Rethinking Biotech Investments

Every few weeks, there is a discussion on the merits of the knowledge economy connected with new global trends in biotech. We are told why the country should invest in bio-nanotechnology or other similar research areas. The argument goes something like this — there is a need for new therapeutics and new devices, India is a large country with a high burden of healthcare challenges, and there is increasing evidence that biotech discoveries can tackle some of the pressing challenges. Many speak of similar blue-sky ideas from time to time. In the past, I also believed in these grand ventures, and perhaps to a certain extent remain intrigued by the possibility. But experiences both before and during the global pandemic have made me think that these investments are unlikely to succeed in India in the near or perhaps even the intermediate future. The issue is neither the ability of our students and scholars nor any inherent problem with the potential of discoveries in science. The problem is on the other side of the equation. The other side of the equation is the absorptive capacity and the ecosystem in which these technologies can function and thrive. When it comes to biotech, India’s industry lacks investment, infrastructure and incentive for new research, the engine that works in synergy with academia to make these technologies viable. Both the funding in the public sector and the size of the industry are too small, and it is far more efficient for everyone (public sector and the local industry) to simply import the products in demand.The industry sector relies largely on generic goods and off-patent products and is unwilling or uninterested in investing in research that is slow, unpredictable, and expensive. The industry is also not particularly keen to work with local academia beyond small-scale projects. This distrust issue is bi-directional. The long-term vision of the biotech industry has no space for discovery, research, and original products. It is solely focused on revenue based on sales in the short term. The venture capital sector in India also lacks a serious appetite for the biotech sector, and they have very good reasons to consider it a non-starter. International investment in our biotech is negligible compared to investment in the programmatic implementation where international donors see a much greater likelihood of success. Then there is the dysfunctional intellectual property and regulator sector.
The drug regulatory authority of India(DRAI) continues to underperform (the website is an embarrassment; the front page has a picture of a researcher with a face mask that does not cover the nose, and the section on quality medical products has a picture of a strange concoction and if you try going to international collaboration page, it is empty). DRAI website also clarifies that medical devices will not be locally designed and only be imported. There are no sections for registering a local novel medical device, only forms for importing those. In this ecosystem, I find calls for investment in the biotech sector or similar areas of the “knowledge economy” misguided, impulsive, and following a trend that has little relevance to our realities. Far better use of funds would be to build a culture of strong basic science research, on which the structure of future biotech can stand and thrive. Investment in basic science is a solid and reliable investment in both high and middle-income countries. For us, it is more likely to lead to local, context-appropriate discoveries that may then allow for partnerships and fruitful collaborations with the international biotech industry that has both interest and capacity. Finally, it is also much more likely to increase science literacy than investing in technology. Perhaps the lesson is the same whether it is politics, economics, or science — let us get our fundamentals right.
(The author is a EVS Lecturer at Govt.Higher.Secondary School Khellani Doda. Views are his own)
[email protected]