Yer Biotech Blues - Michael Rosen
U.S. Life Science Clusters: Chicago in the Mix
The real estate brokerage firm of Jones Lang Lasalle at the end of last year published a comprehensive report on global life science clusters. This report, “Life sciences Cluster Report: Global 2011”, analyzes the life science industry around the globe and compiles a number of analyses from different sources such as the NIH, PriceWaterhouseCoopers Moneytree Report on Venture Capital, National Science Foundation, etc., and then produces a ranking of key metro areas. While one can argue with some of the metrics, this report is a very good attempt at looking at the key indicators that make-up a life science cluster including research critical mass, peer-reviewed funding from the government (National Institutes of Health), venture capital, and relevant labor force availability. JLL’s results on the ranking of life science clusters in the U.S. appear to include medical devices, diagnostics and drugs, but not the agriculture component of life sciences.
Leading U.S. Life Science Clusters
While there are certain discrepancies in the measuring characteristics such as city metro areas versus, in some cases, whole states (eg, New York/New Jersey and Florida), this is a good attempt to capture the full life science presence in the U.S. market.
One could also argue that while it does take into account life space in academia and research institutions, it does not include the full commercial life science space in a region.The predominance of California is apparent with L.A. emerging as the 4th largest cluster given the impact of Amgen, the local medical device industry and key academia such as UCLA and USC which has increased their lifescience research capabilities substantially. What is startling is that L.A. ranks just behind San Francisco.
There are other metrics which could have been used and which were not such as: schools of medicine in each location, life science workforce size and capability, and life science company presence (e.g. Chicago has the second largest pharma hub in the U.S. and largest diagnostics hub), but one can hardly argue with key metrics such as NIH funding and venture capital funding. Surprising in this analysis is the presence of Minneapolis ranked 8th ahead of Research Triangle, most likely due to the presence there of Medtronic, St. Jude and 3M, and institutions such as University of Minnesota and Mayo Clinic. Also surprising on the list is Indianapolis, home to Eli Lilly and Roche Diagnostics, and nearby Cook Medical along with Indiana University. California is the clear star of this compilation.
The bad news is that Chicago did not make the top 10 clusters yet has been recognized by the BIO organization as the site for its global conference in 2006, 2010, and the upcoming years of 2013 and 2016. In this analysis, Chicago falls short in venture capital and R&D spend as a % of State GDP. However recent announcements of New Venture Capital Funds as noted in the Crain’s Chicago Business posting on February 1, 2012 “Heavyweights including Pritzker, Mansueto launch tech investment fund” are initiatives to help remedy the venture capital deficit.
