How to shorten the market entry innovation in a highly regulated market. The case of Early access programs in the pharmaceutical industry

[EN] Government regulation impacts deeply on the innovation process. Regulatory frameworks influence firms' innovativeness. This study aims to provide an exploratory investigation of Early Access programs as a tool to shorten the time to place innovation in highly regulated markets. Thus, our research question is: How do institutional actors push the entry of innovation in highly regulated markets? To address the research question, a qualitative analysis was conducted using the multiple case study method among different countries. The analysis practised an inductive approach. The results provide an inductive conceptual framework to identify different configurations of Early Access programs based on three characterizing dimensions: (1) authorities involved, (2) eligibility criteria and (3) applicant. This study provides implications for both theory and practice. Future research will be needed to investigate the emerging aspects further and make the model generalisable.Schiavone, F.; Bastone, A.; Carli, MR.; Juárez Varón, D. (2023). How to shorten the market entry innovation in a highly regulated market. The case of Early access programs in the pharmaceutical industry. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-023-00893-y121Adams, R., Bessant, J., & Phelps, R. (2006). Innovation management measurement: A review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8(1), 21–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2006.00119.xAday, S., & Aday, M. S. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 on the food supply chain. Food Quality and Safety, 4(4), 167–180. https://doi.org/10.1093/fqsafe/fyaa024Aldieri, L., Bruno, B., Senatore, L., & Vinci, C. P. (2020). The future of pharmaceuticals industry within the triad: The role of knowledge spillovers in the innovation process. Futures, 122, 102600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2020.102600Amable, B., Ledezma, I., & Robin, S. (2016). Product market regulation, innovation, and productivity. Research Policy, 45(10), 2087–2104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.08.003Apolone, G., Ardizzoni, A., Buzzetti, G., Clerico, M. A., Conte, P., de Braud, F., ... & Scroccaro, G. (2019). Early access in oncology: why is it needed? Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment, 2019, 2284240319857072. https://doi.org/10.1177/2284240319857072Bansal, P., Smith, W. K., & Vaara, E. (2018). New ways of seeing through qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 61(4), 1189–1195. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2018.4004Baregheh, A., Rowley, J., & Sambrook, S. (2009). Towards a multidisciplinary definition of innovation. Management Decision. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740910984578Berger, J. (2019). Signaling can increase consumers' willingness to pay for green products. Theoretical model and experimental evidence. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 18(3), 233–246. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1760Bettinazzi, E. L., & Zollo, M. (2017). Stakeholder orientation and acquisition performance. Strategic Management Journal, 38(12), 2465–2485. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2672Blind, K. (2016). The impact of regulation on innovation. In Handbook of innovation policy impact (pp. 450–482). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784711856.00022Blind, K., Petersen, S. S., & Riillo, C. A. (2017). The impact of standards and regulation on innovation in uncertain markets. Research Policy, 46(1), 249–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.11.003Bonnafous-Boucher, M., & Rendtorff, J. D. (2016). Stakeholder theory: A model for strategic management. Springer. ISBN: 978-3-319-44356-0.Bossle, M. B., de Barcellos, M. D., Vieira, L. M., & Sauvée, L. (2016). The drivers for adoption of eco-innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 113, 861–872.Branstad, A., & Solem, B. A. (2020). Emerging theories of consumer-driven market innovation, adoption, and diffusion: A selective review of consumer-oriented studies. Journal of Business Research, 116, 561–571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.01.028Brem, A., Viardot, E., & Nylund, P. A. (2021). Implications of the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak for innovation: Which technologies will improve our lives? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 163, 120451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120451Carayannis, E. G., Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D. F., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2018). The ecosystem as helix: An exploratory theory-building study of regional co-opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as Quadruple/Quintuple Helix Innovation Models. R&D Management, 48(1), 148–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12300Cavaleri, M., Enzmann, H., Straus, S., & Cooke, E. (2021). The European Medicines Agency’s EU conditional marketing authorisations for COVID-19 vaccines. The Lancet, 397(10272), 355–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00085-4Cobelli, N., & Chiarini, A. (2020). Improving customer satisfaction and loyalty through mHealth service digitalization: New challenges for Italian pharmacists. The TQM Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-10-2019-0252Costa, E., & Magrini, N. (2022). Verso un modello integrato di sviluppo, approvazione e accesso dei farmaci per malattie rare in Europa. Recenti Progressi in Medicina, 113(7), 407–410. https://doi.org/10.1701/3850.38333Deloitte. (2016). Innovation mining Australia 2016. Retrieved from https://www.deloitte.com/au/en/pages/energy-and-resources/articles/innovation-mining.htmlDing, Z., Wang, Y., & Zou, P. X. (2016). An agent based environmental impact assessment of building demolition waste management: Conventional versus green management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 133, 1136–1153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.054Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and mplications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.Donbesuur, F., Ampong, G. O. A., Owusu-Yirenkyi, D., & Chu, I. (2020). Technological innovation, organisational innovation and international performance of SMEs: The moderating role of domestic institutional environment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 161, 120252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120252Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308385Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24160888Elias, A. A. (2016). Analysing the stakes of stakeholders in research and development project management: A systems approach. R&D Management, 46(4), 749–760. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12122Elton, J., & O'Riordan, A. (2016). Healthcare disrupted: Next generation business models and strategies. John Wiley & Sons.FARMINDUSTRIA. (2022). Gli indicatori farmaceutici. Retrieved December 2022, from https://www.farmindustria.it/app/uploads/2022/07/IndicatoriFarmaceutici2022.pdfFerreira, A., & Sandner, P. (2021). Eu search for regulatory answers to crypto assets and their place in the financial markets’ infrastructure. Computer Law & Security Review, 43, 105632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2021.105632Fliaster, A., & Kolloch, M. (2017). Implementation of green innovations–The impact of stakeholders and their network relations. R&D Management, 47(5), 689–700. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12257Frishammar, J., Richtnér, A., Brattström, A., Magnusson, M., & Björk, J. (2019). Opportunities and challenges in the new innovation landscape: Implications for innovation auditing and innovation management. European Management Journal, 37(2), 151–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2018.05.002Garousi Mokhtarzadeh, N., Amoozad Mahdiraji, H., Jafarpanah, I., Jafari-Sadeghi, V., & Cardinali, S. (2020). Investigating the impact of networking capability on firm innovation performance: Using the resource-action-performance framework. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 21(6), 1009–1034. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-01-2020-0005Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31.Goffin, K., & Mitchell, R. (2017). Innovation management. Red Globe Press.Gopal, G., Suter-Crazzolara, C., Toldo, L., & Eberhardt, W. (2019). Digital transformation in healthcare–architectures of present and future information technologies. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM), 57(3), 328–335. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2018-0658Greenwood, R., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.20785498Greif, A., & Kingston, C. (2011). Institutions: rules or equilibria? In Political economy of institutions, democracy and voting (pp. 13–43). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.Gruenhagen, J. H., & Parker, R. (2020). Factors driving or impeding the diffusion and adoption of innovation in mining: A systematic review of the literature. Resources Policy, 65, 101540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101540Hashai, N., & Markovich, S. (2017). Market entry by high technology startups: The effect of competition level and startup innovativeness. Strategy Science, 2(3), 141–160. https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2017.0033Hashmi, R., & Alam, K. (2019). Dynamic relationship among environmental regulation, innovation, CO2 emissions, population, and economic growth in OECD countries: A panel investigation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 231, 1100–1109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.325Hörisch, J., Schaltegger, S., & Freeman, R. E. (2020). Integrating stakeholder theory and sustainability accounting: A conceptual synthesis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 275, 124097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124097Jakhar, S. K., Mangla, S. K., Luthra, S., & Kusi-Sarpong, S. (2019). When stakeholder pressure drives the circular economy: Measuring the mediating role of innovation capabilities. Management Decision, 57(4), 904–920. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-09-2018-0990Jin, W., Zhang, H. Q., Liu, S. S., & Zhang, H. B. (2019). Technological innovation, environmental regulation, and green total factor efficiency of industrial water resources. Journal of Cleaner Production, pp. 211, 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.172Jommi, C., Apolone, G., Cicchetti, A., Conte, P., Fattore, G., Mantoan, D., ... & Buzzetti11, G. (2019). Prezzo, rimborso e accesso ai farmaci in Italia: le proposte di riforma di quattro panel di esperti. Politiche Sanitarie, 20, 168–79. https://doi.org/10.1706/3289.32610Jommi, C., Armeni, P., Costa, F., Alberti, C., Bandello, F., Bordonaro, R., ... & Villa, F. (2021). Early access programs and managed entry agreements for medicines in Italy: results of a Focus Group (Early Access Programs and Managed Entry Agreement). Recenti Progressi in Medicina, 112(11), 749–756. https://doi.org/10.1701/3696.36853Länsisalmi, H., Kivimäki, M., Aalto, P., & Ruoranen, R. (2006). Innovation in healthcare: A systematic review of recent research. Nursing Science Quarterly, 19(1), 66–72.Lee, M. T., & Raschke, R. L. (2020). Innovative sustainability and stakeholders’ shared understanding: The secret sauce to “performance with a purpose.” Journal of Business Research, 108, 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.020Lee, R. (1998). What is an exchange? Automation, management, and regulation of financial markets. OUP Oxford.Leite, H., Lindsay, C., & Kumar, M. (2020). COVID-19 outbreak: Implications on healthcare operations. The TQM Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-05-2020-0111Lin, D., Bezemer, C. P., & Hassan, A. E. (2018). An empirical study of early access games on the Steam platform. Empirical Software Engineering, 23, 771–799. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-017-9531-3Löblová, O., Csanádi, M., Ozierański, P., Kaló, Z., King, L., & McKee, M. (2019). Alternative access schemes for pharmaceuticals in Europe: Towards an emerging typology. Health Policy, 123(7), 630–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.05.012Luthra, S., Garg, D., & Haleem, A. (2016). The impacts of critical success factors for implementing green supply chain management towards sustainability: An empirical investigation of Indian automobile industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 121, 142–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.095Magistretti, S., Allo, L., Verganti, R., Dell’Era, C., & Reutter, F. (2021). The microfoundations of design sprint: How Johnson & Johnson cultivates innovation in a highly regulated market. Journal of Knowledge Management, 25(11), 88–104. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-09-2020-0687Mariani, M. M., & Wamba, S. F. (2020). Exploring how consumer goods companies innovate in the digital age: The role of big data analytics companies. Journal of Business Research, 121, 338–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.012Marino, M., Parrotta, P., & Valletta, G. (2019). Electricity (de) regulation and innovation. Research Policy, 48(3), 748–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.11.005Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P., Tyge Payne, G., Tucci, C., Filatotchev, I., Kotha, R., & Gedajlovic, E. (2019). The who, where, what, how and when of market entry. Journal of Management Studies, 56(7), 1241–1259. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12448McGahan, A. M. (2021). Integrating insights from the resource-based view of the firm into the new stakeholder theory. Journal of Management, 47(7), 1734–1756. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320987282Mohan, S. (2020). Private standards and producer risk: A framework for analysis of development implications. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 47(2), 403–437. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbz005Mukundhan, K. V., & Nandakumar, M. K. (2016). Stakeholder influences on the choice and performance of FDI-based market entry modes: A conceptual model. International Studies of Management & Organization, 46(1), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2015.1007017Najafi-Tavani, S., Najafi-Tavani, Z., Naudé, P., Oghazi, P., & Zeynaloo, E. (2018). How collaborative innovation networks affect new product performance: Product innovation capability, process innovation capability, and absorptive capacity. Industrial Marketing Management, 73, 193–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.02.009Newton, M., Scott, K., & Troein, P. (2022). EFPIA Patients WAIT Indicator 2021 Survey. WAIT (Waiting to Access Innov Ther Surv Indic 2020) 2021, 51. https://www.efpia.eu/media/602652/efpia-patient-wait-indicator-final-250521.pdf. Accessed March 23, 2022.OECD, OECD Staff, & Development (OECD) Staff. (1997). The OECD Report on Regulatory Reform: Sectoral Studies (Vol. 1). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Paolone, F., Cucari, N., Wu, J., & Tiscini, R. (2022). How do ESG pillars impact firms’ marketing performance? A configurational analysis in the pharmaceutical sector. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-07-2020-0356Parente, R., Rong, K., Geleilate, J. M. G., & Misati, E. (2019). Adapting and sustaining operations in weak institutional environments: A business ecosystem assessment of a Chinese MNE in Central Africa. Journal of International Business Studies, 50, 275–291. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-018-0179-zSantoro, G., Bertoldi, B., Giachino, C., & Candelo, E. (2020). Exploring the relationship between entrepreneurial resilience and success: The moderating role of stakeholders’ engagement. Journal of Business Research, 119, 142–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.11.052Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research Methods for Business Students Fourth Edition.Schiavone, F., & Simoni, M. (2019). Strategic marketing approaches for the diffusion of innovation in highly regulated industrial markets: The value of market access. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 34(7), 1606–1618. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-08-2018-0232Schneider, T., & Sachs, S. (2017). The impact of stakeholder identities on value creation in issue-based stakeholder networks. Journal of Business Ethics, 144, 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2845-4Storbacka, K. (2019). Actor engagement, value creation and market innovation. Industrial Marketing Management, 80, 4–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.04.007Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331Sultana, J., Addis, A., Braga, M., Campomori, A., Capuano, A., Corrao, G., ... & Trifirò, G. (2020). What can real-world evidence contribute to regulatory science in pre-and post-marketing setting. Pharmadvances, 2(2), 51–8. https://doi.org/10.36118/pharmadvances.02.2020.02Thomas, V. J., & Maine, E. (2019). Market entry strategies for electric vehicle start-ups in the automotive industry–Lessons from Tesla Motors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 235, 653–663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.284Tomino C., De Lorenzo F., Prada M., Gori S., Pinto C. (2017). 9° Rapporto sulla condizione assistenziale dei malati oncologici I tempi di accesso ai farmaci oncologici: dall’EMA al malato a cura.van de Bovenkamp, H. M., Stoopendaal, A., van Bochove, M., & Bal, R. (2020). Tackling the problem of regulatory pressure in Dutch elderly care: The need for recoupling to establish functional rules. Health Policy, 124(3), 275–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.12.017Vargo, S. L., Akaka, M. A., & Wieland, H. (2020). Rethinking the process of diffusion in innovation: A service-ecosystems and institutional perspective. Journal of Business Research, 116, 526–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.01.038Villa, F., Tutone, M., Altamura, G., Antignani, S., Cangini, A., Fortino, I., ... & Jommi, C. (2019). Determinants of price negotiations for new drugs. The experience of the Italian Medicines Agency. Health Policy, 123(6), 595–600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.03.009Wang, C., & Hu, Q. (2020). Knowledge sharing in supply chain networks: Effects of collaborative innovation activities and capability on innovation performance. Technovation, 94, 102010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2017.12.002Woodward, R. T., & Kaiser, R. A. (2002). Market structures for US water quality trading. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 24(2), 366–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/1349766Yin, R. K. (1994). Discovering the future of the case study. Method in Evaluation Research. Evaluation Practice, 15(3), 283–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/109821409401500309Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5). Sage.Yin, R. K. (2013). Validity and generalization in future case study evaluations. Evaluation, 19(3), 321–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389013497081Yin, R. K. (2017). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. Sage publications, Thousand Oaks. https://doi.org/10.33524/cjar.v14i1.73Yu, X., & Li, Y. (2020). Effect of environmental regulation policy tools on the quality of foreign direct investment: An empirical study of China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 270, 122346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.12234

Gender vs Clothing

<p>Gender of subjects of Lab 2 Ecology Lab and whether or not they were wearing hoodies.</p

Blockchain&Health

Il report Blockchain e Health è frutto della collaborazione fra l’Italian Blockchain National Observatory (IBNO- Università degli studi di Napoli Federico II) e Il laboratorio VIMASS-Università degli Studi di Napoli Parthenope. Il mercato della sanità digitale in Italia valeva circa 3 miliardi di euro nel 2020 e si prevede raggiunga i 4 mld entro il 2024. Tale sviluppo si inserisce nell’ambito di un piano di investimenti per il quinquennio 2021-2026 che impatterà direttamente sul mercato italiano della salute digitale per circa 10 miliardi di euro con l'obiettivo di promuovere lo sviluppo di un ecosistema che spinga alla trasformazione digitale. La tecnologia blockchain può rappresentare un innovativo strumento che permette di affrontare e superare le sfide poste dalla digitalizzazione del sistema sanitario. Basandosi su un registro distribuito, condiviso, non modificabile, accessibile simultaneamente, e architetturalmente decentralizzato, la Blockchain rende i dati disponibili “real-time” e, in ottica di cyber security, sicuri da manipolazioni. Come sottolinea Corrado Cuccurullo, Prof. Ordinario di Economia Aziendale, Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli e ex-Presidente di SoReSa S.p.A, che ha curato la presentazione del Report. “Tra le diverse questioni che potrebbero sollevarsi sul tema declinato in sanità, due, [...] hanno maggiore rilevanza. La prima riguarda la [...] transizione digitale in sanità. [...] La blockchain potrebbe essere la soluzione appropriata per risolvere questi problemi, accelerando la corsa tecnologica nel settore sanitario. [...] La seconda questione generale riguarda l’empowerment del paziente. [...], i sistemi basati su blockchain possono offrire [...], maggiore sicurezza dei dati e, [...] una più salda data ownership.” Il presente report offre un’analisi approfondita sullo stato dell’arte dell’implementazione della blockchain nel settore dell’healthcare, analizzato e arricchito dallo studio di 32 casi aziendali nazionali e internazionali selezionati in funzione della loro maturità tecnologica e della presenza di evidenze significative in relazione agli aspetti economici, relazionali e/o di processo. La digitalizzazione introduce importanti vantaggi non soltanto in riferimento alla relazione medico-paziente, ma anche in termini di maggiore coordinamento tra i vari attori coinvolti nell’ecosistema sanitario. Difatti, i sistemi sanitari sono caratterizzati da processi composti da una partecipazione eterogenea di pazienti, medici, assistenti sanitari, ospedali e diversi altri attori. La componente della tecnologia non può essere considerata solo un mezzo attraverso il quale si modificano le singole attività legate alla produzione e erogazione dei servizi sanitari, ma come uno strumento attraverso cui si trasformano e si innovano i processi e le relazioni sia all’interno delle organizzazioni sia nei rapporti con altri attori del sistema. I risultati della ricerca illustrano come la tecnologia blockchain possa supportare la creazione di un phygital health ecosystem nel quale si attivino processi di&nbsp; co-creazione multipli, che coinvolgono attori economici, istituzioni pubbliche, nuovi player tec etc.., in grado di abilitare una esperienza di servizio che renda il paziente sempre più protagonista nella gestione del suo percorso di cura e di gestione della propria salute. Autori: Ylenia Cavacece Sara Ebraico Daniele Leone Cristina mele Tiziana Russo Spena Coordinatori IBNO: Cristina Mele Tiziana Russo Spena Luigi Di Benedetto Pietro Azzara Jessica Maria Rot

Studio di valutazione dell'esposizione inalatoria a contaminazione atmosferica nella citta' di Ferrara. Prima fase

Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche - Biblioteca Centrale - P.le Aldo Moro, 7 , Rome / CNR - Consiglio Nazionale delle RichercheSIGLEITItal

Experimental plant for the cultivation of microalgae in photobioreactors for energy production

The continuous research of alternative and sustainable energy solutions with respect to fuels deriving from oil has led the current industrial and scientific system to analyze and develop approaches and technologies capable of enhancing materials of different nature for the production of biofuels. Algae are an alternative widely studied for this purpose, not only respect to the production of fossil fuels, but also respect to first-generation biofuels that use higher plants produced by normal cultivation methods. There are many plant solutions tested and disseminated internationally, operating in both outdoor and indoor environments. One of the most widespread criticisms is the inability to supply biodiesel quantities suitable for a production scale and with a positive economic and energy balance. This paper describes the results of a 4-years experimental research project oriented to the development of a low-scale demonstration plant of a complete advanced energy system based on the massive cultivation of microalgae and their treatment aimed at competitive production and sustainable bio-oil and biogas having requisites of suitability and compatibility with the relevant reference markets. The article intends to focus on a specific technological macro-component, completely studied and realized during the research project: the transparent, fully closed tubular photobioreactor (PBR) made of plastic material operating in continuous and in outdoor environments used for algal cultivation at low cost and high efficiency. The experimental plant was developed with the aim of providing a contribution to the main critical situations spread in this field, in particular: the need to reduce costs of the components of the plant and of the input resources necessary for the functioning of the system (energy, fertilizers, CO2, water, etc), as well as to maximize its modularity, reproducibility and exportability in other territorial contexts