Balancing health and industrial policy objectives in the pharmaceutical sector: lessons from Australia

Research

Related Publications

Suter E, Misfeldt R, Mallinson S, Wilhelm A, Boakye O, Marchildon G, et al. Comparative Review of the Policy Landscape of Team-based Primary Health Care Service Delivery in Western Canada. Alberta Health Services; 2014.
Laberge M, Pang J, Walker K, Wong ST, Hogg W, Wodchis WP. QUALICOPC (Quality and Costs of Primary Care) Canada: A focus on the aspects of primary care most highly rated by current patients of primary care practices. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Foundation for Healthcare Improvement; 2014.
McGregor MJ, Abu-Laban RB, Ronald L, McGrail KM, Andrusiek D, Baumbusch J, et al. Nursing Home Characteristics Associated with Resident Transfers to Emergency Department. Canadian Journal on Aging. 2012;33(1):38-48.
Koehoorn M, McLeod CB, Fan JK, McGrail KM, Barer ML, Cote P, et al. Do private clinics or expedited fees improve wait- or return-to-work times for injured workers following knee surgery? Healthcare Policy. 2011;5(3):17-26.
Sutherland JM, Barer ML, Evans RG, Crump RT. Will paying the piper change the tune? Healthcare Policy. 2011;6(4):16-24.

Publication Topics

Balancing health and industrial policy objectives in the pharmaceutical sector: lessons from Australia

Title
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2008
AuthorsMorgan SG, McMahon M, Greyson D
JournalHealth policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Health Policy
Volume87
Issue2
Pages133 - 145
Date Published2008
KeywordsAustralia, Drug Industry/economics/legislation & jurisprudence, Drugs, Essential/economics/supply & distribution, Economics, Pharmaceutical, Health Care Sector, Health Policy/economics/legislation & jurisprudence, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Insurance, Pharmaceutical Services, Organizational Case Studies, Organizational Objectives, Research Support as Topic
AbstractINTRODUCTION: Policy-makers worldwide struggle to balance health with industrial policy objectives in the pharmaceutical sector. Tensions arise over pricing and reimbursement in particular. What health plans view as necessary to maintain equitable access to medicines, industry views as inimical to R&D and innovation. Australia has grappled with this issue for years, even incorporating the goal of "maintaining a responsible and viable medicines industry" into its National Medicines Policy. METHODS: This case study was conducted via a narrative review that examined Australia's experiences balancing health and industrial policy objectives in the pharmaceutical sector. The review included electronic databases, grey literature and government publications for reports on relevant Australian policy published over the period 1985-2007. RESULTS: While pharmaceutical companies claim that Australia's pricing and reimbursement policies suppress drug prices and reduce profits, national policy audits indicate these claims are misguided. Australia appears to have secured relatively low prices for generics and "me-too drugs" while paying internationally competitive prices for "breakthrough" medicines. Simultaneously, Australia has focused efforts on local pharmaceutical investment through a variety of industry-targeted R&D incentive policies. DISCUSSION: Despite the fact that policy reviews suggest that Australia has achieved balance between health and industrial policy objectives, the country continues to face criticism from industry that its health goals harm innovation and R&D. Recent reforms raise the question whether Australia can sustain the apparent balance.
Citation Key436