Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-02T01:22:49.492Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Ensuring the Future Supply of Vaccines: Is a National Vaccine Authority the Answer?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2009

Frank R. Lichtenberg
Affiliation:
Columbia University
Frank A. Sloan
Affiliation:
Duke University, North Carolina
Chee-Ruey Hsieh
Affiliation:
Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan
Get access

Summary

Introduction

In the next decade, U.S. and world demand for vaccines is expected to increase sharply, in part because of bioterrorism threats. But the vaccine industrial base has been declining for decades. Between 1966 and 1977, half of all commercial vaccine manufacturers stopped producing vaccines, and the exodus continued in the 1980s and 1990s. More than 25 companies produced vaccines for the U.S. market 30 years ago; today there are only 5 (Institute of Medicine 2004). Five of the current recommended vaccines have only one producer, and the others have either two or three (Institute of Medicine, p. 5).

Private companies find vaccines less financially rewarding than drugs. In 2001 the global marketplace for therapeutic drugs exceeded $300 billion, whereas worldwide vaccine sales were only about $5 billion. There are several reasons for this differential. Thomas (2002) offers one: patients must take some drugs every day, whereas vaccines are given only occasionally.

Kremer and Snyder (2003) offer a second explanation. In a simple representative consumer model, vaccines and drug treatments yield the same revenue for a pharmaceutical manufacturer, implying that the firm would have the same incentive to develop either, other factors being the same. However, using more realistic models, they find that this conclusion breaks down for two reasons.

First, drug treatments are sold after the firm has learned who has contracted the disease; in the case of heterogeneous consumers who vary with respect to the probability of contracting the disease, there is less asymmetric information to prevent the firm from extracting consumer surplus with drug treatments than with vaccines.

Type
Chapter
Information
Pharmaceutical Innovation
Incentives, Competition, and Cost-Benefit Analysis in International Perspective
, pp. 127 - 150
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×