frost & Sullivan, DataMonitor<br />
    5. 5. Global Biotechnology Industry Overview: 2009 <br />Global Biotechnology Revenue by Sectors<br />26.00%<br />62%<br />12%<br />Healthcare<br />Agriculture<br />Others, Inc Industrial<br />HC: Will continue to be >50% of the market<br />Breakdown by Sector<br />
    6. 6. Scientific American WorldviewA global biotechnology survey, 2010<br /><ul><li>INTENSITY measurement—defined by indicators such as public companies per capita and portion of overall R&D spending used for biotech—balances some of the size-related differences between countries
    7. 7. This survey aims to find how well various countries are doing in Biotechnology</li></ul>Source: Scientific American World View<br /><br />
    8. 8. Dynamics of the Biotech Industry in APAC . . . Valued at USD 50 million<br />Japan<br /><ul><li>The Japanese government, which was earlier accused of shielding its domestic companies, has now opened its doors for foreign investment</li></ul>China<br /><ul><li>Opaque government policies and regulations in China are acting as a major hurdle for foreign participation in the biotech market
    9. 9. China’s health biotech segment had maintained an annual growth rate of 30% since 2005. Biopharmaceutical production rose from US$860 million in 2000 to US$4.2 billion in 2005, and is forecast to exceed US$12.5 billion in 2015
    10. 10. Venture capitalists committed US$337 million to Chinese life sciences projects during 2008.</li></ul>South Korea<br /><ul><li>The South Korean Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) plans to make South Korea the seventh most developed country by 2010 in biotechnology</li></ul>Taiwan<br /><ul><li>The government expects that the local biotech industry will support 500 biotech companies by the end of 2010 and transform Taiwan into a Green Silicon Island </li></ul>India<br /><ul><li>India has an emerging biotechnology industry that is aided by a large highly-educated community of scientists and researchers. The country's biotechnology industry also boasts of strong government support and a growing infrastructure base
    11. 11. The Contract Research industry in India could reach as high as US$ 270 million by 2009
    12. 12. Indian biotech sector could reachUS$5 billion by 2010
    13. 13. Biopharmaceutical segment has more than 40% of the 325 biotech companies in India</li></ul>Malaysia<br /><ul><li>Malaysia has strong government support and capital injection to boost its biotech industry. Focus is on technology transfer and key areas of agriculture, healthcare and industrial biotechnology</li></ul>Australia<br /><ul><li>Australia's strengths in biotech research include agricultural and medical research in general, but particularly immunology and vaccines, stem cells, proteomics, and bioinformatics</li></ul>Singapore<br /><ul><li>Singapore has strong government support and capital injection to boost its biotech industry. Made strides in biomedical research</li></ul>Source:;<br />
    14. 14. AGENDA<br />Global Biotechnology Overview<br />1<br />Benchmarking successful biotechnology clusters<br />2<br />Malaysia in the context of biotechnology<br />3<br />
    15. 15. Examples of strong biotech clusters<br />Medicon Valley<br /><ul><li>Zealand in Denmark and Scania in South Sweden</li></ul>Boston/ Massachusetts <br /><ul><li>Greater Boston Area including Providence and Worcester</li></ul>South Korea<br /><ul><li>Across the country</li></ul>California <br /><ul><li>San Francisco Bay Area in North California
    16. 16. Los Angeles, Orange County, Riverside and San Diego in South California </li></ul>Taiwan<br /><ul><li>Medical Technology</li></ul>Singapore<br />
    17. 17. The Magic of Boston and California ClustersStrong science base. Established institutions, Funds from government and VC, strong industry associations and a spirit of entrepreneurship make them sustainable clusters<br />Strong Science Base<br />Funding Availability<br />Business Environment for Biotech<br /><ul><li>30+ years of history in Biotech
    18. 18. 100+ years of successful research at MIT, Harvard, Stanford, UCSF
    19. 19. Efficient TLO and networks to drive commercialization
    20. 20. Spin offs from successful companies
    21. 21. Clarity in IP transfer
    22. 22. Leading Medical Institutions in the area
    23. 23. NIH funds of $ 2bn + annually
    24. 24. VC funds of $ 1bn + annually
    25. 25. IPO markets, Angel community and a culture to promote entrepreneurship and risk taking
    26. 26. $80mn+ funding for small businesses
    27. 27. Intellectual environment attract staff and companies
    28. 28. Continuous supply of educated workers
    29. 29. Industry Associations to continuously monitor and provide feedback
    30. 30. State’s drive to attract companies
    31. 31. Presence of three generation of entrepreneurs</li></ul>Key Capabilities<br /><ul><li>Boston and California face competition from Texas, Los Angeles, Philadelphia for funds. Companies locating manufacturing facilities elsewhere for low real estate costs, higher tax benefits etc.
    32. 32. Continuous need to Provide space, talent, funds for the expanding cluster
    33. 33. Needs to continue focus on scientific collaboration and innovation
    34. 34. Emerging clusters pose competition due to low cost, high growth potential for companies</li></ul>Key Issues<br />
    35. 35. The Growth of Korea Educated and experienced manpower, success in research and clinical trials and the biomedical infrastructure created by the government are the key reasons for growth<br />Strong Science Base<br />Business Environment for Biotech<br /><ul><li>Biotechnology-related Departments in 40 Universities
    36. 36. Strong in clinical trials
    37. 37. High quality of workforce
    38. 38. Around 40 technologies or drug candidates were licensed out to Big Pharma during 1986-2008 and over 100 new drugs or lead candidates are under development.
    39. 39. Govt. creating research institutes, 25 biotechnology centers acting as incubators, specialized biotech parks, providing funds
    40. 40. The first initiative started in late 1980’s, continued effort in 1994 and 2006
    41. 41. government investments have grown from $311mn in 2001 to $721mn in 2007. This represents a CAGR of 15%.
    42. 42. Korea is ranked as 19 by WF Global Competitiveness Report 2009-10
    43. 43. The Bio-Vision initiative started in 2006 out with a budget of $720 million for R&D and $230 million for infrastructure in 2007, with a projected rise to $1.67 billion for R&D and $690 million for infrastructure by 2016. The total budget for nine years is projected at $15.56 billion</li></ul>Key Capabilities<br /><ul><li>Pharmaceutical companies do not have strong experience to enter global markets
    44. 44. Difficulty to source foreign talent
    45. 45. Collaboration needs to improve among universities and industries. Between companies in the clusters
    46. 46. Pharmaceutical industry is mostly generics</li></ul>Key Issues<br />
    47. 47. Taiwan Clusters<br /><ul><li>17TH IN World, 1st in Asia Knowledge Economy Development by WB (2008)
    48. 48. 6th in World, 2nd in Asia Innovation Ranking by EIU (2007-11)
    49. 49. 17TH IN World, 5th in Asia Global Competitiveness Index (2008-09)
    50. 50. 1st Industry Cluster Development Global Competitiveness Index , WEF 2006-09</li></ul>Source:, Ministry of Economic Affairs Taiwan, 2009<br />
    51. 51. AGENDA<br />Global Biotechnology Overview<br />1<br />Benchmarking successful biotechnology clusters<br />2<br />Malaysia in the context of biotechnology<br />3<br />
    52. 52. Availability of Research grants and Govt support<br />Lack of financial loans from financial institutions<br />Cost-competitive labor<br />Structural and background as manufacturing country<br />Rich biodiversity<br />Cost effective leading to potentially higher profit margins<br />Time to build technology background<br />RESTRAINTS<br />DRIVERS<br />Market demand as acceptability of biotech in all areas increases<br />Insufficient funding<br />Good infrastructure, good transportation network<br />Human resource<br />National Biotechnology Policy<br />BioNexus Status<br />Malaysia’s Biotechnology Industry:Overall Market Drivers and Restraints<br />
    53. 53. Comparative Analysis<br /><ul><li>Lack of compiled data for the clusters and across the same areas and similar year make quantitative comparison difficult</li></ul>Source: Frost & Sullivan Analysis<br />
    54. 54. Key Attributes of Successful Biotech Clusters. . . . Priorities for Malaysia<br />Industry Maturity<br />University/Medical Centre Maturity<br /><ul><li>Presence and nature of biotech companies (e.g. Startup, early stage, late development, mature commercial, enabling service)
    55. 55. Quantity and diversity of lifesciences stakeholders (e.g. R&D, medical devices, clinical trials and manufacturing, supporting industries)
    56. 56. Growth in Output – stagnated growth, slow growth or faster than industry
    57. 57. Strong research universities and academic medical centers, supported by effective technology transfer offices, as a key source of innovation and talent
    58. 58. Collaborative relationships between research universities and academic medical centers to sustain invention and innovation
    59. 59. Areas of Research and Commercialization Success</li></ul>Funding Availability<br />Regulatory and Business Environment<br /><ul><li>Availability of funding to support early stage company research
    60. 60. Funding for established biotech companies to invest in additional infrastructure and clinical research to move products into the market place
    61. 61. Public and Private funding channels
    62. 62. Stable and supportive public policy structure
    63. 63. Supportive business environment to retain existing companies and / or attract new enterprises (e.g., taxes, permitting, costs, IP protection)
    64. 64. Stakeholder Synergy
    65. 65. Industry Maturity and University/Medical Centre maturity comprises Company and Science Base
    66. 66. Funding Availability Remains Same
    67. 67. Regulatory and Business Environment comprises other seven factors</li></ul>Source: Frost & Sullivan analysis<br />
    68. 68. Setting the stage…<br />1<br />Industry Maturity, Medical Centre and University Maturity, Funding Availability and Regulatory and Business Environment are four key attributes of a strong biotechnology cluster<br />2<br />Malaysia is at the starting point of biotechnology innovation . . . . We don’t have a history and need to progress on each attribute . . Starting from our education system and public awareness<br />3<br />To improve Industry Maturity– we need to focus on medical devices, commercialisable research, historically strong technologies<br />4<br />To improve University and Medical Centre maturity - collaboration activities, TTOs and incubators, More commercial exposure to scientists and international tie-ups are needed<br />5<br />Promotion of SMEs, Improving skill base and promoting entrepreneurship are desirable to improve the business environment in the overall industry <br />6<br />Pre seed funding and steps to develop VC need to be taken to improve funding availability for companies<br />
    69. 69. Proactive commercialization in Research and Academic Centers – Learning from Yale University<br />Technology Transfer at Yale University<br />Impact<br /><ul><li>High support–high selectivity policies needed for entrepreneurially underdeveloped environments
    70. 70. Provided facilities like creation of business plan, providing mentoring support, promotion of success stories, having entrepreneurial courses in curriculum, incentives for starting up, getting entrepreneurs to set up in the region and chasing VCs
    71. 71. Gregory Gardiner, a former Pfizer executive took charge of Office of Cooperative Research in 1982
    72. 72. An important goal for the Yale OCR was to identify new ideas, cultivate venture funding for them, and facilitate their development into companies that become part of the New Haven economy.
    73. 73. Increased exposure of researchers to commercial ideas
    74. 74. The renewed OCR established direct contacts with venture capital firms. The goal was not only to persuade venture capital firms of the relevance of university technology but also to convince them to create ventures in New Haven
    75. 75. Only six biotech companies in 1993
    76. 76. The hard work of seeking appropriate investors eventually paid off, and in 1998, after two years of effort, the first round of financing was concluded with $20 million for five companies.
    77. 77. Today the Connecticut cluster employs 17,985 people directly and 35,857 through indirect and induced employment. It consists of 49 biotechnology companies. Five of the biotech companies are publicly traded: Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Neurogen, Curagen, Gennesiance, and Vion Pharmaceuticals. Of the biotech companies, 24 companies, or 49%, of the biotechnology cluster in New Haven were created after 1996 with technology, ideas, or founders from Yale and with the help of the OCR.</li></ul>Source: University Commercialization Strategies in the Development of Regional Bioclusters , Shiri M. Breznitz, Rory P. O’Shea, and Thomas J. Allen published in Journal of Product Innovation Management 2008 <br />
    78. 78. THANK YOU<br />Rhenu BhullerVP, BiotechnologyFrost & Sullivan<br />