A number of researchers, particularly Lynn Zucker and Michael Darby, have demonstrated the crucial role of federal funding for "star scientists" in the takeoff of the biotech industry in the 1990s, and they have been supported by studies by Mihail Roco and others who have claimed that nanotech is following the same pattern. In this study we are interested in exploring whether the patterns of growth that launched the first biotech revolution are being repeated in the case of bionanotech and nanomedicine. Several studies (Lux Research for instance) have indicated that private and commercial funding has taken the lead in funding nanotechnology since 2006, and given the large R&D commitments of pharmaceutical companies and their traditional role in financing the development of therapeutic drugs and bringing them to market, there is prima facie reason to believe that private rather than corporate funding is playing the lead role in the nanomedicine revolution. Our initial set of data on R&D funding by the NIH in US chemicals, pharmaceuticals, medicines, the areas in which most bionano R&D is being conducted, suggest that while federal funding is not a large component of funding for nanobiotech and nanomedicine, highly targeted and well-orchestrated initiatives by NIH organizations such as the National Cancer Institute, are in fact providing the core platforms and bridge funding for the takeoff of bionanotech and nanomedicine.
Please RSVP for lunch before Monday, November 26th:(https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/7N6ST3F)
This talk is sponsored by CSIS and STS and open to the public.