10个国家生物制药战略比较分析

A comparative analysis ofbiopharmaceutical strategies NOVEMBER 2025 A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF BIOPHARMACEUTICAL STRATEGIES IN 10 COUNTRIES Biopharmaceutical support measures post-COVID-19 reflect the growing strategic interest in the sector.The sector is part ofthe global race for innovation and industrial competitiveness, alongside areas such as artificial intelligence (AI) and quantum The biomedical industry is a high-risk, high-investment, technology-intensive sector. These characteristics make it uniquelychallenging to achieve innovation, attract investment and translate innovation into globally significant leadership. A supportive The urgency for Europe is driven by shifting geopolitical and economic pressures: •The countries reviewed in this analysis view biotech and biopharma as a key strategic sector. They develop policiesthat support innovation and are willing to invest public funds into drivers for its growth. Convergence of technologies(AI, biotechnology, quantum technology) are deliberately sought in integrated policy frameworks. Governments are •Cost pressures are increasing – for example, US pricing reforms – while competition from China is shorteningasset lifecycles. Industry pipelines are expanding, but considerable pressure points will further drive focus on R&Dproductivity and cost efficiency. National biopharma support policies will become even more important, both to address •Barriers to entry into biotech are lowering with the combination of biotech, digital and AI technologies. Asia is emergingas a major driver for global pipelines. Multiple datasets indicate that the Asia–Pacific (APAC) region now accounts forroughly one-third to approaching one-half of the global innovative-drug pipeline, with China alone contributing around Government measures span the value chain from early research to biomanufacturing and post-launch activities. Whilemarket access and pricing policies are not within scope of this analysis, demand-side measures matter. Varying degreesof state intervention mix between innovation incentives, drug pricing and public access openness in different and oftencontradictory ways. Complementarity between measures to attract investment with access to medicines and technologies Countries want to build a ‘homegrown’ industry that keeps headquarters, jobs and IP within their borders, in addition toattracting foreign direct investment. This is harder in today’s risk-averse capital markets, and hinges on investor confidence Post-COVID-19, countries are also reevaluating how to make biopharmaresilient to shocks(for example, pandemics,geopolitical fragmentation). The analysis looks at structural policies (such as supply-chain localisation, stockpiles, flexibleregulatory regimes) that best supported resilience. The report identifies specific elements in the strategies that respond Health policy and regulation are important levers that shape attractive business environments and strengthen Europe’sposition as a preferred global-launch market for biopharma innovation. However, they are by far not the only levers. In today’s Comparison across countries to identify patterns and best practices is useful, but not all measures can simply be ‘translated’into a European context. The EU can learn from them while playing to its unique strengths: scientific excellence and high-quality research centres, values-driven governance, public sector scale, collaborative spirit and vast high-quality data, whichcan be powerful levers when combined with political urgency and coordination. Closer collaboration between the EU and If European countries do not manage to seize the current momentum, there is a tangible risk of losing the innovation curvein a more permanent way. It will mean an acceleration of the shift towards the US and China, plus strong regional pockets,notably in the APAC region. The two member states analysed in this report – France and Denmark – could further reinforce While this report looks specifically at life sciences strategies, it is important to recognise that the most critical actions theEU and Member States can take is to make Europe a place thatvalues innovation– by strengthening IP and includingwider societal benefits in value assessments. And make Europe a place thatinvests in innovationby removing clawbacks A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF BIOPHARMACEUTICAL STRATEGIES IN 10 COUNTRIES Conceptual framework The report is descriptive and does not aim to rank countries. It recognises that national ecosystems reflect distinct histories,industrial strategies, institutional processes, and design and policy choices. While each of the countries selected are in upper The analysis can help understand specific combinations of public investment, regulation and industrial policy that are mosteffective under the institutional conditions of each country, while identifying core drivers of support that are less context-dependent, to advance a set of recommendations for Europe. For exam