The pharmaceutical industry in Bangladesh is experiencing a pivotal moment. After relying heavily on imports in the 1980s, the sector now fulfills 98 percent of the country’s medicine demands and exports to more than 150 nations. In the fiscal year 2024-25, the industry generated export revenue of $213 million. This success can be attributed largely to the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) waiver from the World Trade Organization (WTO), which permitted the production of generic versions of patented medications.
As Bangladesh prepares to graduate from the Least Developed Country (LDC) status by November 2026, the TRIPS flexibilities and other international exemptions are expected to cease. This transition could potentially restrict the local manufacturing of patented drugs, leading to higher drug costs, particularly for newer treatments, and a decline in export opportunities. Public health initiatives relying on affordable generics may face financial strain. Concurrently, the domestic pharmaceutical sector will be required to adhere to more stringent international regulatory standards, such as those set by the US Food and Drug Administration, European Medicines Agency, and World Health Organization-Good Manufacturing Practices (WHO-GMP), while competing in a more intricate global market. Challenges will be further compounded by gaps in biotechnology, active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) production, and clinical trial infrastructure.
To successfully navigate the post-LDC era, Bangladesh must transition from a model focused on volume-driven generics to one centered around innovation, quality, and global integration. Achieving this shift necessitates enhanced collaboration between the industry and academia. Historically, academic research in the country has been disjointed from industry requirements, with underfunded laboratories, outdated infrastructure, and limited private sector engagement weakening universities’ role as innovation hubs. This disconnect is evident in pharmaceutical education and research, hindered by theoretical research orientations, outdated curricula, and a lack of mechanisms like technology transfer offices. Applied research funding is scarce, and expertise in emerging fields such as biotechnology, regulatory science, and clinical trials is deficient.
Furthermore, many firms shy away from collaboration, prioritizing short-term gains over long-term innovation. Reluctance to invest in joint research, curriculum development, or workforce training, compounded by the absence of structured engagement platforms and concerns over intellectual property, hampers cooperation.
A national strategy addressing these disparities is imperative, accompanied by investments in collaborative research initiatives to propel pharmaceutical innovation and resilience. Tertiary institutions, particularly departments specializing in pharmacy, biochemistry, molecular biology, genetic engineering, biotechnology, microbiology, and health economics, can collaborate with pharmaceutical companies to develop biosimilars and new drug formulations. Industry-supported clinical trials conducted within academic settings can reduce reliance on foreign facilities, lower research and development costs, and expedite product advancement. Incentivizing faculty members to pursue industry-relevant research through consultancy, collaborative grants, and performance-based incentives is crucial.
Moreover, addressing workforce readiness is paramount, as many employers perceive graduates to lack essential skills. Revising university curricula in consultation with pharmaceutical firms to include regulatory science, bioequivalence studies, GMP compliance, data analytics, and advanced manufacturing practices is essential. Internship programs offering real-world industry exposure and faculty-industry exchanges can help align teaching with evolving industry needs.
Establishing centers of excellence (CoEs) dedicated to pharmaceutical innovation is a strategic approach. Modeled after India’s National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), Bangladesh can create CoEs focusing on biotechnology, API manufacturing, clinical research, and regulatory affairs. These centers can reduce dependence on imported APIs and bolster the country’s capacity for globally recognized clinical trials. Sustainable public-private partnerships involving government, academia, and industry are vital for the longevity and financial stability of these centers.
Notably, Bangladesh’s clinical trial infrastructure remains underdeveloped, with existing clinical research organizations grappling with delays in ethical approvals, insufficient qualified staff, and challenges in recruiting volunteers. By investing in accredited research facilities and university-based ethical review boards, Bangladesh can localize clinical research activities. Additionally, industry-sponsored training programs in trial design, regulatory compliance, and data management can enhance research capacity.
Academic institutions must also play a pivotal role in evidence-based policymaking. As Bangladesh adjusts to post-LDC trade and intellectual property requirements, academic entities can evaluate the economic ramifications of patent compliance, propose sustainable pricing models, and aid in devising national strategies. Establishing formal “policy labs” that bring together academics, industry leaders, and regulators can facilitate informed decision-making. Internationally, academic voices can advocate for fair IP policies and targeted support during transitional phases for countries like Bangladesh.
In order to realize these objectives, urgent structural reforms are necessary. Bureaucratic hurdles, mistrust, and misaligned incentives should be replaced with a supportive national framework for industry-academia collaboration. This framework should encompass tax incentives, research and development grants, and co-financing mechanisms for joint initiatives. Empowering universities to commercialize intellectual property and engage