26 Jun The evolving global life sciences landscape: Part 1
In a recent conversation, Marsden’s Jonathan Bower sat down with Marek Petecki, Co-Head of Life Sciences at Bristows, to discuss the evolving global life sciences landscape. Their conversation covered China’s rise as a biotech powerhouse, the geopolitical factors influencing cross-border innovation and investment, and the expertise law firms need to support increasingly complex transactions in the sector.
Jonathan Bower: What is the most significant change you expect to see in the life sciences industry over the next five years?
Marek Petecki: It might not be a change as such, but a continuation of a change that’s already started – the increasing dominance of China. Previously one might have thought of China as a place that was excellent at serving the biotech and pharma community. I think in the next five years it will become the country that’s leading the biotech and pharma community. We’re already seeing that in terms of the amount of original research and development that’s going on there and the number of US and European pharma companies that are looking to replenish their pipelines using original science coming out of China.
What will be interesting to see is the extent to which again geopolitical factors come into play there. The best thing for patients is if science and capital can flow freely around the world as it as it has done historically. But with geopolitical issues coming more to the fore, you can conceive of a world in which you have separate pools of capital and perhaps even separate pools of science developing, with regulatory hurdles and barriers between them. What will be very interesting is to see is how and to what extent the connections are made between those separate pools. They will obviously have to be made, and there’s great interest in that happening on all sides, but one can see at the moment a fairly hostile climate, particularly given the current US administration’s stance to China.
Jonathan Bower: I’ve heard people talk about a “brain drain” effect, where tariffs and other policy changes have encouraged some scientists to return to their home countries. To what extent do you think that has contributed to China’s rise and its growing leadership position in the sector?
Marek Petecki: For sure, that would be a contributing factor, and possibly in the longer term also a factor in perhaps the loss of the US’s pre-eminence in research and development, but I think a really important element is the Chinese government’s decision to prioritise original research and development in biotech and pharma.
Because of the way the Chinese state is structured, they’re perfectly placed to make the sort of long-term investment and commitment needed to become a leader in this space, because by its very nature it’s capital, resource, and time-intensive. So, having set their sights on it, I don’t think it’s a surprise that they’re having great success, and as long as it remains a strategic priority I don’t see that changing.
Of course, they’ve had many years to develop a phenomenal research and manufacturing base on the back of a service-led offering to the rest of the world and they are now perfectly placed to develop drugs and bring them to market extremely quickly.
Jonathan Bower: When you’re putting together a deal team, what specific skills or legal specialisms do you look for in the lawyers involved?
Marek Petecki: It depends on the transaction. We aspire to have a really broad and deep bench of lawyers from whom to choose. The other thing we try to do, by being a firm that’s primarily focused on the life sciences and technology sectors, is have people who’ve got experience of particular modalities or products, so that we can be quite specific with the way we assign people to matters. Client continuity is also important, as well as making sure that people have got familiarity with clients, and the right mindset.
We’re seeing increasingly that some clients are very keen to understand how we’re going to use technology in the delivery of their services, for example, AI, and as lawyers some of us are more comfortable working with those tools than others. That can become a factor as well if you’ve got a tech-focused team at the client – making sure that they’re working with people who are equally comfortable with the technology and can deploy it in the way that’s being asked of them.
Part 2 of the conversation can be read here.