DG MARE study 2012/06
„Support to the Impact Assessment
on EU Blue Biotechnology policy options“
Introducing some key findings
Angela Schultz-Zehden
s.Pro
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
1
Purpose of the study
• development of potential policy options
for the EU and
• an impact assessment of those policy
options
in support of the development of
Blue Biotechnology throughout Europe
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
2
Elements of the study
• Status review
„Blue biotechnology within the EU“
(literature & desk-based research)
• Stakeholder database „Blue Biotechnology“
• Patent Profiling
• Stakeholder meeting
• EU Public Consultation
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
3
Blue Biotechnology – defined
?
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
4
Linkages from marine
bioresources to industrial uses
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
5
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
6
Stakeholder position in Blue
Biotechnology value chain
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
7
Size & economic value of
Blue Biotechnology sector
• Difficult to collect data – due to lack of
definition, but also „age“ of sector
• 2-5 % of overall biotechnology sector
• Annual turnover: € 302 – 754 million
• Annual growth rate lower than
biotechnology as a whole: 4-5% vs 6-8%
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
8
Employment
• Not many people in biotechnology as such!
11,500 – 40,000 ?
Sectors
N° of employees
R & D employees
Biotechnology
54,750
NA
Pharmaceuticals
700,000
116,000
1,500,000
25,000
66,905
NA
Cosmetics
Aquaculture
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
9
In which sectors?
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
10
In which countries ?
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
11
Stakeholders: Types
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
12
Types of SME :
• Initiators: typically university spin-outs, scientistled, involved in bioprospecting, collectionbuilding, early genomics and metagenomics.
• Validators: providing the bioactive screening
needed to identify molecules of interest,
demonstrating that products and processes are
manufacturable and scaleable.
• Facilitators: typically consultancies, creating and
analysing opportunities, enabling partnerships
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
13
Issues for SMEs
•
•
•
•
•
•
No unified directory of marine SMEs (140?)
No map of activities
Typically small (<250 people)
Cash –limited, in ‘cash burn’ phase of project
Funding erratic
To profit, need downstream linkages to end-users
to sell or licence product to
SME Funding
• Start-up, utilising own reserves, university
funds if a spin-out;
• Public funding of local economic development
• Public funding from national or European RTDI
programmes;
• From end-users in collaborations and contract
work;
• Funding from investment institutions.
Public Finance
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
16
Finance / Capital
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
17
Patent Filing: still rising
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
18
Trend analysis
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
19
Protection level
1986 - 2013
US-patents
3%
National
patents
10%
EU-patents
11%
WO-patents
76%
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
20
Patent Profiling:
Blue Biotech Sub-sectors
Genetics
8%
Aquaculture
1%
Other
industries
10%
Food &
Feed
8%
Energy
2%
Cosmetics
14%
Health
57%
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
21
Patent content:
IPC distribution
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
09.10.14
A61
C12
C07
A23
C11
C08
www.sustainable-projects.eu
B01
C09
C01
22
Who is filing?
Comparison between
academia and industry
R: public research
institution
5%
U:
Universit
y
10%
Top 50 patent filers
P: private
person
10%
C: Company
75%
09.10.14
Companies: all fields, mainly drugs,
cosm., enzymes
Private: drugs, energy, biofilm
Res inst: drug, cosm., enzy., gen.
Universities: gen., energy
www.sustainable-projects.eu
23
0
09.10.14
25
www.sustainable-projects.eu
14
13
12
11
11
UNIV ARIZONA
UNIV MAINZ
NOVOZYMES AS
14
UNIV CALIFORNIA
18
FERMENTALG
18
NESTEC SA
18
KAO GERMANY GMBH
19
MARTEK BIO
20
IFREMER
23
PRONOVA
BASF AG
26
UNILEVER
30
CNRS
31
RGK
40
DSM IP ASSETS BV
51
L'OREAL
53
PHARMA MAR
60
P&G
160
HENKEL
Key players
180
153
140
120
100
80
45
24
Policy Landscape in
European countries
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
25
Stakeholder Workshop:
10 „points of interest“
1. Definition of Blue Biotechnology sector
2. Data on Blue Biotechnology sector is scarce
3. Public investment in sector (FP7 & Horizon 2020) =>
but not equal access to fund
4. Current status of Blue Biotechnology sector not clear
5. Performance in research exceeds that in commercialisation
6. Health and well being areas of growth
7. Access to Finance: a main barrier
8. A lack of collaboration along the value chain
9. Regulatory framework: a key to future growth
10. Make smart use of existing platforms & initiatives
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
26
Problems & Barriers
• Difficulty in sampling the huge diversity of resources and
potential high cost of sampling some of these
• Consequent preponderance of public funding for R&D
• Complexity of property rights under marine governance (UNCLOS)
• Lack of clarity on mechanism for benefit sharing in marine systems
(Nagoya) and uncertainty of status of genetic resources in areas
beyond national jurisdiction
• Dependence upon SMEs to translate R&D results
into marketable product for commercialisation
• High risk & vulnerability of SMEs
• Problems of economic data availability within poorly defined sector
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
27
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
28
Objective Tree
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
29
Objectives &
specific objectives
Objectives:
Specific Objectives:
•
Enhance cooperation across the
value chain
•
•
Facilitate access to knowledge and
exploratory infrastructure
•
•
Facility access to finance across
the value chain
•
•
Facilitate access to resources
09.10.14
•
Enhance cooperation between
research institutes, SMEs and
businesses involved in up-scaling
Promote integration of
exploratory infrastructure for
bioprospecting purposes
Facilitate access to finance from
second & third round product
development stages
Improve clarity and completeness
of legal framework
www.sustainable-projects.eu
30
Objective 1
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
31
Objective 2
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
32
Objective 3
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
33
Objective 4
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
34
Policy Options
1. No-change
2. Facilitating and promotion
(Soft policy option)
3. Mainstreaming Blue Biotechnology
4. Formal measures
More stringent policy option.
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
35
Policy Actions in
Policy Option 2
• Support development of Marine Biotech ERA-NET
• Promote collaboration between stakeholders (workshops,
events)
• Mapping of Blue BioTech SMEs
• Blue BioTech matchmaking events between SMEs & investors
• Mapping of genetic resources stored in biobanks & available
infrastructure
• Establish Blue Growth Fund for Blue BioTech SMEs and
disseminate information on available financial instruments
• Identify & disseminate best practice and develop & promulgate
guidelines for implementation of Nagoya Protocol and ABS
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
36
Policy Actions in
Policy Option 3
• Promote inclusion of Blue Biotechnology research activities
in other ERA‘s
• Identify good practices and benchmarks for Blue
biotechnology sector by building on existing biotechnology
practices
• Facilitate matchmaking, roadshows, etc. as part of broader
initiatiuves for biotechnology
• Foster development of a live database of biotechnology
SMEs & products and include Blue Biotechnology as a
category
• Establish Blue Biotech Fund for SMEs and disseminate
information on available financial instruments
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
37
Policy Actions in
Policy Option 4
•
•
•
•
Increase visibility by proposing a specific NACE code
Create a register for Blue Biotech firms
Establish a (stand-alone) Blue Biotech fund
Promote legal measures in the context of UNCLOS
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
38
Impact Assessment
Comparison of Options
Policy option
Effectiveness
Efficiency
Coherence
Total
2 Soft measures
++
+
+
++++
3 Mainstreaming
+
++
+
++++
4 Formal measures
++
-
-
0
Grading Scale: Highly Positive (++), Positive (+), Neutral (0), Somewhat negative (-), Highly
negative (--)
Given the complementary nature of the policy options and the closely connected
problem areas, combination of policy options 2 and 3 is likely to be the most
effective in addressing the overall problem of the sector:
•
•
•
•
increase collaboration across the value chain;
increase funding available across the value chain;
encourage better understanding of the sector by the investors;
bridge the so-called valley of death for product development.
Thank you very much for your attention
Angela Schultz-Zehden
s.Pro GmbH
[email protected]
SUBMARINER network EEIG
[email protected]
09.10.14
www.sustainable-projects.eu
40