ESG challenges in the healthcare sector

ESG challenges in the healthcare sector

07-12-2016 | インサイト

Biopharmaceutical companies operate in an environment of rising chronic disease, aging populations and an increasing demand from emerging markets. From an investor's point of view, a company's capacity to focus in long term value creation through investing in improving the access to medicine in low- and middle-income countries is a key factor for positively contribute to the development of emerging markets.

  • Peter van der Werf
    Peter
    van der Werf
    Engagement Specialist

Access to medicine

Providing access to high quality medicines is one of the biopharmaceutical industry’s main priorities. These companies have the capability to bring modern medicine to everyone, playing a major role in providing life-saving products for the two billion people that still lack access to them. Due to their expertise in the sector, they are able to strengthen supply chains, support development of healthcare infrastructures, and ensure widespread distribution of their products.

In the recent years drug spending in emerging markets has grown at a faster pace than in North America, Europe and Japan. Therefore, it has become business critical to build a reputation as a positive contributor to the development of emerging markets. The underlying purposes are not only ensuring that their products reach as wide a base of people as possible, but also that they do so efficiently with an eye toward long term value creation for shareholders.

To analyze how the industry evolved in this matter, it is used the information gathered in the Access to Medicine Index (ATMI) reports published in November 2014 and November 2016. It provides a comprehensive overview of the top 20 research-based pharmaceutical companies’ efforts to make medicines, vaccines and diagnostics more accessible in low- and middle-income countries.

サステナビリティに関する最新の「インサイト」を読む
サステナビリティに関する最新の「インサイト」を読む
配信登録

Progress reported in the 2016 ATMI report

Overall, a larger amount of companies have implemented strategies for increasing access to medicine, many of them approaching it as a way of developing business in emerging markets. More than 100 products for high-burden diseases entered the pipeline since 2014, being R&D one of the areas where there is evidence that the industry responds to externally identified needs.

The proportion of collaborative research models for high-priority, low-incentive products increased in the last two years. R&D conducted in partnership includes access plans more often and earlier than in-house R&D, highlighting that collaborative models are an effective mechanism for engaging the biopharmaceutical sector in R&D oriented to the needs of populations in low- and middle-income countries.

Modest improvements were achieved in terms of product deployment. Voluntary licensing have been expanding the last two years, more compounds have been covered by voluntary license agreements, and for the first time moving beyond HIV/AIDS and extending them to hepatitis C. Even though steps are promising, large middle-income countries (MICs) are often excluded from licenses despite the fact that they are home to the majority of the world’s poor. Efforts for moving the product from the pipeline to the patient differ across companies, but a persistent trend of limited registration of new products in countries where they are particularly needed dominates the industry.

Most of the companies analyzed by the ATMI have now engaged in equitable pricing strategies, tailoring prices to different population segments. Although companies are considering affordability for more products than they did in 2014, the proportion of the industry portfolio covered by such pricing strategies remains static at one-third.

Overall performance

The biopharmaceutical industry is very diverse and this is reflected in the way companies approach access to medicine, which access challenges they choose to address and how, and which products they prioritize. Evidence shows the industry is continuing to step up its efforts to improve access to medicine in developing countries. It is analyzed below the performance of biopharmaceutical companies in four key industry-levels:

  • Research & Development. Johnson & Johnson presents one of the largest relevant pipeline, with a significant share of development targeting high-priority product gaps with low commercial incentives. Together with GSK, Novartis, Sanofi, Merck KGaA and AbbVie, these companies account for over half (55%) the total industry pipeline. On top of that, they lead in the field of developing products for the poor, developing almost three quarters (72%) of products targeting high-priority, low-incentive product gaps. In 2014, tropical diseases and maternal and neonatal health were identified by the ATMI as disease areas with least attention. GSK and Novartis reported new projects for both maternal and neonatal health, thus addressing this area of need.
  • Product Deployment. AstraZeneca has done a considerable improvement in terms of product deployment through the implementation of a new affordability-based pricing strategy and expanded it to more products than in 2014. Currently it conducts an in-depth ability-to-pay analysis in certain countries, and it also extensively updates and expands its access strategy. Even though Novo Nordisk have filed to register most of their newest products where they are needed, it has equitable pricing strategies only for a small proportion of its portfolio as well as a small pipeline of products addressed for people in low and middle-income countries.
  • Governance and Compliance. In general all companies have comprehensive compliance systems, yet misconduct continues to some extent. Novartis Access business model shows a preparedness to take calculated risks in reaching more people, while its access management approach is more closely aligned with stakeholder expectations than that of any other company. Roche has strong enforcement processes for ensuring compliance, yet its approach to intellectual property (IP-management) remains static lacking back in product deployment.
  • Capacity Building. AstraZeneca, GSK, Johnson & Johnson, Merck & Co., Inc. and Novartis are key leaders in addressing local needs when engaging in capacity building. For instance, Merck& Co., Inc. has a system for continually improving quality standards in manufacturing, including at 53 third-party manufacturing sites on four continents. Novartis took a comprehensive approach to partnering with in-country research organizations to identify local skills gaps and design partnerships to target identified need, while continuing its innovative, research-based capacity building strategy in two disease-specific areas.

重要事項

当資料は情報提供を目的として、Robeco Institutional Asset Management B.V.が作成した英文資料、もしくはその英文資料をロベコ・ジャパン株式会社が翻訳したものです。資料中の個別の金融商品の売買の勧誘や推奨等を目的とするものではありません。記載された情報は十分信頼できるものであると考えておりますが、その正確性、完全性を保証するものではありません。意見や見通しはあくまで作成日における弊社の判断に基づくものであり、今後予告なしに変更されることがあります。運用状況、市場動向、意見等は、過去の一時点あるいは過去の一定期間についてのものであり、過去の実績は将来の運用成果を保証または示唆するものではありません。また、記載された投資方針・戦略等は全ての投資家の皆様に適合するとは限りません。当資料は法律、税務、会計面での助言の提供を意図するものではありません。

ご契約に際しては、必要に応じ専門家にご相談の上、最終的なご判断はお客様ご自身でなさるようお願い致します。

運用を行う資産の評価額は、組入有価証券等の価格、金融市場の相場や金利等の変動、及び組入有価証券の発行体の財務状況による信用力等の影響を受けて変動します。また、外貨建資産に投資する場合は為替変動の影響も受けます。運用によって生じた損益は、全て投資家の皆様に帰属します。したがって投資元本や一定の運用成果が保証されているものではなく、投資元本を上回る損失を被ることがあります。弊社が行う金融商品取引業に係る手数料または報酬は、締結される契約の種類や契約資産額により異なるため、当資料において記載せず別途ご提示させて頂く場合があります。具体的な手数料または報酬の金額・計算方法につきましては弊社担当者へお問合せください。

当資料及び記載されている情報、商品に関する権利は弊社に帰属します。したがって、弊社の書面による同意なくしてその全部もしくは一部を複製またはその他の方法で配布することはご遠慮ください。

商号等: ロベコ・ジャパン株式会社  金融商品取引業者 関東財務局長(金商)第2780号

加入協会: 一般社団法人 日本投資顧問業協会

本記事に関連するテーマ: