|
In recent years, Denmark has emerged as a major global player in
life science research and commerce. The Scandinavian nation has a
century-old history of developing pharmaceutical companies, an
equally long tradition of conducting clinical trials, and a
decade’s worth of experience in creating biotechnology firms. Add
to that the presence of a handful of authentically global
pharmaceutical companies, most notably Novo Nordisk which
specializes in treatments for diabetes, and it’s clear why the
country has gained its high profile.
Now, the Danish government wants to cement that global position
and even improve it. To expand the country’s appeal to investors
and researchers in the international life science community, the
government has set out a strategy based on the recommendations of
the Globalization Council — a unique public council with five
ministers and representatives from research communities,
universities, industry, unions, employers, and others among its
members. “My vision is a society that gives every individual the
opportunity to make a success of his or her life,” says Prime
Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who chairs the council. “Therefore
my government’s goal is that Denmark becomes a global leader
regarding sustainable economic growth development into knowledge
society and dynamic entrepreneurship.”
  Based on the recommendations of the Globalization Council, the
Danish Government has proposed a strategy that includes more than
300 initiatives, which extend well beyond life science or, indeed,
science as a whole. Life science plays a key role in the strategy. Indeed, Minister of
Science, Technology and Innovation Helge Sander notes that “the
intention is to solidify Denmark’s place on the world stage of
breakthrough research in the life sciences.” The effort will
involve all sectors of Danish life science: universities,
hospitals, and industry. Indeed, the strategy strongly emphasizes
collaboration among those sectors. “To a high degree, challenges
and inspiration come from collaboration with scientists from other
sectors, such as private industry and other types of research
institutions or from interdisciplinary settings,” Sander continues.
“We know that some of the best research environments in Denmark are
also the environments with a high level of external funding and
collaboration with external partners.”
Strong Infrastructure
The government has a strong infrastructure from which it can launch
Denmark’s expanded global presence. The country ranks first in the
world in terms of biotechnology patents per member of the
population, second in Europe in the European Union’s best
performance index of biotechnology innovation, and third in Europe
in the absolute size of its drug development pipeline.
It all started with beer and pork. “The Carlsberg brewery and
laboratory was instrumental in creating a research industry through
microbiology 150 years ago,” explains Lauritz Holm-Nielsen, rector
of the University of Aarhus. “And the industry side of the equation
probably stems from our strong agricultural background. To produce
cheese, you need enzymes. We got into enzymes early and into
insulin because we had a large availability of pork.” Børge
Diderichsen, vice president of corporate research affairs at Novo
Nordisk, agrees. “We developed considerable competencies in
agriculture-related industries,” he says. “You can draw a line from
barley to pigs to insulin and Novo Nordisk.”
Those developments also instilled a culture of collaboration
among Danish life scientists in academe and industry. “The starting
point was strong, creative researchers who saw commercial
opportunities in the medical discoveries being made in the 1920s,”
says Claus Bræstrup, president and CEO of pharmaceutical firm H.
Lundbeck. “At one point, Danish politicians realized the value that
the two sectors comprise together and laid down framework
conditions that allow life science contributions in both the public
and private sectors to continue to develop and grow.” Collaboration
also plays a key role in Denmark’s academic research community.
“There is an established tradition for close relationships between
the basic and clinical sciences,” explains Ralf Hemmingsen, rector
of the University of Copenhagen. “The collaborative closeness
between the basic science and clinical sciences and the industry
and public health/epidemiology part of it has enhanced
multidisciplinary projects.”
Building on the
Foundations
Jens Oddershede, rector of the University of Southern Denmark,
points out another key factor in Denmark’s development of life
science: a long history of precise medical record-keeping. “We’re
very well organized,” he says. “It’s easy to trace our ancestors
and place our genes. That’s important for many studies in life
science and clinical science.”
Building on those 19th and 20th century foundations, modern
Denmark has much to offer the world of life science. “The most
important thing is the high educational level in Denmark,” says
Henrik Ditzel, professor and center coordinator of the Medical
Biotechnology Center (MBC), part of the University of Southern
Denmark and associated with Odense University Hospital. “Although
Danes pretend to be very relaxed, they are very ambitious.”
Elisabeth Manford, director of Denmark’s national investment
promotional agency Invest in Denmark, agrees. “Great emphasis is
placed on lifelong education and the general education system
enjoys high priority,” she says. “The result is a well-educated
population with a high proportion of university graduates. Every
year we turn out 400 Ph.D.s and 5,500 Master’s graduates with life
science–related degrees.”
The collaborative ambience helps. “It is critically important,”
says Torben Greve, pro-rector for research at The Royal Veterinary
and Agricultural University. “Training of young scientists is
highly facilitated through such collaboration.” It has also led to
success in business. “There is very close collaboration between the
industry and academic institutions, through economic contributions,
joint projects, research academies, training of students in
industry, and consulting boards,” says Tore Duvold, vice president
for drug discovery at LEO Pharma. “Several collaborations have
resulted in the establishment of new companies based on innovative
concepts.”
The small size of both the country and its population (of
roughly 5.5 million) also contributes to its strength in life
science. “Everybody knows everybody in a small country like
Denmark,” says Kristian Stubkjær, dean of research at the Technical
University of Denmark (DTU). “It’s easier to organize
collaborations.”
Concentration of Institutions
Collaborations also benefit from the concentration of research
institutions. “Here in the Copenhagen region we have the medical
school, the Pharmaceutical University, the Royal Veterinary School,
and the Technical University. That’s a very prosperous group within
a six mile radius,” Hemmingsen says. Manford makes a similar point
in a larger context. “In an area no bigger than Silicon Valley we
have eight leading universities, six university hospitals, more
than 140 biotech companies, and 18,000 people working in the
industry,” she says.
The collaborative instinct extends across national borders. A
six-year-old bridge over the Øresund, the stretch of water between
Denmark and Sweden, links universities, research institutions, and
life science companies in greater Copenhagen and their southern
Swedish counterparts in Malmö and Lund. The result is the Medicon
Valley, a hub of life science that rivals conglomerations in other
parts of Europe.
The University of Aarhus’s Holm-Nielsen points out another
advantage of Danish geography. “Being small and agile, we can catch
up relatively quickly – even if we start a little behind larger
countries,” he says.
Corporate governance has also helped to guarantee the prosperity
of Danish life science. “We have a system in which some companies
are protected by foundation structures, so that they can’t be taken
over,” Diderichsen explains. “So we have been able to maintain a
strong national research base in the life science industry while in
Sweden almost all the well known pharmaceutical companies have
disappeared or been merged.”
The government has also played its part. In 2000, a new law gave
Danish universities ownership of their researchers’ inventions,
thereby facilitating the universities’ ability to make licensing
deals with industry. As a result, Denmark has become an excellent
country in which to do life science business – a fact that overseas
firms have begun to recognize. “A strong position in R&D,
together with a dynamic business environment and excellent
framework conditions are contributing factors to why international
companies like GE Healthcare, Johnson & Johnson, Procter &
Gamble, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Aeras, Ferring, and Biogen IDEC
have chosen to set up R&D centers or production facilities in
Denmark,” Manford says.
Present and Future Initiatives
Science, Technology and Innovation Minister Sander sums up the
current situation. “Over the last few years, a range of initiatives
has been taken to improve the framework for life science. They
include strategic research programs in biotechnology, incubators,
and new science parks,” he says. “We have a modern R&D
framework, with new legislation governing the universities. This
has given the universities more freedom with regard to
self-governance. More emphasis has been placed on strategic
research with the establishment of a specific research council for
strategic results as well as the establishment of a national
high-technology foundation.”
 Given all those advantages, why does the government want to
create a new global strategy? “International competition within
R&D is getting strong and stronger,” Sander says. “If we’re not
constantly seeking to improve our international standing in
R&D, we may well fall behind. We must not get complacent and
believe that our life science, as well as other fields, will
continue to be successful.” The strategy has a business objective
as well. “Denmark consistently ranks among the best business
environments in the world,” Prime Minister Rasmussen explains. “But
because of our small size, this fact is not very well known in the
international community. Consequently, during the next few years we
will increase our efforts to inform about the superior business
opportunities offered to foreign investors in Denmark.”
The government has proposed the strategy to do just that. “It is
not only within R&D we are drawing up a globalization
strategy,” Sander explains. “Primary education must be improved;
teachers’ qualifications must be improved. Further education,
R&D, and innovation are all areas where the government has a
set of strategic initiatives to face the challenges of
globalization. But it is of major importance that we are placing
quality at the top of the agenda.”
Four Segments of Strategy
Four segments of the proposed strategy have particular relevance to
life science:
-
By 2010, public funding for R&D will amount to 1 percent of
GDP, in contrast to the present figure of 0.75 percent. And
overall, public and private funding of R&D will reach 3 percent
of GDP. This implies substantial growth, achieved largely through
the internationalization of Danish science.
-
The model for funding academic research will undergo a
significant change. The government will base its allocation of
funds for basic research in universities on an overall evaluation
of the level of quality and the goals presented in the development
contracts. Universities will be assessed on their teaching,
research, and knowledge proliferation. Those institutions that do
best in the evaluation by international experts will receive
relatively more funding.
-
By 2010 at the latest, the government will base half of its
support for research on open competition, as opposed to earmarks
for specific institutions. Today, winners of open competition
receive just one-third of the share of public R&D
expenditure.
-
The numbers of Ph.D. scholarships and industrial Ph.D.s will
double. Ph.D. scholarships in natural sciences, technical sciences,
and health sciences will gain particular benefit from this segment
of the strategy.
The strategy focuses on scientists of the future as well as the
present. “The government wants to improve the general international
outlook and understanding among students in Denmark,” Sander says.
“Danish students will be encouraged to take parts of their
education abroad and the Danish educational system will be made
more attractive to international students. These initiatives are
part of the government’s aim to ensure that new generations of the
Danish work force are better prepared to face the challenges of
globalization. But it should certainly also make them more
attractive to employment in international companies within
Denmark.”
Rasmussen summarizes the strategy’s goals. “We will implement
methods in order to better utilize and transform R&D into new
commercial technologies, products, and services,” he says. “We will
strive to create the best business environment in the world so that
entrepreneurs can grow and compete.”
Denmark’s life scientists have welcomed the strategy. But they
have one small concern. “There’s enormous encouragement for us to
do industrial-style applied research, which might take away from
basic research over the long term,” MBC’s Ditzel warns. According
to Stubkjær of DTU, industry echoes that sentiment. “The life
science/pharmaceutical industry wants universities to do basic
research, not to move into applications,” he declares.
Setting Up the Framework
Having announced its strategy for globalization, the government has
begun to organize a framework that will enable it to flourish. That
will involve extensive collaboration in the life science sector.
“Different organizations, institutions, and companies will be
collaborating on the implementation of specific initiatives,”
Sander says. “This could apply to the development of educational
projects or formal traineeships in private companies. The Danish
life science sector could play a major role with regard to this.”
As it happens, most academic and industrial life science
organizations have already started to set up collaborative projects
and to look overseas for ideas and staff. A typical example is the
work of the Danish Research Coordination Committee. “It is an
attempt to put all important partners in research – the research
councils, universities, and national laboratories – on the same
committee,” says the University of Southern Denmark’s Oddershede,
who formerly chaired the institution. “The idea is that those who
give out the money and those who get it are presented with the same
facts, so that we can design programs that will benefit both
parties. The committee also has the main responsibility for funding
graduate education. That’s an excellent tool in directing
research.”
The life science industry now plays a major part in encouraging
academic research. One scheme involves government contributions as
well. “The Danish government is supporting 70 new industrial Ph.D.
fellowships per year,” Novo Nordisk’s Diderichsen says. “The
company pays approximately half and the government half, and the
Ph.D. students work both in a company and a university and are
jointly supervised by scientists from both parties. This very
successful program is also open to foreign Ph.D. students.”
Lundbeck’s Bræstrup outlines the advantages of that scheme. “It
builds bridges between industry and academia,” he explains. “The
Ph.D. students gain a broader understanding of their own
opportunities and those of their profession, and program graduates
are extremely well qualified as workers and bridge builders in both
worlds.”
Greve of The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University points
out that the programs have already begun to yield results. “These
are seen in a number of publications, and in the increasing amount
of patents of which universities have part ownership,” he says.
Corporate Contributions
Individual firms make their own contributions to the support of
academic research in the homeland and to spreading the word about
Danish life science throughout the world. “We have major research
and training collaborations with about 27 universities, hospitals,
and research institutions globally, about half of them Danish
institutions,” Novo Nordisk’s Diderichsen says. “These agreements
are important because they mean money for the collaborating
institutions and transfer of knowledge in both directions. This is
also a joint confidence-building effort.”
LEO Pharma has sponsored an incubator concept that helps
individual scientists and university groups to develop promising
research leads for therapeutic use. “We shared our knowledge and
experience in drug development and gave the valuable consultancy
needed to take the concepts further,” Duvold says. In addition, he
continues, “We regularly give economic support from our research
foundation to fundamental research. We primarily focus on young and
promising talents that are about to establish a group, a concept,
or facilities. We also have direct collaborations in which we work
actively with academic groups on developing new pharmacological
models, elucidating biological mechanisms, and targeting proteins,
technologies, or compounds with therapeutic potential.”
Lundbeck owes its very existence to collaborative technology
transfer and its continuing growth to an international outlook.
“The company we see today was founded and created against a
backdrop of a research discovery of a new medical product,”
Bræstrup recalls. “The discovery was put into practice, and has
since resulted in growth and many jobs in Denmark – and also
abroad. And it has laid the groundwork for our ability to continue
our research and to develop new drugs to treat diseases of the
central nervous system. We are also active participants in the
development of the local research environment. For example, we are
active board members for the various universities.”
Changing Attitudes
Academics’ attitudes to collaborating with industry have shifted
significantly in recent years. “There has been a big change in
perception,” MBC’s Ditzel says. “University research used to be
very separate from industry. Now, scientists have realized that
they can benefit a lot from collaboration. Basically all the
professors in my place have collaborations.”
The University of Copenhagen has taken the initiative in working
with industry. “We have increased our efforts in technology
transfer services for researchers over the last five years,”
Hemmingsen reports. “We have, for example, established some
industry professorships funded by the industry and appointed by the
university, with a 50-50 time share between the firm and the
faculty. Such professorships serve as paradigms for young
researchers so they don’t feel that, once they go into industry,
they can’t come back.”
Universities have also started to set up formal academic
collaborations. “There are current strong efforts to create synergy
between our university, which is focused on food, and other Danish
institutions focused on pharma and drugs,” Greve says. “In fact we
have just created a Danish Pharma Consortium, and we are trying to
get a European technology platform in this field into the
Copenhagen area.” In addition to Greve’s veterinary university, the
consortium includes the University of Copenhagen, the
Pharmaceutical University, and the Technical University. “Our
consortium will collaborate with other organizations, such as
research institutes, research hospitals, and the pharma industry,”
says DTU’s Stubkjær.
The University of Copenhagen has taken a step further, by
joining a worldwide Alliance of Research Universities. “It was
inaugurated in January 2006,” Hemmingsen says. “It includes strong
institutions in the United States, such as Berkeley and Yale, as
well as Oxford and Cambridge in the United Kingdom. We’ll hopefully
get exchanges of a few students, and some collaborations involving
medical scientists.”
International Announcements
Danish universities also have active efforts to recruit life
science faculty members and graduate students from overseas.
“Recruiting professors from abroad is taken very seriously by our
university,” Greve says. “All positions are announced
internationally, and we try very hard to convince applicants that
our university and Denmark represent the best place to stay.”
Part of the recruitment process involves making academic
institutions comfortable for individuals from different scientific
cultures. Ditzel, who moved from the Scripps Research Institute in
the United States, helped to set up the University of Southern
Denmark’s Medical Biotechnology Center with an American-style
organization in which several professors head their own large
research groups. “It was a very inspiring idea to have a fresh
start with seven professors starting at the same time,” he recalls.
The MBC faculty team has a strong international flavor, with
professors from Canada and Germany, as well as Denmark and the
United States.
 Since English has become the de facto lingua franca of life
science, Danish universities use the language as a powerful
stimulus for overseas recruitment. “All our meetings are in
English,” Ditzel says. “And our e-mails to each other are in
English. We also have interest in helping people to adapt to the
country. But you can get around without speaking the native
tongue.”
Other universities take a similar line. “We have recently
negotiated an agreement with the government that includes more
courses and whole degrees that can be taken in English,” the
University of Copenhagen’s Hemmingsen says. “We are announcing
positions for professors and postdocs in English and often in the
international journals.”
Traction for English
The trend to teaching in English has the greatest traction at the
graduate level. “The language is Danish at the undergraduate level,
although we have some programs in English and we do everything we
can to make the framework comfortable for foreign students,”
Holm-Nielsen of the University of Aarhus says. “At the graduate
level, language is not an issue. We use the English language and
original literature. We also have Danish language courses and good
programs for spouses.” At DTU, Stubkjær adds, “Most of our courses
at the Master’s level are given in English. In most of our
departments the working language is English.” Much the same is true
of the University of Southern Denmark, which has faculty members
from several European countries, Australia, former nations of the
Soviet Union, and the United States. “We have offered a range of
Master’s programs in life science and other areas in English,”
Oddershede says. “The Ph.D. program ties up with the Master’s
program in English.”
Some institutions offer a little extra help to acclimate newly
arrived faculty to the mores of Danish science. “We have a two-year
support scheme for new professors that provides direct economic
support for their research until they get used to the Danish system
of research councils,” Stubkjær notes. That type of assistance
complements a government incentive announced recently that charges
foreign scientists tax at a rate of 25 percent of income – rather
than the usual 55 percent to 60 percent – during their first three
years in Denmark.
Those efforts, combined with the government’s new strategy,
promise to keep Denmark high in the global league of life science.
“In the years to come, we will see the results of a range of life
science initiatives,” Minister Sander says. “In the Copenhagen
area, a major bio-center is presently under construction. This
center will include industry and academia, a science park, and
world-class science environments. And the new, national
high-technology foundation is to have a specific focus on
biotechnology. I see a variety of potential for growth within
Danish life science that could lead to world-class science within
academia as well as industry.”
A former science editor ofNewsweek,Peter Gwynne (
pgwynne767@aol.com ) covers
science and technology from his base on Cape Cod, Massachusetts,
U.S.A.
DOI: 10.1126/science.opms.r0600008
|