Off the northwestern coast of mainland Europe, there sits an island with big ambitions for its life sciences sector.
Though small in comparison to competitors like the US and China, the UK is set on punching above its weight in the life sciences commercial ring – which Prime Minister Keir Starmer has previously called “one of the crown jewels of the UK economy”.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Discover B2B Marketing That Performs
Combine business intelligence and editorial excellence to reach engaged professionals across 36 leading media platforms.
However, in recent years, UK-based pharmaceutical trade associations have warned that the UK’s competitive edge may be dulling, as investors are increasingly turning to other nations due to high clawback rates and longer set-up times for clinical trials compared with its European peers.
To address these industry concerns, the current Labour government debuted the Life Sciences Sector Plan. Introduced back in July 2025, the six-point framework is designed to make the UK’s life sciences sector a global leader, behind only China and the US, by 2035. The UK government currently estimates the plan will enhance the value of the UK’s life sciences segment by $41bn.
Alongside these efforts, the UK has introduced several other policies to give its life sciences sector a boost, including reduced clawback rates on innovative medicines and the streamlining of clinical trial setups in the UK through the 10 Year Health Plan. This push also includes schemes aimed at making the National Health Service (NHS) the go-to place for innovation, including the National Healthtech Access Programme (NHAP) and the National Cancer Plan for England.
While experts note that these policies all take the UK in the right direction, they believe that the nation must do more to fully harness its life sciences potential.
Early-stage R&D shines, but commercial translation falls flat
The UK has a long legacy in early-stage medicines R&D, with several blockbuster drugs from big pharma players like AstraZeneca and GSK reaching the market through British-based development programmes. One of the most notable UK R&D successes is Humira (adalimumab), which went on to become one of the best-selling drugs of all time after University of Cambridge spin-out, Cambridge Antibody Technology (CAT), discovered the therapy in the early 1990s.
According to Ros Deegan, CEO of UK-based biotech OMass Therapeutics, the UK is also a great place to start a business. “The science heritage here is hard to surpass,” Deegan says.
Despite her enthusiasm towards the UK as a business base, Deegan notes that Britain’s early-stage strengths do not always translate into commercial benefit. “We often see high-quality science taken out of the UK at the stage where it begins to return capital,” she states.
There is no better example of this than Humira, which came to generate billions for the US economy after the Illinois-based company, AbbVie, secured its approval.
To overcome this challenge, Deegan believes that the government must focus on changing the commercial environment – particularly from a clinical trial perspective. To bring more late-stage studies to the UK, and subsequently more capital to the UK, she believes there needs to be a move towards making Britain a “launch market”, where standard of care (SoC) therapies are routinely prescribed to patients.
Martin Turner, director of policy and external affairs at the UK’s BioIndustry Association, echoed Deegan’s sentiments, adding that capital constraints often lead companies to move to America for commercialisation, or take foreign acquisition deals – thus taking innovation out of the UK. To combat this, Turner notes that there needs to be a stronger emphasis on enacting pension fund policies like the Mansion House Accord, which focus on incentivising pension providers to invest in high-growth British businesses such as biotech or pharma companies.
Turner also stressed the importance of curating a favourable tax environment to incentivise companies to base their manufacturing and commercial operations in the UK.
UK investment landscape in need of a boost
On the long road to the commercial market, biotech companies must contend with several challenges – one of which is the funding landscape.
While the total value of venture financing deals involving British companies increased in 2024 and 2025, the figure significantly lags the capital pulled in by countries like China and the US.
Though the UK may not match its rivals in funding, Dominic O’Regan, business development consultant and early-stage investor at New Mosaic, notes that UK tax initiatives like the Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme (SEIS) are essential in helping investors like him reduce risk and retain interest in British business.
However, to catch up with dominant market forces, O’Regan explains that UK investors and big institutions must increase their risk appetite – particularly further down the line to commercialisation.
Attracting further investment will also require the UK to make itself welcoming to both domestic and foreign players, Turner adds. “We need to make sure prospective companies understand the lay of the land, where they may base their factories and access skills, as well as how they may benefit from government grants and tax incentives,” he comments.
Meanwhile, Annelise Vuidepot, senior VP and chief science and technology officer at British T-cell receptor therapy pioneer, Immunocore, notes that more should be done to support UK-based biotechs at the clinical validation stage, which she calls the “crunch point” where companies are particularly vulnerable to folding.
Vuidepot also applies this thought to the commercialisation stage, as she believes that the UK must improve negotiations around drug accessibility to ensure that medicines reach the patients who need them.
Fostering an innovation culture
As the UK takes steps towards enhancing its life science presence, Deegan notes that the country will need a change in public and government mindset around drug spending to fully realise its commercial potential. In her eyes, the narrative will have to shift away from driving costs down, focusing instead on investing in innovation and “world-class healthcare”.
O’Regan mirrors this point with a medtech example, mentioning that it’s currently challenging for early-stage companies in the space to get their technology to the NHS – primarily due to the service’s poor adoption of novel health tech tools and the silos between specific NHS trusts. This dynamic, O’Regan warns, is causing many medtech companies to go straight to Europe and the US and “not even bother with the UK”. To prevent this, O’Regan says that the NHS must adopt a stronger “culture of innovation”.
When considering how to curate such a culture, all four experts cite immigration as a key factor.
Vuidepot, a French national who originally moved to the UK to take up a role as a postdoctoral research scientist in 1998, believes that a diversity in background, thoughts and ideas is critical to drive innovation forward.
Turner seconds this take, as he says that the continued growth of the British life sciences sector will rely on a quick and efficient immigration system that can attract the necessary talent.
While the UK remains a strong R&D hub, without more substantial changes to make the commercialisation market stronger, the pattern of companies stepping away from Britain at later stages will continue to be an issue for the UK pharma scene.
