Policies for life sciences and healthcare in the global health framework

Article type: Short Communication

Authors: Huttin, Christine C.^{a; b; c}

Affiliations: [a] Business and Economics of HealthCare, University Aix Marseille, Aix-en-Provence, France | [b] ENDEPUSresearch, Cambridge, MA, USA | [c] Endepluxco, SARLS, Luxembourg | E-mails: huttinc@gmail.com, christine.huttin@univ-amu.fr, chxyinfo@endepusresearchinc.com

Correspondence: [*] Corresponding author: Endepluxco, SARLS, Luxembourg. E-mails: huttinc@gmail.com, christine.huttin@univ-amu.fr, chxyinfo@endepusresearchinc.com.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: At a time when welfare contracts are in crisis, it is timely to discuss different forms of disruptive innovation and responses of medical finance and economic systems, especially adjusting with new instruments for recovery and innovative solutions for health reforms. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to propose some ways to develop a framework for policy changes affecting life science sectors and healthcare. It aims to analyze the types of relationships between health or medical systems and the economic systems. METHOD: Medical systems used to be generally closed systems, but the new forms of delivery, especially with increase of telehealth and Mobile health (Mhealth) solutions (boosted by the COVID-19 pandemic, such as online consultations), have open traditional boundaries and generate more interactions with economic systems. It also led to new institutional arrangements at federal, national, or local levels, with different power games according to the history of institutions and cultural differences between countries. RESULTS: Which system dynamics prevail will also depend on the political systems in place, for instance very innovative open innovation systems dominated by private players such as the USA empower individuals and favor intuitive and entrepreneurial states. On the other hand, systems historically dominated by socialized insurance or former communist countries, have investigated “attunements” or adaptation mechanisms in system intelligence. However, systemic changes are not only implemented by traditional rulers (government agencies, federal reserve banks) but also face the emergence of systemic platforms dominated by Big Tech players. The new agendas expressed for instance in the United Nation (UN) framework and the set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for climate change and sustainable growth, also require global adjustment of supply and demand, in a context where the traditional drug/vaccine split is challenged by the new technologies (e.g., mRNA technologies). Investment for drug research led to the development of COVID-19 vaccines, but also potential cancer vaccines. Finally, welfare economics is increasingly criticized among economist circles; it requires new design for global value assessment framework, facing growing inequalities and inter-generational challenges in aging populations. CONCLUSION: This paper contributes to new models of developments and different frameworks for multiple stakeholders with major technological changes.

Keywords: Welfare economics, economics of innovation, value assessment, life science, medical systems

DOI: 10.3233/THC-220609

Journal: Technology and Health Care, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 1497-1504, 2023