Star scientists and institutional transformation: Patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry

The most productive (“star”) bioscientists had intellectual human capital of extraordinary scientific and pecuniary value for some 10–15 years after Cohen and Boyer’s 1973 founding discovery for biotechnology [Cohen, S., Chang, A., Boyer, H. & Helling, R. (1973) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 70, 3240–3244]. This extraordinary value was due to the union of still scarce knowledge of the new research techniques and genius and vision to apply them in novel, valuable ways. As in other sciences, star bioscientists were very protective of their techniques, ideas, and discoveries in the early years of the revolution, tending to collaborate more within their own institution, which slowed diffusion to other scientists. Close, bench-level working ties between stars and firm scientists were needed to accomplish commercialization of the breakthroughs. Where and when star scientists were actively producing publications is a key predictor of where and when commercial firms began to use biotechnology. The extent of collaboration by a firm’s scientists with stars is a powerful predictor of its success: for an average firm, 5 articles coauthored by an academic star and the firm’s scientists result in about 5 more products in development, 3.5 more products on the market, and 860 more employees. Articles by stars collaborating with or employed by firms have significantly higher rates of citation than other articles by the same or other stars. The U.S. scientific and economic infrastructure has been particularly effective in fostering and commercializing the bioscientific revolution. These results let us see the process by which scientific breakthroughs become economic growth and consider implications for policy.

Long-term change in the organization of inventive activity

Relying on a quantitative analysis of the patenting and assignment behavior of inventors, we highlight the evolution of institutions that encouraged trade in technology and a growing division of labor between those who invented new technologies and those who exploited them commercially over the nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries. At the heart of this change in the organization of inventive activity was a set of familiar developments which had significant consequences for the supply and demand of inventions. On the supply side, the growing complexity and capital intensity of technology raised the amount of human and physical capital required for effective invention, making it increasingly desirable for individuals involved in this activity to specialize. On the demand side, the growing competitiveness of product markets induced firms to purchase or otherwise obtain the rights to technologies developed by others. These increasing incentives to differentiate the task of invention from that of commercializing new technologies depended for their realization upon the development of markets and other types of organizational supports for trade in technology. The evidence suggests that the necessary institutions evolved first in those regions of the country where early patenting activity had already been concentrated. A self-reinforcing process whereby high rates of inventive activity encouraged the evolution of a market for technology, which in turn encouraged greater specialization and productivity at invention as individuals found it increasingly feasible to sell and license their discoveries, appears to have been operating. This market trade in technological information was an important contributor to the achievement of a high level of specialization at invention well before the rise of large-scale research laboratories in the twentieth century.

Relationship between evolutionary rate and cellular location among the Inv/Spa invasion proteins of Salmonella enterica.

For 21 strains of Salmonella enterica, nucleotide sequences were obtained for three invasion genes, spaO, spaP, and spaQ, of the chromosomal inv/spa complex, the products of which form a protein export system required for entry of the bacteria into nonphagocytic host cells. These genes are present in all eight subspecies of the salmonellae, and homologues occur in a variety of other bacteria, including the enteric pathogens Shigella and Yersinia, in which they are plasmid borne. Evolutionary diversification of the invasion genes among the subspecies of S. enterica has been generally similar in pattern and average rate to that of housekeeping genes. However, the range of variation in evolutionary rate among the invasion genes is unusually large, and there is a relationship between the evolutionary rate and cellular location of the invasion proteins, possibly reflecting diversifying selection on exported proteins in adaptation to variable host factors in extracellular environments. The SpaO protein, which is hypervariable in S. enterica and exhibits only 24% sequence identity with its homologues in Shigella and Yersinia, is secreted. In contrast, the membrane-associated proteins SpaP, SpaQ, and InvA are weakly polymorphic and have > 60% sequence identity with the corresponding proteins of other enteric bacteria. Acquisition of the inv/spa genes may have been a key event in the evolution of the salmonellae as pathogens, following which the invention of flagellar phase shifting facilitated niche expansion to include warm-blooded vertebrates.