[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cbr/cbrwps/wp262.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Globalisation and Its Impact on Competitiveness: the Case of the British and German Pharmaceutical Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Christel Lane
  • Jocelyn Probert
Abstract
This paper assesses the degree of financial and economic globalisation of British and German pharmaceutical companies during 1990 and 2001 and explores the changing balance between globalisation and national embeddedness. It tries to explain both the much lower degree of globalisation of German as compared to British companies in 1990, as well as their catching up at the beginning of the 21st century. The paper suggests that the lesser degree of globalisation of German firms during most of the 1990s partly explains their slide in competitiveness during this period. The conclusion examines prospects for the future of firms in both economies. The paper draws on detailed industry data, as well as case studies of the major firms in the two national industries.

Suggested Citation

  • Christel Lane & Jocelyn Probert, 2003. "Globalisation and Its Impact on Competitiveness: the Case of the British and German Pharmaceutical Industry," Working Papers wp262, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    • Handle: RePEc:cbr:cbrwps:wp262
    Note: PRO-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/cbrwp262/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christel Lane, 1995. "Industry and Society in Europe," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 272.
    2. Steven Casper;Hannah Kettler, 2000. "The Road to Sustainability in the UK and German Biotechnology Industries," Monograph 000466, Office of Health Economics.
    3. Catherine Matraves, 1997. "German Industrial Structure in Comparative Perspective (Only in German language!)," CIG Working Papers FS IV 97-10, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    4. Steven Casper & Mark Lehrer & David Soskice, 1999. "Can High-technology Industries Prosper in Germany? Institutional Frameworks and the Evolution of the German Software and Biotechnology Industries," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 5-24.
    5. Catherine Matraves, 1997. "German Industrial Structure in Comparative Perspective," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 37-51.
    6. Schmidt, Vivien A., 2002. "The Futures of European Capitalism," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199253685.
    7. Christel Lane, 2003. "Changes in corporate governance of German corporations: convergence to the Anglo-American model?," Working Papers wp259, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    8. David Soskice, 1997. "German technology policy, innovation, and national institutional frameworks," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 75-96.
    9. Stephane Jacobzone, 2000. "Pharmaceutical Policies in OECD Countries: Reconciling Social and Industrial Goals," OECD Labour Market and Social Policy Occasional Papers 40, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rachel Parker, 2001. "The Myth of the Entrepreneurial Economy: Employment and Innovation in Small Firms," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 15(2), pages 373-384, June.
    2. Hancké, Bob & Coulter, Steve, 2013. "The German manufacturing sector unpacked: institutions, policies and future trajectories," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 56090, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Casper, Steven & Whitley, Richard, 2004. "Managing competences in entrepreneurial technology firms: a comparative institutional analysis of Germany, Sweden and the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 89-106, January.
    4. Gambardella, Alfonso & Orsenigo, Luigi & Pammolli, Fabio, 2000. "Global Competitiveness in Pharmaceuticals: A European Perspective," MPRA Paper 15965, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Casper, Steven & Matraves, Catherine, 2003. "Institutional frameworks and innovation in the German and UK pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1865-1879, December.
    6. Steven Casper & Richard Whitley, 2002. "Managing competences in entrepreneurial technology firms: a comparative institutional analysis of Germany, Sweden and the UK," Working Papers wp230, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    7. Eric Bartelsman & Andrea Bassanini & John Haltiwanger & Ron Jarmin & Stefano Scarpetta & Thorsten Schank, 2002. "The Spread of ICT and Productivity Growth: Is Europe Really Lagging Behind in the New Economy?," Working Papers halshs-00289168, HAL.
    8. Andrea Bassanini & Ekkehard Ernst, 2002. "Labour market regulation, industrial relations and technological regimes: a tale of comparative advantage," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(3), pages 391-426, June.
    9. Silvia Teuber & Uschi Backes-Gellner, 2012. "How do companies adjust their organization to national institutions: evidence from matched-pair engineering companies," Economics of Education Working Paper Series 0082, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW), revised Apr 2013.
    10. Marc Goergen & Miguel Manjon & Luc Renneboog, 2008. "Is the German system of corporate governance converging towards the Anglo-American model?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 12(1), pages 37-71, March.
    11. Whitley, Richard, 2003. "Competition and pluralism in the public sciences: the impact of institutional frameworks on the organisation of academic science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1015-1029, June.
    12. Kaiser, Robert & Prange, Heiko, 2004. "The reconfiguration of National Innovation Systems--the example of German biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 395-408, April.
    13. Siebert, Horst & Stolpe, Michael, 2001. "Technology and economic performance in the German economy," Kiel Working Papers 1035, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    14. Philip Cooke, 2002. "Biotechnology Clusters as Regional, Sectoral Innovation Systems," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 25(1), pages 8-37, January.
    15. Gianluca Baio & Laura Magazzini & Antonio Nicita & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni, 2003. "Il Decreto DL 15/04/2002, n. 63 sul Contenimento della Spesa Farmaceutica - Impatto sull'Industria e Distorsioni nel Funzionamento del Mercato," Working Papers CERM 0-2003, Competitività, Regole, Mercati (CERM).
    16. Caroline Lambert & Éric Pezet, 2007. "Discipliner les autres et agir sur soi:la double vie du contrôleur de gestion," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 10(1), pages 183-208, March.
    17. Taner Akan & Tim Solle, 2022. "Do macroeconomic and financial governance matter? Evidence from Germany, 1950–2019," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 17(4), pages 993-1045, October.
    18. Emma Verastegui & Alejandro Mohar, 2010. "Colorectal cancer in Mexico: should a middle income country invest in screening or in treatment?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 10(1), pages 107-114, January.
    19. Salim Chahine & Mohamad Zeidan, 2014. "Corporate governance and market performance of parent firms following equity carve-out announcements," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 18(2), pages 471-503, May.
    20. Morgan, Steve & McMahon, Meghan & Greyson, Devon, 2008. "Balancing health and industrial policy objectives in the pharmaceutical sector: Lessons from Australia," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 133-145, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    globalisation; pharmaceutical industry; performance; British-German comparison;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L22 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Organization and Market Structure
    • L65 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Chemicals; Rubber; Drugs; Biotechnology; Plastics
    • P12 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - Capitalist Enterprises

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cbr:cbrwps:wp262. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ruth Newman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.