Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Apr;8(2):185-208.
doi: 10.1017/S1744133112000321. Epub 2013 Jan 24.

Neglected infectious diseases: are push and pull incentive mechanisms suitable for promoting drug development research?

Frank Mueller-Langer  1
Affiliations
Free PMC article

Neglected infectious diseases: are push and pull incentive mechanisms suitable for promoting drug development research?

Frank Mueller-Langer. Health Econ Policy Law. 2013 Apr.
Free PMC article

Abstract

Infectious diseases are among the main causes of death and disability in developing countries, and they are a major reason for the health disparity between rich and poor countries. One of the reasons for this public health tragedy is a lack of lifesaving essential medicines, which either do not exist or badly need improvements. In this article, we analyse which of the push and pull mechanisms proposed in the recent literature may serve to promote research into neglected infectious diseases. A combination of push programmes that subsidise research inputs through direct funding and pull programmes that reward research output rather than research input may be the appropriate strategy to stimulate research into neglected diseases. On the one hand, early-stage (basic) research should be supported through push mechanisms, such as research grants or publicly financed research institutions. On the other hand, pull mechanisms, such as prize funds that link reward payments to the health impacts of effective medicines, have the potential to stimulate research into neglected diseases.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Push and pull R&D incentive programmes and selected examples
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Acemoglu D. Linn J. (2004), ‘Market size in innovation: theory and evidence from the pharmaceutical industry’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(3): 1049–1090
    1. Berndt E. R., Glennerster R., Kremer M., Lee J., Levine R., Weizsäcker G. Williams H. L. (2007), ‘Advance market commitments for vaccines against neglected diseases: estimating costs and effectiveness’, Health Economics, 16(4): 491–511 - PubMed
    1. Bhutta Z. A., Gupta I., de'Silva H., Manadhar D., Awasthi S., Hossain S. M. Salam S. A. (2004), ‘Maternal and child health: Is South Asia ready for change?’, BMJ, 328: 816–819 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Buckup S. (2008), ‘Global public–private partnerships against neglected diseases: building governance structures for effective outcomes’, Health Economics, Policy and Law, 3: 31–50 - PubMed
    1. DiMasi J. A., Hansen R. W. Grabowski H. G. (2003), ‘The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs’, Journal of Health Economics, 22: 151–185 - PubMed