On international cost-sharing of pharmaceutical R&D

  • Pedro Pita Barros
  • Xavier Martinez-Giralt


Ramsey pricing has been proposed in the pharmaceutical industry as a principle to price discriminate among markets while allowing to recover the (fixed) R&D cost. However, such analyses neglect the presence of insurance or the fund raising costs for most of drug reimbursement. By incorporating these new elements, we aim at providing some building blocks towards an economic theory incorporating Ramsey pricing and insurance coverage. We show how coinsurance affects the optimal prices to pay for the R&D investment. We also show that under certain conditions, there is no strategic incentive by governments to set coinsurance rates in order to shift the financial burden of R&D. This will have important implications to the application of Ramsey pricing principles to pharmaceutical products across countries.


Ramsey pricing Coinsurance 

JEL Classifications

I11 I18 L51 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adachi T. (2002). A note on third-degree price discrimination with interdependent demands. Journal of Industrial Economics 50: 235 Google Scholar
  2. Adachi T. (2005). Third-degree price discrimination, consumption externalities and social welfare. Economica 72: 171–178 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allgood S. and Snow A. (2006). Marginal welfare costs of taxation with human and physical capital. Economic Inquiry 44: 451–464 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Besley T. (1988). Optimal reimbursement health insurance and the theory of Ramsey taxation. Journal of Health Economics 7: 321–336 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Danzon, P. M. (no date). Parallel trade and comparative pricing of medicines: poor choice for patients?
  6. Danzon P.M. and Towse A. (2003). Differential pricing for pharmaceuticals: Reconciling access, R&D and patents. International Journal of Health Care Finance and Economics 3: 183–205 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diamond P. (1975). A many-person Ramsey tax rule. Journal of Public Economics 4: 335–342 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. DiMasi J.A., Hansen R.W. and Grabowski H.G. (2003). The price of innovation: New estimates of drug development costs. Journal of Health Economics 22: 151–185 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dumonliu J. (2001). Global pricing strategies for innovative essential drugs. International Journal of Biotechnology 3(3–4): 338–349 Google Scholar
  10. Felder S. (2004). Drug price regulation under consumer moral hazard: Two-part tariffs, uniform price, or third-degree price discrimination. European Journal of Health Economics 49: 324–329 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Felder S. (2006). Third-degree price discrimination in the presence of subsidies. German Economic Review 7(4): 419–426 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frank R.G. (2003). Editorial. New estimates of drug development costs. Journal of Health Economics 22: 325–330 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fullerton D. (1991). Reconciling recent estimates of the marginal welfare cost of taxation. American Economic Review 81: 302–308 Google Scholar
  14. Galera F. and Zaratiegui J.M. (2006). Welfare and output in third-degree price discrimination: A note. International Journal of Industrial Organization 24: 605–611 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jack, W., & Lanjouw, J. O. (2003). Financing pharmaceutical innovation: How much should poor countries contribute? Center for Global Development, working paper No. 28.Google Scholar
  16. Love, J. (2001). Policies that ensure access to medicine and promote innovation, with special attention to issues concerning the impact of parallel trade on the competitive sector, and a trade framework to support global R&D on new health inventions. WHO/WTO Joint Secretariat Workshop on Differential Pricing and Financing of Essential Drugs, Hoshjor, Norway.
  17. (2007). Health systems in transition: Template for analysis. WHO Regional Office for Europe on behalf of European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, Copenhagen Google Scholar
  18. Newhouse J. (1993). Free for all? Lessons from the RAND health insurance experiment. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA Google Scholar
  19. Raghavan, C. (2001). Differential pricing for drugs to help people or corporations.
  20. Ringel, J., Hosek, S., Vollaard, B., & Mahnovsky, S. (2005). The elasticity of demand for health care—a review of the literature and its application to the Military Health System, Rand Health report.
  21. Scherer F.M. (2001). The link between gross profitability and the pharmaceutical R&D spending. Health Affairs 20(5): 216–220 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schmalensee R. (1981). Output and welfare implications of monopolistic third-degree price discrimination. American Economic Review 71: 242–247 Google Scholar
  23. Toole A. (2005). The evolving US pharmaceutical research enterprise. Economic Realities in Health Care Policy 4(1): 3–9 Google Scholar
  24. Tufts CSDD. (2003). Post-approval R&D raises total drug development costs to $897 million. Impact Report, 5(3).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculdade de EconomiaUniversidade Nova de LisboaLisboaPortugal
  2. 2.CODE and Departament d’EconomiaUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaBellaterraSpain

Personalised recommendations