The Long March to Innovation: R&D and Competitive Evolution in the Indian Pharmaceutical Industry
NBER Working Papers · 2026 · Chirantan Chatterjee、Aniruddh Bhaskaran、Matthew J. Higgins
中文摘要
TRIPS（1995年）在塑造印度制药业方面发挥了重要作用。传统理论认为，强有力的知识产权（IPR）框架应能强化创新激励。然而，在TRIPS实施二十年后，印度新颖创新管线的增长已陷入停滞。本章质疑仅靠更强知识产权便能催生基于发现的研发这一假设。我们利用Biomedtracker数据库的试验阶段转换数据，发现印度管线在临床试验转换中存在瓶颈，具体表现为从1期到2期的转换，并以从1期到3期转换的零结果作为佐证，同时以中国和英国为基准进行比较。我们认为，这反映了印度生态系统中可能与知识产权无关的约束性限制，并伴随着企业内向非新颖项目的转移。我们通过对印度制药业专家的访谈佐证了这些论点。我们的发现应有助于思考发展中经济体的规范性知识产权问题。
Abstract
TRIPS (1995) has played a major role in shaping the Indian pharmaceutical industry. Conventional theory suggests that strong intellectual property rights (IPR) frameworks should strengthen innovation incentives. Yet, two decades after TRIPS, growth in India’s novel innovation pipeline has stalled. This chapter challenges the assumption that stronger IPR alone would catalyze discovery-based R&D. We utilize trial phase transition data from the Biomedtracker database, finding that the Indian pipeline faces a bottleneck in transitioning clinical trials specifically from Phase 1 to Phase 2, supported by a null result in transitions from Phase 1 to Phase 3, benchmarked against China and the United Kingdom. We argue that this reflects binding constraints in the Indian ecosystem that are likely orthogonal to IPR, accompanied by a within-firm shift toward non-novel programs. We corroborate these arguments through interviews with Indian pharmaceutical industry experts. Our findings should inform thinking about normative IPR in developing economies.