Presentation (CTI)

OBJECTIVES: Governments worldwide have invested significantly in national genomics research infrastructure yet the economic and policy reasoning underpinning these investments is poorly understood. Traditional economic evaluation tools are often ill-suited to assessing large-scale research infrastructure investments, where benefits are diffuse, long-term, and cross-sectoral. This study aims to examine how different countries have justified investment in genomics research infrastructure, what forms of evidence and evaluation were used, and how “value” has been conceptualised beyond conventional cost-effectiveness/cost-benefit approaches. Insights are intended to inform future evaluation frameworks in Aotearoa New Zealand and comparable health systems.
METHODS: A qualitative, multi-country case study design is being undertaken using semi-structured interviews with senior stakeholders involved in the planning, funding, governance, and evaluation of national genomics initiatives. Participants include policy-makers, programme directors, and research infrastructure experts. Interviews explore decision-making processes, use of formal economic analyses and economic evidence, business cases, and broader social-value arguments. Interviews are transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis to identify common approaches to investment justification, types of evidence employed, and contextual factors shaping decisions.
RESULTS: Data collection is ongoing. Preliminary analysis suggests variation in how genomics research infrastructure investments have been justified. Early themes indicate that while some jurisdictions employed formal economic tools such as cost-benefit analysis, many relied on strategic narratives emphasising innovation, national competitiveness, anticipated health system efficiencies, and research spillovers. Emerging findings highlight the influence of political timing, institutional champions, and differing interpretations of equity and public value in shaping investment decisions.
CONCLUSIONS: The study provides novel insight into real-world decision-making with respect to investing in genomic research infrastructure. Findings will inform the development of an evaluation framework capable of capturing long-term, system-level benefits that extend beyond standard cost-effectiveness metrics. These lessons are relevant to policymakers and health economists tasked with assessing future investments in genomics and other large-scale research infrastructure.