Research and Markets: Comparison of Pharma Outsourcing Between China and India
NEW YORK (July 14, 2009) Research and Markets (www.researchandmarkets.com/research/837d77/comparison_of_phar) has announced the addition of the ” Comparison of Pharma Outsourcing between China and India” report to their offering.
It has been well recognized that the global pharmaceutical industry is facing a number of challenges at present. The difficulties the industry is experiencing have forced all drug companies to change their current operation models. They are now forced to pursue more efficient, cost-effective and productive ways to conduct their operations, whether in R&D or manufacturing. The keys for them to make a quick turnaround are to get drugs discovered quicker, developed faster, manufactured cheaper and marketed wider.
Outsourcing has been proven to be one of the effective solutions for drug companies to quickly turn the situation around as it provides them with the desired efficiency, flexibility and agility. Among all emerging countries for outsourcing, China and India have risen rapidly and become stars in the global pharmaceutical outsourcing arena as both countries possess the unique combination of low cost and quality service. The current global financial crisis also greatly enhanced the importance of these two countries to many drug companies around the world that are vigorously seeking cost reduction.
However, China and India each possess their own, unique features and characteristics, not only in the pharmaceutical-related industries but also in almost every aspect of social structure. To many companies that are interested in conducting outsourcing or investment in either country, it is always a challenge to decide which country best fits their investment goals.
The report, ” Comparison of Pharma Outsourcing between China and India,” has conducted so far the most complete and comprehensive comparisons between China and India. It for the first time revealed the similarities and differences between these two countries in a broad range of areas. It also revealed the advantages and disadvantages of each country in pharmaceutical outsourcing and the strengths and shortcomings of their service capabilities. The report also made in-depth comparisons of pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries between China and India including their R&D capabilities for innovative medicines.
The report provides clear insight into the current development states of pharmaceutical outsourcing industries in each country including their market sizes and service capabilities in each technical area. In addition, it provides valuable advices to pharmaceutical and biotech companies that are interested in outsourcing to either country on how to appropriately evaluate each country and decide which one best fits their development goals and outsourcing strategies.
The report is a must-read book to all professionals in the industries of pharmaceutical, biotechnology, financial investment and outsourcing service that are interested in either one of these two countries. It is also a valuable reference book to drug regulatory agencies and other government agencies that are involved in strategic planning for development of pharmaceutical industry in their own countries.
Key Findings of the Report
- In general, China is better equipped in industry infrastructure than India. The Chinese pharmaceutical market is also much bigger than India’s. However, the business operation style and philosophy in Indian companies are closer to the Westerner than in Chinese companies.
Indian companies are also more familiar with the Western regulations than Chinese companies. They also have broader global presences than Chinese companies.
- China is better in education of biology than India. The biotechnology industry in China is also more advanced than in India. However, Indian pharmaceutical companies have invested more in R&D and have a much broader product scope than Chinese companies.
- In the traditional pharmaceutical sector, Chinese companies are still limited to manufacturing of traditional products that are marketed in a limited number of countries. But in the biotech sector, Chinese companies possess much stronger capabilities in R&D and manufacturing of macro compounds than Indian companies.
- In professional outsourcing service, the two countries provide close service scopes and possess close service capabilities. However, there are still differences in each service sector between these two countries. In discovery service, Chinese companies and Indian companies possess close skills and offer similar services and qualities. However, in target identification and validation as well as those related areas such as research in genomics and proteomics, Chinese companies possess stronger service capabilities than Indian companies; whereas in small molecule drug R&D, Indian companies are more capable than Chinese companies.
- In preclinical research service, Chinese CROs possess better service capabilities than Indian CROs; whereas in clinical research service, it is just the opposite. In process R&D and scale-up synthesis, both countries possess similar capabilities. However, Indian companies possess better skills and capabilities than Chinese companies in formulation, manufacturing and marketing of generic drugs.
- Major pharma and biotech companies play different strategies in these two countries. In India, they more tend to form close collaborations such as risk-sharing outsourcing with an Indian company to co-develop drug candidates, but very few of them are willing to permanently set up a decent size of R&D center or manufacturing facility in the country. In stark contrast, almost all major pharma and biotech companies have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in China to establish their wholly owned R&D centers and large-scale manufacturing and marketing facilities. Many of their China R&D centers have already reached decent sizes and gained strong capabilities. They are ready to conduct full-scale research independently.
- The outsourcing models between the Western companies and the Asian companies are also not limited to just straight outsourcing. Rather, it has extended to including all types of activities such as product marketing and drug candidate licensing. Also, any pharma or biotech companies in any of these two countries could become outsourcing partners as long as they possess the desired capabilities.
- The pharma outsourcing industries in both countries have grown rapidly in the recent few years. They are currently valued at about $1.42 B in China and $1.77 B in India, respectively; each occupying only about 2% share in the global pharma outsourcing market. On the other hand, both markets are poised to still grow rapidly in the future as they are driven by a number of positive factors. However, China appears to have higher future growth potential than India as it has fewer growth resistors. It will very likely catch and even surpass India after 2010.
- At present, India is better than China in small molecule drug R&D and manufacturing. But China is superior over India in biotechnologies including the R&D and manufacturing of macro compounds. India offers better product quality but China has more cost reduction advantage. In terms of investment opportunities, China seems to present more attractions than India as its industry infrastructure and biotechnologies are more advanced.
The objective of the comparison between China and India is to provide readers an unbiased depiction of the pharmaceutical outsourcing industry in each country with the emphasis on revealing each country’s strengths, weakness, advantages and disadvantages in outsourcing.
Key Topics Covered
- Chapter 1. China and India: The Two Most Favored Places for Pharma Outsourcing
- Chapter 2. Advantages and Disadvantages of China and India in Pharma Outsourcing: Head-to-Head Comparison of Two Countries
- Chapter 3. Strengths and Shortcomings of China and India in Pharma Outsourcing: Head-to-Head Comparison of Top 50 Best Service Providers of Each Country
- Chapter 4. Which Country Best Fits Your Outsourcing Investment? A Series of Case Studies