Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword or section
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Biotechnology in Europe. Comparative study, 2006

Biotechnology in Europe. Comparative study, 2006

Ratings: (0)|Views: 32 |Likes:
Published by i-people
Биотехнологии в Европе. Сравнительный анализ, 2006.
Биотехнологии в Европе. Сравнительный анализ, 2006.

More info:

Published by: i-people on Mar 28, 2008
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/08/2014

pdf

text

original

 
Biotechnology in Europe:2006 Comparative study
Critical I comparative study for EuropaBio
 
Critical I comparative study for EuropaBio 
 © 
Critical I 2006
3
Sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Executive Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Structure and Growth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Financial Picture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Elite Companies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17National and Regional Profiles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Europe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Austria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Belgium. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Denmark. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Estonia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Finland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26France. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Greece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Hungary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30Ireland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31Italy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32Netherlands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Norway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34Portugal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35Spain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Sweden. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Switzerland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38UK. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39USA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Appendix – Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Contents
 
Sources
Critical I comparative study for EuropaBio 
4
 —
 © 
Critical I 2006
This is the second report Critical I has produced that compares the biotechnology sectors across some eighteen European nations and the USA. As part of itsongoing survey work, Critical I has looked in depth at the biotechnology sectors of four European nations – France, Germany, Switzerland, and the UK – and atthat of the USA. For these countries, and also for the 2003 data presented here for the Scandinavian nations of Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, and forIreland, the information has been gathered and validated according to the approach outlined in the Methodology Appendix.In addition, Critical I has undertaken some preliminary survey work on nine additional European nations – Austria, Belgium, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Italy, TheNetherlands, Portugal, and Spain. We have also updated our records for the four Scandinavian nations and Ireland. For these thirteen nations, we have usedavailable primary information sources to assess on an individual company basis within the definitions used in this survey. We have worked closely with thebioindustry organisations in some of these countries, notably with Flanders Bio in Belgium, Bionova in Greece, Assobiotec in Italy, NIABA in the Netherlands,SwedenBio in Sweden, and Genoma Espagne in Spain. We have also been able to obtain information on metrics such as numbers of employees, researchspending, number of R&D employees, and revenues for many of the companies, but the penetration of these data is lower than for those countries covered inour on-going work. In addition, it has not been validated by company sources (with the exception of a few instances) as we would normally do. Our assessmentsof the biotechnology sectors within Austria, Belgium, Italy, The Netherlands, and Portugal are accurate, but based on a less complete set of data.For sixteen of the nineteen countries covered in this report – Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway,Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK and the USA - we can compare metrics directly on a year-on-year basis at a company level. Thus we know, forinstance, not only how many people a particular company employs and what its R&D spend is, but also whether it is expanding or contracting. As an example ofthe utility of this approach, data on the proportion of companies in the UK, USA, France, and Germany that have increased their employee counts between 2003and 2004 has been used as an early indicator of impending restructuring or likely future expansion.

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->