There are about 40 diseases of poverty (DoP). Some of the diseases, like malaria, are well known, while other diseases, like fascioliasis, are more obscure. The health policy literature attributes a large proportion of global healthcare inequality to the lack of a profitable market associated with diseases of poverty. Scholars reason that pharmaceutical companies will not develop new medicines to target DoP if they cannot recoup their research and development (R&D) expenses. As a result there is a lack of R&D and medicines for DoP.

To overcome the small market for DoP treatments, many scholars believe that special organizational structures, like public-private partnerships (PPP), are necessary. PPPs can provide research funds, connect companies to government health organizations, participate in manufacturing and assist with distribution and marketing. These efforts can spur new DoP drug development and make the current medicines for DoP more accessible.

One particular area of science that can have a big impact on healthcare is medical applications of nanotechnology (nanomedicine). Nanotechnology is an emerging technology that will improve medicine development because it allows scientists to create targeted delivery systems, ultra sensitive disease detection sensors and better prosthetics. However, as an emerging technology, nanotechnology only has a future if there is a market for the products.

Therefore, there is an interesting intersection between public-private partnerships, nanomedicine and diseases of poverty. According to current academic theory, PPPs can act as the conduit for nanotechnology to address DoP because the PPPs resolve the market failure associated with DoP research. However, no one has studied this relationship.

This presentation gives my results after interviewing managers of health PPPs. I find that there are both are pro-nanotechnology and anti-nanotechnology partnerships. The pro-nanotechnology PPPs believe that nanotechnology can offer solutions for DoPs and scientists should explore this new area for DoP medicines. They are also in favor of more nanomedicine research for DoP and they are actively pursuing projects in this space. The main criticism of the anti-nanomedicine scientists focuses on the cost and regulatory constraints of the technology. They worry that nanomedicines would be too expensive to manufacture for drugs that require a very low price point.