Abstract
This article describes the process by which two industries—the environmental and pharmaceutical—survive the funding gap in new technology development known as the “valley of death”. The article (1) defines the valley of death, including a brief description of the causes; (2) describes private financial resources that the pharmaceutical industry has used successfully, such as internal corporate reinvestment in research and development and external venture capital funds, but which the environmental industry has yet to adequately cultivate; (3) describes potential public financial vehicles that can be used by both the pharmaceutical and environmental industries to fund development and demonstration; and (4) offers an analysis and makes recommendations for government technology policy makers interested in learning about environmental protection through the successful commercialization practices of government/industry partnerships.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
National Environmental Technology Applications Center.Barriers to Environmental Technology Commercialization. April 1995.
Kassebaum, Nancy Landon. “Revitalizing New Product Development from Clinical Trials Through FDA Review.”Testimony: FDA Reform (February 21, 1996).
Ward, Michael R., and David Dranove. “The Vertical Chain of Research and Development in the Pharmaceutical Industry.”Economic Inquiry (January 1995): 70–87.
U.S. Food & Drug Administration. “User Fees.”FDA Backgrounder (1992).
VentureOne at Environmental Investing Conference, Nov. 10, 1994.
Paterson, Andy. Phone conversation (August 14, 1995).
Beltz, Cynthia, ed.Financing Entrepreneurs. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute Press, 1994.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “Orientation Handbook for Members of Scientific Review Groups.”HHS Publication, March 1992 Interim Revision.
Conlan, Michael F. “Congress Debates Price of Drug Found by Government Process.”Drug Topics (February 22, 1993): 44–45.
Conlan, Michael F. “Government R&D Contributions to Rx Firms Eyed Again.”Drug Topics (April 5, 1993): 59–60.
Schofield, John. Phone conversation (August 9, 1995).
Preston, John T. “Key Problems in Commercializing Technology in the U.S.” Presented as testimony before the Energy Subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives, Space Science and Technology Committee (March 23, 1993).
Preston, John T. “Success Factors in Technology Development.”Industry & Higher Education 7, no. 4 (1993): 207–215.
Preston, John T., and David H. Staelin. “National Strategies for Technology Commercialization.”Technology Management 1, no. 1 (1994): 30–34.
Preston, John T. Phone conversation (April 10, 1996).
21 Code of Federal Regulations 316.31.
Weck, Egon. “Medicine's Orphans: Drugs for Rare Diseases.”From Test Tube to Patient: New Drug Development in the United States. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (1990): 52–55.
Koberstein, Wayne, et al. “The Future of Research: A Forecast for Pharmaceuticals.”Pharmaceutical Executive (December 1994): 28–60.
Environmental Business International, Inc.,Environmental Business Journal 8, no. 10 (October 1995): 2.
Bridge to a Sustainable Future. Washington, DC: National Science and Technology Council, April 1995.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Frank, C., Sink, C., Mynatt, L. et al. Surviving the “valley of death”: A comparative analysis. J Technol Transfer 21, 61–69 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02220308
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02220308