dr. mazzucato. let me start with a question about for innovation comes from. we need first to understand where discoveries come from. one analysis found two thirds of the 21 drugs with the highest therapeutic impact occurred between 1965 and 1992 stand direct to the publicly funded research. you sound in a recent study the truly transformative drugs are based on insights gained are publicly funded research comes something you some right in her testimony. this study found that said saget died the dragon is great that 91% of drug patents are run by the church and the industry says this is evident innovation comes straight from the drug companies. i want you to help us understand the need in these descriptions of where innovation comes from. >> i think they're a number of ex-nations as to why it is the health affairs study might've found that. first of all as i said in my comment, a lot of the key insight such as do so locker is to treat diseases that inspire a whole field of therapeutics are not neces

dr. mazzucato. there's talk about cutting corporate taxes to companies that can trace their profits back to patents or other forms of intellectual property. so i want to know what you think about this sort of innovation box tax cut. would it spur innovation or increase federal investments in research, dr. mazzucato? do you have a point of view about this? >> well, i think it's very important to remember that -- that we remember what a patent is. a patent is a monopoly for 20 years. so as a policymaker the goal should not be to increase the profits of companies it should bo to increase the research that leads to the patents, this is what policymakers are trying to do around the world. the evidence is that these patent box type policies are not very good at that because what they're targeting is the income generated from the patents rather than the research that leads to them. this is also true of lots of r&d tax credits which end up being designed very poorly. in holland they designed one that's inte

dr. mazzucato. >> thank you for inviting me here. this is one of the only topics economists agree about. so it is agreed that spending on r&d which we should remember is one of the inputs into the innovation process have an absolutely very important effect on long run economic growth. but the real issue and that is where we get back into the debates between economists is how do we talk about this and what is the example of the role of the public sector, when it interacts with the private sector in nurturing the innovation of economy and there we have a problem and i think i want to focus on the limited way that economists have talked about this and also limited the way that policymakers have -- have feels enabled or increase the budget whether of the nih, nsf or nasa. and it is not a coincidence that i work at the policy research institute in sussex founded in 1965 because it was the only places that head-on confronted the notion that the economists have the role of the public sector in financing innovation is to fix market failures.

dr. mazzucato received her degree in new york.s the author of the entrepreneurial state debunking public versus private sector myths, which was included in the 2013 book of the year list issued by the financial times. so thanks each of you for being here and for being here and you could each provide some opening remarks and then we will get started with questions. ..