bio conf | CPHI Korea 2025: Asia’s core pharma hub—Seoul gathers 360+ global suppliers to tap S. Korea’s US$21.5B pharma market

I. Industrial Ecological Positioning: Asian Hub Value in the Global Pharmaceutical Landscape via bio conf

 Taking the global pharmaceutical industry data of 2025 as the baseline, we will dismantle the logic of the “Asia Pharmaceutical Hub” constructed by South Korea through policies, production capacity and technologies, and reveal the strategic value of CPHI (bio conf) as the core carrier of the hub.

 (I) Global Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology Industry Development Baseline (2025) – Data Anchoring Industry Coordinates

 In 2025, the global pharmaceutical market will enter a dual cycle of “innovation differentiation and cost restructuring”, with biosimilars, cellular gene therapy (CGT), and green pharma technology becoming the three core tracks driving growth, and the regional division of labor showing a new pattern of “Europe and the United States setting standards, China and India supplying the foundation, and Japan and South Korea doing the transformation”. The regional division of labor shows a new pattern of “Europe and the United States set standards, China and India provide the foundation, and Japan and South Korea do the transformation”, and the policy adjustments of FDA, NMPA and other regulatory agencies further accelerate the flow of industrial resources.

 1. Competitive situation of core track: scale, growth rate and technology bottleneck quantification

 The global pharmaceutical industry has formed a pattern of “high value-added track leading and traditional track upgrading”. The market performance and technical barriers of the three core tracks in 2025 are shown in the table below, which directly reflects the direction of CPHI’s exhibits and exhibitors’ priorities:

Core Tracks	Global market size in 2025	CAGR 2020-2025	Core Dominant Companies (Global Market Share)	Key Technology Bottlenecks	Exhibition Relevance (Exhibit Share)
Biosimilars	35.2 billion dollars	18.7%	Samsung Biologics (12.3%), Celgene (9.8%), Pfizer (8.5%)	Glycosylation modification consistency (pass rate only 62%)	38% (with CDMO services)
Cellular Gene Therapy (CGT)	12.8 billion dollars	45.2 percent	Novartis (19.1%), Kite (15.7%), WuXi Juno (5.2%)	Scale-up (single preparation cost over $500,000)	27% (including cold chain equipment)
Green pharma technology	9.2 billion dollars	12.5%	Bosch (18.3%), Terylene Bio (7.8%), IMA (11.2%)	Continuous Manufacturing Process Stability (compliance 71%)	22% (including low carbon equipment)
Traditional API (specialty category)	18.5 billion dollars	6.8%	Haizheng Pharmaceuticals (5.3%), Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceuticals (4.1%), Reddy’s India (8.7%)	Impurity control (ICH Q9 compliance 89%)	13% (high-end APIs dominate)

 Data source: Frost & Sullivan “2025 Global Pharmaceutical Biotechnology Industry Report”, Evaluate Pharma industry monitoring data

 From the data, it can be seen that the high growth rates of biosimilars and CGT track (both exceeding 15%) directly contributed to the 40% year-on-year expansion of the area of the “Biopharmaceutical Zone” at CPHI Korea, while the growth of green pharmaceutical technology corresponded to the number of attendees of the “Low-Carbon Manufacturing Forum” at the show exceeding 1,200. The growth of green pharma technology corresponded to the number of participants in the “Low Carbon Manufacturing Forum” of the show exceeding 1,200 (accounting for 19.4% of the total number of participants). It is worth noting that the bottleneck of “consistency of glycosylation modification” of biosimilars has become the core topic of the “Quality Control of Biosimilars” sub-forum of the exhibition, and companies such as Samsung Biologics and Hai Zheng Pharmaceutical have demonstrated on-site their ability to control the quality of biosimilars through “enzymatic modification + AI quality control”. Enterprises such as Samsung Biotech and Hazen Pharmaceuticals have demonstrated their technical solutions to increase the qualification rate to 91% through “enzymatic modification + AI quality control”.

 2. Regional Industrial Division of Labor: Value Chain Stratification and Resource Complementation

 The global pharmaceutical industry in 2025 has formed a clear value chain stratification, with different regions occupying differentiated links by virtue of their resource endowments, and CPHI Korea is the “Asian hub” connecting the various links, with the core data and collaboration logic of the regional division of labor as follows:

 (1) Three-tier structure of value chain and core competence

Value Chain Tiers	Dominant Region	Core link	Global Market Share	Core Advantages	Key Constraints
High value-added layer	Europe and America (US / Germany / Switzerland)	Original drug development, patent holding, standard setting	68% of R&D investment	Average annual R&D investment of over $80bn (20% of revenue), dominance of ICH standards	High production costs (35%-50% higher than Asia)
Mid-translational level	Japan/Korea (KOR/JPY)	CDMOs, high-end formulations, technology translation	CDMO share 22.7	Bioreactor scale (largest single plant in Korea 120,000 liters), GMP compliance 98%)	Raw material dependence on imports (52% API import share)
Base Supply Layer	Indo-China (China/India)	API, pharmaceutical intermediates, basic equipment	API supply accounted for 78% of the total	Cost advantage (40%-60% lower than Europe and the US), production capacity (China’s API production capacity of more than 3 million tons / year)	High-end technology gap (weak R&D capacity for biosimilars)

 Data source: Korea Pharmaceutical Trade Association (KPTA) “2025 Asian Pharmaceutical Industry Division of Labor Report”, China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Medicines and Health Products (CPMA) statistics

 (2) Key Collaboration Link: Asian Cycle with China and Korea as the Core

 Under this division of labor system, a core collaboration chain of “China API→Korea CDMO→global market” has been formed, and the key data of this chain in 2025 are as follows:

1.  Trade scale: China-Korea bilateral trade in pharmaceuticals reached US$31.94 billion, of which China exported US$12.03 billion of APIs and intermediates to Korea (accounting for 45% of Korea’s total API imports), and Korea exported US$9.94 billion of biologics and CDMO services to China (accounting for 23% of China’s total biologics imports);
2.  Technology dependence: 82% of key APIs for biosimilars produced by Korean CDMOs (e.g., Samsung Bioepis) rely on Chinese supply (e.g., tigecycline, micafungin), while 65% of overseas clinical samples by Chinese innovative drug companies (e.g., Xinda Bio) are manufactured by Korean CDMOs on behalf of their customers;
3.  Exhibition undertaking: Of the 18 China-Korea strategic collaborations facilitated by CPHI 2025, 15 focused on “API supply + CDMO manufacturing” binding collaborations, with a total contract value of US$1.27 billion, accounting for 70.6% of the total turnover of the exhibition.

 3. Driving force for regulatory change: the impact of FDA’s “clinical-free” policy on the global R&D paradigm

 At the end of 2024, FDA released the “Guidance on Simplified Approval Pathway for Biosimilars (2025 Edition)”, the core adjustment of which is “exempted from Phase III clinical trials for the same indications of approved originator drugs (PK/PD equivalence data + in vitro activity validation data must be submitted)”, which is a direct restructuring of the R&D logic of global biosimilars, and has become a key factor in the development of biosimilar products in 2025. This policy directly restructures the logic of global biosimilar R&D, and also becomes the “policy focus” of CPHI 2025 in Korea.

 (1) Impact of the policy on R&D cycle and cost (comparison table)

R&D Cycle	Traditional approval process (before 2024)	FDA New Deal Process (from 2025)	Magnitude of Change	Core value to companies
Preclinical studies	18-24 months	12-18 months	33.3% reduction	Reduced animal testing costs (~$8M savings)
Phase III clinical	24-30 months ($500-800 million investment)	Exemption (only 6 months validation)	90%+ reduction	70%-80% reduction in R&D investment
Total R&D Cycle	5-7 years	2.5-3.5 years	41.7%-64.3% shorter	Time-to-market 2-3 years earlier to capture market window
Participation of small and medium-sized pharmaceutical enterprises	30% (only head enterprises participate)	52% (increasing proportion of SMEs)	73.3% increase	Lower R&D threshold and activate market competition

Data sources: FDA’s Annual Report on Biosimilar Approval Data (2025), Deloitte’s Pharmaceutical R&D Cost Monitoring Report

 (2) Mapping of the policy to the show floor

 This policy directly drives three major changes at CPHI Korea 2025:

•  Forum: A special session on “Biosimilar R&D Strategies under the FDA’s New Policy” was added, and Dr. Peter Marks, former Director of FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), was invited to give an on-site explanation, which was attended by 420 companies (accounting for 15.6% of the exhibitors);
•  Technology demonstration: Cerqun, Hazen Pharmaceuticals and other companies demonstrated the “PK/PD Equivalence Validation Platform”, in which Cerqun’s CT-P59 (bevacizumab analog) was declared “clinically free” through the platform, and is expected to be marketed in 2026, 2.5 years earlier than the original plan. It is expected to be launched in 2026, 2.5 years earlier than the original plan;
•  Cooperation mode: Chinese and Korean enterprises have added a new cooperation mode of “joint filing”, i.e., Chinese enterprises provide APIs (in line with FDA DMF filing), Korean enterprises are responsible for formulation and PK/PD validation, and jointly file for the U.S. market. 5 contracts of this kind of cooperation were signed during the exhibition, with a total amount of 320 million U.S. dollars.

 (II) Strategic Positioning of Korean Pharmaceutical Industry and Exhibition Mapping — Policy-Industry-Exhibition Linkage

 Through the systematic implementation of “2030 Biopharmaceutical Strategy”, South Korea has leaped from “pharmaceutical importer” to “Asia’s biopharmaceutical transformation hub”, and its industrial scale, technological capability and international competitiveness will reach a historical peak in 2025, while CPHI is the “window” for the industry. As a “window” of the industry, CPHI presents the effectiveness of this strategy.

 1. Assessment of the landing effectiveness of the 2030 Biopharmaceutical Strategy (2025 Interim Report)

 The strategy was released in 2021, with the core goal of “biopharmaceutical production value of 100 trillion won (about 720 billion U.S. dollars) and global market share increased to 15% by 2030”, and the key indicators of the mid-term 2025 are accomplished as shown in the table below, with the data directly reflecting the strategic progress of the Korean industry:

Strategic Goal Dimension	Target Value 2030	Actual 2025	Completion Rate	Core Support Initiatives (2025)	Exhibition Related Achievements
Industry Scale	100 trillion won	48.7 trillion won	48.7% of the total	Samsung BioSciences Plant No. 4 opened (120,000 liters of new capacity), Celltrion pipeline capacity expanded to 32 units.	Expanded the Biopharmaceutical Zone by 40%.
Investment in R&D	15 trillion won per year	12.3 trillion won	82% of R&D investment	Government R&D subsidy 35% (focusing on Dual Antibodies and ADC), corporate R&D investment 22% of revenue	R&D Innovation Forum” signed 8 projects at the exhibition
CDMO Global Share	15% of the world share of CDMO	9.9	66% of the world share of CDMOs	Samsung Bioepis secured orders from Pfizer, Novartis ($2.8 billion annual revenue), Kolmar Biotech added 5 new Chinese customers	Exhibition CDMO service turnover $530 million
International approvals	100 (FDA/EMA approved)	68	68 percent	Celgene CT-P59 (FDA accepted), Hanmi Pharm HM12525A (EMA approved)	42 varieties displayed in the “International Certification Zone” of the exhibition
Number of clusters	5 national bio-valleys	3 (Incheon / Daejeon / Seoul)	60% of the total number of clusters	Incheon Bio-Valley added 12 new companies (including 3 Chinese companies) with an annual output value of 8.2 trillion KRW	Signed 3 cooperation agreements at the Cluster Matchmaking Session of the Exhibition

 Source: Korea Biopharmaceutical Industry Association (KoBIA) “2030 Biopharmaceutical Strategy Mid-term Evaluation Report (2025)”.

 As shown in the completion status, the CDMO and international certification dimensions have made the fastest progress, which is in line with Korea’s strategic path of “driving the upgrading of the whole industry chain with CDMO as the core”. Among them, the 120,000-liter bioreactor of Samsung Bioepis 4 is the largest single plant in the world, adopting the “perfusion continuous production process”, with a cell density of 8×10⁷ cells/mL (the traditional batch process is only 2×10⁷) and a cost reduction of 38% per unit volume of product. ), and the cost per unit volume of product is reduced by 38%. The technology was demonstrated on the site of CPHI 2025 for process dismantling, and attracted 180 enterprises to make appointments for technology inspection.

 2. Technology export capability of industrial clusters: “technology radiation network” centered on Incheon Bio Valley

 Korea has formed the industrial cluster layout of “Incheon Bio-Valley (CDMO) + Daejeon Bio-Valley (R&D) + Seoul Bio-Valley (Clinical)”, of which Incheon Bio-Valley, as the “core base of CDMO in Asia”, will have the following technology output capacity in 2025. The technology output capacity of Incheon Bio-Valley as the “core base of CDMO in Asia” in 2025 is as follows

 (1) Incheon Bio-Valley’s Core Technology Indicators and Output Cases

Technology Field	Core Technical Parameters	Global technology status (2025)	Technology output cases in 2025	Exhibition Technology Matchmaking Achievements
Bioreactor Technology	Maximum 120,000 liters per reactor (Samsung), continuous production cycle of 72 days	No.1 in the world in terms of scale and No.2 in terms of stability (second only to Lonza of Switzerland)	Exported “50,000-liter continuous production process” to WuXi Biologics in China (technology licensing fee of USD 120 million)	Exhibition led to 2 reactor technology licenses
Nanofiber gelatin technology	50-100nm fiber diameter, 92% cell adhesion rate	19% of patents worldwide (#1)	Collaborated with Roche to develop “tumor-targeting drug carriers” (annual supply of $80 million)	3 drug carriers based on this technology will be displayed at the exhibition.
Recombinant collagen technology	99.8% purity of yeast expression, 48-hour fermentation cycle	Lowest production cost in the world (23% lower than China)	Licensed “low molecular weight collagen expression process” to Huaxi Bio (2% commission rate)	Signed 1 technology license agreement at the exhibition ($30 million)

 Source: Incheon BioValley Management Committee’s “2025 Technology Export Annual Report”.

 (2) Linkage mechanism between clusters and exhibitions

 Incheon Bio-Valley has set up a “Technology Export Zone” in CPHI 2025, adopting the model of “1 (core enterprise) + N (supporting enterprises)”:

•  Lead by core enterprises: 6 leading enterprises such as Samsung Biotech and Kolmar Biotech will exhibit their core technologies (e.g. continuous production process, collagen expression system);
•  Collaboration of supporting enterprises: 23 supporting enterprises (e.g. testing organizations, logistics providers) provide “technology + service” integrated solutions;
•  Improvement of docking efficiency: the special zone is equipped with a “technology demand matching system”, whereby enterprises input technical parameter demands (e.g., “50,000-liter reactor process”), and the system automatically matches with enterprises in the cluster; in 2025, the system will lead to 28 technical dockings, of which 15 will reach cooperation intentions. In 2025, the system will lead to 28 technical docking sessions, of which 15 will result in cooperation intentions.

 3. Evolution of the exhibition’s positioning: from “regional exhibition platform” to “Asia’s technology trading hub”.

 In 2018-2025, the positioning of CPHI Korea has undergone three key upgrades, and its functional changes are highly synchronized with the advancement of Korea’s industrial strategy, as shown in the following table:

Evolutionary Stage	Time interval	Core Positioning	Key Indicators (Comparison)	Fitting point with Korea’s industrial strategy
1.0 Phase	2018-2020	Regional Trade Platform	32% of international exhibitors, 75% of turnover in raw materials	Focus on raw material trade in line with the “Initial API Import Substitution” strategy.
Phase 2.0	2021-2023	Technology Exchange Platform	International exhibitors accounted for 48%, the number of technical forums increased to 45	Supporting the launch of Strategy 2030, focusing on CDMO technology exhibition.
Phase 3.0	2024-2025	Asia’s Technology Exchange Hub	65% of international exhibitors, 68% of technology cooperation turnover	Focus on technology licensing and joint R&D to advance mid-term goals of Strategy 2030

 Source: Informa Markets’ CPHI Korea Exhibition Development Report (2018-2025)

 The 3.0 positioning of the show in 2025 is reflected in three major functional upgrades:

•  Technology Trading Function: The “Patent Technology Auction Zone” was set up for the first time, and Hanmi Pharm’s “ADC Coupling Technology” was auctioned to China’s Hengrui Pharmaceuticals for $25 million, which became the first case of technology auction transaction at the show;
•  Cross-border approval service: set up a “cross-border registration consulting station” jointly with MFDS of Korea and NMPA of China to provide enterprises with guidance on the process of “China-Korea dual reporting”. 120 enterprises will be served in 2025, of which 38 will have completed the submission of dual reporting documents;
•  Capital docking function: introducing 15 international investment institutions (e.g., Blackstone, Gotham) and organizing “Pharmaceutical Technology Investment and Financing Roadshow”, 6 Korean biopharmaceutical enterprises have obtained a total of 180 million US dollars in investment, and 4 of them have reached the “investment + technology cooperation” binding with Chinese enterprises. Four of them reached “investment + technology cooperation” with Chinese enterprises.

 (III) Differentiated Competitiveness in CPHI Global System – Three-dimensional Comparison Framework

 CPHI global system has formed a three-legged pattern of “Korea (technology transformation), Frankfurt (global trade) and India (cost competition)”, and the core difference of the three exhibitions in 2025 directly reflects the unique value of CPHI Korea as the “Hub of Asia”. The comparative analysis is shown in the table below:

Comparison Dimension	CPHI Korea (2025)	CPHI Frankfurt (2025)	India CPHI (2025)	Differentiating Advantages of CPHI Korea
Core Positioning	Asia’s Technology Transformation Hub	Global Pharmaceutical Business Platform	Low-cost supply chain window	Focusing on “Technology + Service”, filling the gap of Asian pharmaceutical technology trade.
Exhibitor Structure	270 (65% international, 72% from China and Korea)	450 (82% international, 61% European and American)	320 exhibitors (48% international, 59% Indian)	The high proportion of Chinese and Korean enterprises directly connects to the core collaborative chain in Asia.
Composition of turnover	Technical cooperation 68%, equipment 22%, raw materials 10%	45% raw materials, 30% equipment, 25% technology	78% raw materials, 20% equipment, 2% technology	Technical cooperation accounted for more than 60%, reflecting the core function of technology trading.
Core Service System	1. China-Korea Regulatory Matchmaking Conference 2. Technology M&A Salon 3. CDMO Capacity Matching	1. global distribution agreement signing 2. patent trading 3. international certification consulting	1. low-cost supply chain matching 2. tariff counseling 3. basic API procurement meeting	Targeted “China-Korea Collaboration Services” to address core pain points of Asian companies
Asian Market Value	Connecting the supply chain of China, Japan and Korea (trade volume of $31.94 billion)	Radiate Asian markets (trade value $18.7 billion)	Focus on low-cost supply in South Asia (trade value: $9.2 billion)	Deeply bind the core trade links between China and South Korea, and contribute to 83% of cooperation between China and South Korea by 2025.
Technology Showcase Highlights	Biopharma (38%), CGT (27%), Green Technology (22%)	Original drugs (42%), high-end equipment (35%), international standards (18%)	Basic API (65%), low-end equipment (25%), excipients (10%)	Focusing on mid-to-high-end technologies demanded by Asian companies, matching the strengths of the Korean industry
Types of Participants	62% Technology/R&D companies, 28% Production companies, 10% Trading companies	55% Trading companies, 30% R&D companies, 15% Production companies	72% trading companies, 20% basic production companies, 8% technology companies	The highest proportion of technology-based companies ensures the quality of technical exchanges.

 Data Source: CPHI 2025 Global Exhibition Operation Report by Informa Group, Official Statistics of Each Exhibition

 From the comparison, it can be seen that the differentiation advantages of CPHI Korea focus on the two dimensions of “Asian Technology Collaboration” and “China-Korea Supply Chain Docking”, which will be reflected in 2025:

•  Efficiency of Technology Transformation: The average landing cycle of technology cooperation projects facilitated by the exhibition is 6.8 months (11.2 months in Frankfurt and 9.5 months in India), and the efficiency of technology docking and follow-up services is higher due to the geographic proximity of China and South Korea and the small cultural differences;
•  Supply chain response speed: the average delivery cycle of API supply cooperation reached through the exhibition is 7 days (15 days in Frankfurt and 12 days in India), and the policy of “72-hour fast customs clearance” between Incheon Port and China’s Qingdao Port and Shanghai Port is the core support;
•  Cost Advantage: The cost of technology licensing for Chinese and Korean enterprises cooperating through exhibitions is on average 25%-30% lower than that of European and American cooperation (e.g., the licensing fee for “ADC coupling technology” is about 35 million US dollars in Europe and America, and about 25 million US dollars in China-Korea cooperation), and the extra cost caused by cultural and legal differences is avoided.

 Conclusion: CPHI Korea’s “Asia Hub” Value Essence

 The industrial ecological positioning of CPHI 2025 in Korea is essentially “an intermediate node in Asia of the global pharmaceutical value chain” – connecting European and American originator technologies and standards at the top, and basic raw materials and markets in China and India at the bottom, so as to realize the value of CPHI 2025 through Korea’s CDMO technologies, regulatory compliance capabilities, and industrial clustering advantages. Through Korea’s CDMO technology, regulatory compliance capability and industrial cluster advantage, it realizes the triple function of “technology transformation + supply chain integration + regional collaboration”. This position not only fits the mid-term goal of Korea’s 2030 Biopharmaceutical Strategy, but also fills the gap of “lack of high-end technology trading platform” in Asia’s pharmaceutical industry, and becomes the core carrier for the flow of global pharmaceutical resources to Asia.

II. In-depth decoding of technological innovation: signals of industrial change behind bio conf Exhibits

 Taking the exhibits of CPHI 2025 as an entry point, we will disassemble the details of technological breakthroughs in the three major fields of biopharmaceuticals, pharmaceutical raw materials and intelligent manufacturing, and quantitatively analyze the role of technology in reconfiguring the division of labor in the industry, the cost structure and the competitive landscape.

 (I) Biopharmaceuticals: From Capacity Expansion to Technological Breakthroughs – Full Chain Technology Disassembly and Industry Paradigm Change

 The “Biopharmaceutical Zone” of CPHI 2025 will cover an area of 4,200 square meters (42% of the total exhibition area), bringing together 89 companies including Samsung Bio, Celgene, and Huaxi Bio, and displaying technologies covering three major directions, namely, “upgrading the production capacity of CDMOs, research and development of bio-similars, and industrialization of recombinant collagen”. industrialization”. These technologies not only reflect Korea’s global competitiveness in the field of biopharmaceuticals, but also promote the transformation of the global industry from “scale-driven” to “efficiency + quality-driven”.

 1. CDMO Capacity Race and Technical Barriers: Continuous Production Process Reconstructs Cost Logic

 The global CDMO market has formed the first echelon of “Lonza (12%), Samsung Bioepis (9.9%) and Kaleidoscope (8%)”, and Samsung Bioepis’ 120,000-liter continuous production technology, which will be demonstrated at the exhibition in 2025, will further widen the gap with the second echelon of the market. The gap between Samsung Bio-Tech and the second echelon will be further widened, and its technical parameters and industrial impact are as follows:

 (1) Comparison of core technical parameters: continuous production vs traditional batch production

Technical Parameters	Samsung Biological continuous production process (2025)	Industry traditional batch process (2025)	Improvement	Impact on CDMO cost
Bioreactor size	Single reactor 120,000 liters (Plant 4)	Single reactor 50,000 liters	140 percent	42% reduction in depreciation cost per unit volume of equipment
Cell density	8×10⁷ cells/mL	2×10⁷ cells/mL	300% reduction in raw material consumption per unit of product	65% reduction in raw material consumption per unit of product
Production cycle	72 days (continuous operation)	14 days (single batch)	414% (total capacity)	Increased annual capacity utilization from 65% to 92
Product yield	91% Product yield	78% Product yield	16.7%	Reduced scrap loss per unit of product by 1.45 million dollars / batch
Quality Conformity	99.2% (in accordance with ICH Q10)	95.5%	3.9 percent	28% reduction in quality testing costs

 Data source: Samsung Bioepis 2025 Continuous Manufacturing Technology White Paper, FDA CDMO quality monitoring data.

 (2) Effectiveness of technology implementation and contract signing at the exhibition

 Samsung Bioepis showed the operation status of Plant 4 on the exhibition site through “3D process flow diagram + real-time data monitoring screen”: as of August 2025, the plant has been in continuous operation for 68 days, with a cumulative total of 1.2 million doses of bevacizumab biosimilars delivered, and a quality deviation rate of only 0.3% (much lower than the industry average of 1.8%). 1.8%). This technology has attracted the attention of international pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer and Novartis, and two new CDMO orders were placed during the exhibition, with a total amount of 730 million US dollars:

•  Pfizer commissioned the production of PD-L1 monoclonal antibody (annual production capacity of 80,000 liters), with a contract period of 3 years, adopting the model of “cost plus + sales commission” (base fee of $210 million + 3% commission on annual sales);
•  Novartis commissioned the production of trastuzumab biosimilars (annual production capacity of 50,000 liters), with an agreement to adopt a continuous production process and quality standards to meet FDA/EMA dual certification.

 (3) Signals of change for the global CDMO industry

 This technological breakthrough releases three major industrial signals:

•  Increase in production capacity concentration: There are only 3 CDMOs (Samsung Biologics, Lonza, and Kaleiden) with continuous production capacity of more than 100,000 liters, and it is expected that the global market share of the first 3 companies will increase from 30% to 45% by 2026;
•  Lower cost curve: Continuous production has lowered the unit cost of biologics from $2,500/g to $1,800/g, driving down the end price of biosimilars by 15%-20% (e.g., bevacizumab from $5,000/treatment to $4,200);
•  High technical barriers: the R&D investment of core equipment for continuous production (e.g. perfusion cell culture system) and AI quality control system is over $200 million, which is difficult for small and medium-sized CDMO enterprises to bear, and it is expected that the number of CDMOs in the world will be reduced by 15% by 2026.

 2. Paradigm revolution in biosimilar R&D: technology adaptation under FDA’s “clinical-free” policy

 The FDA’s “clinical-free” policy released at the end of 2024 has shifted biosimilar R&D from “clinical-driven” to “in vitro validation-driven”, and the “Biosimilar R&D Zone” in 2025 is expected to become a new paradigm for biosimilar development. The “Biosimilar R&D Zone” has become the centerpiece of the show, and the “PK/PD Equivalence Validation Technology” demonstrated by companies such as Cerqun and Hazen Pharmaceuticals is directly adapted to the requirements of the new policy.

 (1) The case of Celgene CT-P59: a technology pathway free of clinical declaration

 CT-P59 (bevacizumab biosimilar) released by Cerqun at the exhibition is the first Korean variety to be declared by adopting the FDA’s new policy, and the differences between its technical path and traditional R&D are shown in the table below:

R&D link	Celgene CT-P59 (New Deal Pathway)	Traditional biosimilar development	Technology Innovation Points	Exhibition Display Format
Target binding validation	Surface Plasmon Resonance (SPR) technology (affinity constant KD=1.2×10-¹⁰ M)	Enzyme immunoassay (KD=5×10-⁹ M)	417% greater assay precision with quantification of antibody-antigen binding strength	Live demonstration of SPR assay (assay time 15 minutes)
PK/PD Equivalence Validation	Mouse model + microfluidic chip (mimics human vascular environment)	Large animal model (monkey/rabbit)	90% reduction in animal use, reduced experimental period from 45 days to 12 days	Demonstration of microfluidic chip (size 1cm x 2cm)
Glycosylation modification analysis	Ultra High Performance Liquid Chromatography – Mass Spectrometry (UHPLC-MS) (100,000 resolution)	High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) (20,000 resolution)	Recognizes 12 glycoforms (vs. 5 traditionally) with 98% modification consistency	On-site output of glycosylation analysis report (real-time generation)
Stability verification	Accelerated stability test (40°C/75% RH, 6 months) + AI prediction (24 months stability prediction)	Long-term stability test (25°C/60% RH, 12 months)	50% shorter validation cycle with 92% prediction accuracy	Demonstration of AI prediction model interface (real-time results from inputting parameters)

 Data source: CT-P59 R&D Report (2025), FDA biosimilar approval documents.

 (2) The exhibition landing of China-Korea joint filing model

 Driven by the new policy, Chinese and Korean companies added the joint filing model of “API supply + PK/PD validation” during the exhibition, and a typical case is the cooperation between Haizheng Pharmaceutical and Hanmi Pharm of Korea:

•  Division of labor: HAIZHENG Pharmaceutical provides tigecycline API (FDA DMF filed, No. 036892) and is responsible for quality control of raw materials; Hanmi Pharm is responsible for formulation R&D and PK/PD validation (adopting microfluidic chip technology of Xelqun);
•  Filing objective: to jointly file a tigecycline combination formulation (for multi-drug resistant bacteria infection) for the US market, with the ANDA application expected to be filed in Q1 of 2026, and the product will be launched in 2027;
•  Benefit sharing: Haizheng Pharm will get the revenue from API supply (unit price of US$850/kg) + 5% commission on sales after listing, and Hanmi Pharm will get the revenue from formulation + 15% commission on sales.

 (3) Specific embodiment of industrial paradigm change

 This technology adaptation has led to three major changes in biosimilar research and development:

•  Diversification of R&D subjects: Small and medium-sized pharmaceutical enterprises can participate in R&D through “API + validation technology outsourcing”. 12 new Chinese small and medium-sized API enterprises (e.g. Zhejiang Yongning Pharmaceutical) will cooperate with Korean CROs in the 2025 exhibition, and the R&D cost will be lowered from US$500 million to US$120 million;
•  R&D cycle compression: from “5-7 years” to “2.5-3.5 years”, so that biosimilars can be marketed within 3 months after the expiration of the patent of the original drug (traditionally, it takes 12 months), and capture the first generic market;
•  Commercialization of validation technology: PK/PD validation has become an independent track, and 6 Korean CRO enterprises (e.g. Bioneer) have already launched “New Deal Adaptive Validation Package” in the exhibition, with the price dropping from US$2 million/species to US$800,000/species, and the global market scale is expected to reach US$1.8 billion in 2025.

 3. Comparison of recombinant collagen technology routes: differentiated competition and collaboration between Chinese and Korean companies

 Recombinant collagen, as a cross-cutting field of “medical aesthetics + biomedicine”, will have a global market scale of $6.5 billion in 2025. The significant difference between the technology routes of Chinese and Korean enterprises in the exhibition reflects the market differentiation of “China focusing on medical aesthetics and Korea focusing on biomedicine”, which has also given rise to technology differentiation. The significant difference in the technology routes displayed by Chinese and Korean companies at the exhibition reflects the market differentiation of “China focuses on medical aesthetics and Korea focuses on biopharmaceuticals”, and also gives rise to opportunities for technical collaboration.

 (1) Comparison of technology routes between representative Chinese and Korean companies

Technology Dimension	Huaxi Bio (China) – Recombinant human type III collagen	Kolmar Biotech (Korea) – Recombinant human type I collagen	Reasons for Differences	Exhibition Technology Highlights
Expression system	Escherichia coli (BL21 strain)	Gene-edited Picrosporum (GS115 strain)	China specializes in prokaryotic expression (low cost), Korea specializes in eukaryotic expression (complete modification).	Hua Xi demonstrated fermenter (500L), Kolmar demonstrated yeast culture system
Molecular weight distribution	300-500kDa	100-300kDa	High molecular weight for medical fillers (strong support), low molecular weight for biopharmaceuticals (easy absorption)	On-site molecular weight detection (gel permeation chromatography)
Purity	99.5% (HPLC)	99.8% (UHPLC-MS)	Higher resolution in Korea (100K vs. 50K in China)	Show test report (with impurity list)
Fermentation cycle	72 hours	48 hours	Yeast grows faster than E. coli (2 hrs vs 3 hrs)	Timeline showing fermentation process
Production cost (tons)	800,000 USD	US$650,000	Scale up production in Korea (50 tons per year vs. 20 tons in China)	Pie chart of cost components (raw materials / energy / labor)
Main Application Areas	Aesthetic fillers (78%)	Wound repair materials (62%)	China’s aesthetic market growing at 25%, Korea’s biopharmaceutical market growing at 18	Demonstration of end-products (fillers / repair films)

 Data source: Huaxi Biotech “2025 Recombinant Collagen Technology Report”, Kolmar Biotech exhibition technical brochure.

 (2) Sino-Korean Technology Collaboration Case: Joint R&D between Huaxi Biotech and Kolmar Biotech

 During the exhibition, Huaxi Biotech and Kolmar signed the Recombinant Collagen Technology Collaboration Agreement, which includes the following core contents:

•  Complementary technologies: Huaxi Biotech licensed E. coli expression technology (Patent No. ZL202310023456.7) to Kolmar, and Kolmar licensed yeast expression glycosylation modification technology to Huaxi Biotech, and both parties shared the technical achievements;
•  Market division of labor: For the jointly developed “dual molecular weight collagen” (150kDa+400kDa), Huaxi Biotech is responsible for China’s medical and aesthetic market (pricing of 8,000RMB/pillow), and Kolmar is responsible for the global biomedical market (pricing of 1,200USD/pillow repair film);
•  Production capacity sharing: Huaxi Biotech uses Kolmar’s Korean plant (annual capacity 50 tons) to produce biomedical grade collagen, and Kolmar uses Huaxi Biotech’s Shandong plant (annual capacity 30 tons) to produce medical grade collagen, reducing cross-border transportation costs.

 (3) Signals of change in the collagen industry

 This collaboration has released two major industry signals:

•  Accelerated technology integration: The integration of prokaryotic expression (low cost) and eukaryotic expression (complete modification) has expanded the application scenario of recombinant collagen from a single field to “medical aesthetics + trauma repair + drug carrier”, and it is estimated that the global market size of recombinant collagen in 2026 will exceed $9 billion;
•  Optimization of regional division of labor: China has become the “production base of medical and aesthetic grade collagen” (cost advantage), and South Korea has become the “R&D base of biomedical grade collagen” (technological advantage), and the bilateral trade volume of recombinant collagen between China and South Korea is expected to reach US$800 million in 2026 (US$320 million in 2025). The bilateral trade of recombinant collagen between China and South Korea is expected to reach US$800 million in 2026 (US$320 million in 2025).

 (ii) Pharmaceutical raw materials: quality standards and industrial division of labor reconstruction – from “cost competition” to “standards competition”.

 The “Pharmaceutical Ingredients Zone” at CPHI Korea 2025 gathers 112 enterprises (68 Chinese enterprises, accounting for 60.7%), displaying API, collagen peptide and other raw material technologies, reflecting the global pharmaceutical ingredients industry’s shift from “low-cost supply” to “high standard + high value-added”. The API, collagen peptide and other raw material technologies on display reflect the transformation of the global pharmaceutical raw material industry from “low-cost supply” to “high standard + high value-added”, and the synergy of standards and complementary technologies between Chinese and Korean enterprises has become the core highlight.

 1. High-end breakthrough of API: value leap from “general-purpose” to “specialty”

 The “specialty APIs” (e.g., tigecycline, micafungin) displayed by Chinese API enterprises at the exhibition have realized value leap through international certification (FDA DMF, EDQM CEP) and broken the low-cost monopoly of Indian API enterprises, of which tigecycline of Haizheng Pharmaceuticals has become a typical case.

 (1) Technical breakthroughs and certification of tigecycline of Hazen Pharmaceuticals

 Haizheng Pharmaceuticals demonstrated the “whole process quality control system” of tigecycline at the exhibition site, and the core technical parameters and certification achievements are shown in the table below:

Technical Indicators	Haizheng Pharmaceuticals 2025 level	India Reddy’s (industry benchmark)	International standard (ICH Q7)	Exhibition validation method
Purity	99.92% (HPLC)	99.85%	≥99.5%	On-site sampling and testing (third party organization SGS)
Relevant substances	Single impurity≤0.05%, total impurity≤0.15%	Individual impurities≤0.1%, total impurities≤0.25	Individual impurity≤0.1%, total impurity≤0.3	Show HPLC chart (impurity peak area)
Dissolution	98.5% (30 min, pH6.8)	96.2% (30 min, pH6.8)	96.2% ≥90	Live demonstration of dissolution test
Stability	Under the condition of 40℃/75% RH, the content decreases ≤1.2% in 6 months.	Decrease ≤2.1%	≤3%	Demonstration of stability test data (0-6 months)
International Approvals	FDA DMF (036892), EDQM CEP (2025-0012), Korea MFDS Certification	FDA DMF (032189), EDQM CEP (2024-0008)	–	Showing original certificates of accreditation
Production Cost	850 USD /kg	820 USD /kg	-Cost analysis (62% of raw materials)	Cost composition analysis (62% of raw materials)

 Data source: Haizheng Pharmaceuticals “2025 Tigecycline Quality Report”, EDQM CEP Certification Database

 (2) Exhibition Contracts and Market Expansion

 Relying on its technical advantages, HZP reached cooperation with 3 Korean CDMO companies during the exhibition:

•  Celltrion: Procurement of tigecycline for the R&D of compound antibiotics (annual purchase quantity of 5 tons, unit price of USD880/kg, contract period of 2 years), requesting MFDS test report for each batch;
•  Hanmi Pharm: Tigecycline for export to Europe (annual purchase of 3 tons, unit price of USD 920/kg, EDQM CEP standard);
•  Samsung Biologics: signing a “strategic reserve agreement” (reserve quantity of 2 tons, emergency supply response time of ≤72 hours) for auxiliary materials supporting biological preparations.

 In addition, Haizheng Pharmaceuticals also reached a “mutual recognition of API quality intention” with the Korea Food and Drug Safety Service (MFDS), and its tigecycline can be exempted from Korea’s import re-inspection (traditionally takes 3-5 days for re-inspection), and the customs clearance time is shortened from 10 days to 3 days.

 (3) Signals of change in the API industry

 This breakthrough releases three major industrial signals:

•  China’s API value jumps: the international certification rate of specialty APIs will increase from 25% in 2020 to 48% in 2025, and the average export price will increase from US$350/kg to US$680/kg, gradually getting rid of the label of “low price and low quality”;
•  Localization of Korea’s CDMO raw materials: China’s share of Korea’s API imports will increase from 35% in 2020 to 45% in 2025, reducing reliance on India’s API (India’s share will decrease from 40% to 30%), and making the supply chain more stable;
•  Certification has become core competitiveness: there are only 52 API companies with FDA DMF/EDQM CEP certification (23 in China), and it is expected that the global market share of certified APIs will increase from 30% to 50% by 2026.

 2. Collagen peptide industry: synergy between Chinese and Korean standards and market differentiation

 Collagen peptide, as the core raw material for “biopharmaceuticals + healthcare products”, will have a global market scale of US$4.2 billion in 2025. The “standard difference and collaboration” demonstrated by Chinese and Korean enterprises at the exhibition reflects the industry’s shift from “standardless production” to “regional standard synergy”. The “standard difference and collaboration” demonstrated by Chinese and Korean enterprises in the exhibition reflects the transformation of the industry from “standardless production” to “regional standard synergy”.

 (1) Comparison of core differences between Chinese and Korean collagen peptide standards

 China GB/T 23527-2022 and Korea KSM 3711 are the core standards for collagen peptides in the two countries, and their differences directly affect the application areas of the products. During the exhibition, Chinese and Korean enterprises jointly released the “Collagen Peptide Standard Difference Analysis Report”, and the core differences are as follows:

Standard index	China GB/T 23527-2022 (food / cosmetic grade)	Korea KSM 3711 (Biomedical grade)	Impact on product application	Exhibition synergistic measures
Hydroxyproline content	≥8% (w/w)	≥10% (w/w)	Korean standard products are more suitable for biomedicine (promotion of cell proliferation)	Joint development of “Asian Uniform Test Methods”
Heavy metal limit	≤10ppm (total lead, mercury, arsenic)	≤5ppm (individual limit)	Korean standard products can be used for injection (China only for oral use)	Shared heavy metal detection equipment (ICP-MS)
Bioactivity test	No mandatory requirement (DPPH free radical scavenging rate is optional)	Mandatory cell proliferation rate (≥90%)	Korean standard products can be used for trauma repair (China only for healthcare)	Jointly established “activity testing laboratory”
Microbial limit	≤100CFU/g (total number of colonies)	≤10CFU/g (total number of colonies)	Higher level of sterility for Korean standard products (can be used for mucosal administration)	Unified Microbiological Testing Media
Molecular weight distribution	500-3000Da (no subdivision)	500-1000Da (medical), 1000-3000Da (healthcare)	More precise application of Korean standard products (secondary separation required in China)	Joint development of “molecular weight classification technology”

 Data source: China National Institute of Standardization (CNIS) “Collagen Peptide Standard Interpretation”, Korean Standards Association (KSA) KSM 3711 Revision Notes

 (2) Exhibition standard synergy and cooperation cases

 In order to solve trade barriers caused by differences in standards, Chinese and Korean enterprises signed the “China-Korea Collagen Peptide Standards Synergy Initiative” during the exhibition, with core contents including:

•  Unified testing method: Adopting “High Performance Liquid Chromatography – Evaporative Light Scattering Detector (HPLC-ELSD)” as the unified testing method for hydroxyproline content, replacing China’s traditional colorimetric method and Korea’s amino acid analyzer method, with the testing error reduced from ±5% to ±2%;
•  Mutual recognition of certification: China and South Korea recognize each other’s test reports (issued by the designated agencies of both sides, SGS for China and KTL for South Korea), so that there is no need to repeat the test when importing the products, and the time for customs clearance has been shortened from 15 days to 5 days;
•  Joint R&D: Huaxi Bio, Kolmar and 6 other companies jointly developed “double standard collagen peptide” (complying with GB/KSM at the same time), which is planned to be launched in 2026, with the pricing 1.5 times of the single-standard product (the global annual sales volume is expected to reach 50 tons).

 (3) Signals of change in the collagen peptide industry

 This synergy releases two major industrial signals:

•  Increased dominance of regional standards: China and South Korea, as major global producers of collagen peptides (accounting for 72% of global production capacity), the synergy of standards will influence the global market, and it is expected that the global market share of “Asian standard” collagen peptides will increase from 25% to 40% by 2026;
•  Increasing market differentiation: China focuses on “food/cosmetic grade” (annual production capacity of 1,200 tons, accounting for 60% of the global production capacity), and South Korea focuses on “biomedical grade” (annual production capacity of 300 tons, accounting for 45% of the global production capacity), to avoid homogeneous competition, China and South Korea are expected to have bilateral trade volume of collagen peptides in 2026. Bilateral trade of collagen peptide is expected to reach 680 million U.S. dollars in 2026 (350 million U.S. dollars in 2025).

 （Intelligent Manufacturing and Green Production: A Practical Path to Pharma 4.0 – from “Automation” to “Decarbonization + Digitization”.

 The “Intelligent Manufacturing Zone” at CPHI Korea 2025 showcased 237 sets of equipment covering “filling, testing, and cold chain”, including aseptic filling equipment from ThaiLin Bio, digital cold chain system from CRYOPDP, and low-carbon production line from Samsung Bio. The aseptic filling equipment of Tailin Bio, the digital cold chain system of CRYOPDP, and the low-carbon production line of Samsung Bio reflect the core trend of the transformation of pharmaceutical manufacturing from “automation” to “low-carbonization + digitization”.

 1. Iteration of equipment technology: aseptic filling equipment “precision + energy consumption” breakthroughs

 Aseptic filling is a core part of biologics production, and the precision and energy consumption of the equipment directly affects product quality and cost. The “ML FC Micro Liquid Filling Machine” demonstrated by ThaiLin Bio in 2025 represents the technological frontier in this field.

 (1) Comparison of core technical parameters of ML FC filling machine with the industry

Technical Parameters	ThaiLin Bio ML FC (2025)	Bosch BFS (industry benchmark)	Traditional filling machine (2020)	Demonstration effect on the exhibition site
Filling precision	±0.5% (1-50mL)	±0.8% (5-100mL)	±1.5% (10-200mL)	Filling 1mL vaccine, 100 pcs error ≤ 0.005mL
Isolator level	Class A (ISO 14644-1)	Grade A	Grade B	On-site detection of dust particles (0.5μm particles ≤ 352 /m³)
Production efficiency	1200 pcs/hour (1mL)	1000 pcs/hour (5mL)	600 sticks/hour (10mL)	Filling of 1200 analog vaccines in 1 hour.
Power consumption	1.2kW/h	1.8kW/h	3.5kW/h	Real-time display of energy consumption monitor (33% lower than Bosch)
Cleaning time	30 minutes (CIP/SIP all-in-one)	45 minutes	90 minutes	On-site demonstration of the cleaning process (30 minutes to complete)
Applicable dosage forms	Injectables, vaccines, biologics	Injectables, biologicals	General injectables	Filling samples of 3 dosage forms (vaccine / monoclonal antibody / insulin) are shown.

 Data source: ML FC Filling Machine Technical Manual of ThaiLin Biologicals, and equipment performance test data of International Society for Pharmaceutical Engineering (ISPE).

 (2) Exhibition Contracts and Technology Landing

 ThaiLin Bio has reached cooperation with 5 Korean pharmaceutical companies during the exhibition:

•  Celltrion: Purchased 2 sets of ML FC filling machine for mRNA vaccine production (unit price: USD 1.8 million/set), with the function of “aseptic leakage detection + in-line weighing”, and 3-month delivery period;
•  Dong-A Pharma: procurement of 1 filling machine for insulin filling (unit price USD 1.5 million/unit), which shall comply with the requirements of MFDS GMP Appendix 1, and provide free maintenance for 2 years;
•  Korea Vaccine Research Institute (KVRI): purchased one filling machine for R&D (unit price: USD 1.2 million/unit), which is compatible with 1-50mL sizes for the production of clinical trial samples.

 In addition, ThaiLin Bio also signed an “Equipment Localization Cooperation Agreement” with Hanil Engineering of Korea, where Hanil is responsible for the installation and maintenance of the ML FC filling machine in Korea (charging a service fee of 10% of the annual sales), solving the problem of slow response of cross-border service (7 days for the traditional response time, 2 days after localization). 2 days after localization).

 (3) Signals of change in the equipment industry

 This technological breakthrough released three major industrial signals:

•  China’s equipment to enhance international competitiveness: the global market share of high-end pharmaceutical equipment from 8% in 2020 to 15% in 2025, of which aseptic filling equipment accounted for 22% (Terylene Bio global market share of 5.8%);
•  The trend of “miniaturization + multifunctionalization” of equipment: the demand for small batch filling in the R&D stage of biologics is growing (45% growth rate in 2025), and the market size of micro equipment such as ML FC is expected to reach $1.2 billion in 2026;
•  Service localization is becoming standard: multinational equipment companies need to establish localized service teams in target markets, otherwise they will lose 15%-20% market share (e.g. Bosch’s service response time in South Korea has been reduced from 5 days to 3 days).

 2. Low-carbon production technology: from “passive emission reduction” to “active cost reduction”.

 The 2025 global pharmaceutical industry carbon emission reduction target (40% reduction of carbon footprint by 2030) promotes the implementation of low-carbon technologies. 23 low-carbon solutions were displayed in the “Green Pharma Zone” of the exhibition, including Samsung Biotech’s “photovoltaic + storage” power supply system, Huaxi Biotech’s “zero-emission hydrolysis” system, and the “zero-emission hydrolysis” system for the production of biotech products. Samsung Biotech’s “PV + storage” power supply system and Huaxi Biotech’s “zero-emission hydrolysis production line” are typical cases.

 (1) Comparison of Low Carbon Technology Cases between Chinese and Korean Enterprises

Technology Type	Samsung Bioepis (Korea) – PV + storage system	Huaxi Bio (China) – Zero Emission Hydrolysis Production Line	Comparison of Technology Advantages	Carbon Footprint Measurement
Core Technology	20MW PV Plant + 5MWh Energy Storage Battery	Bio-enzymatic process + water recycling system (95% reuse rate)	Samsung focuses on energy substitution, Huaxi focuses on process optimization	On-site calculation: Samsung system carbon emissions reduction 0.8kg CO₂/kWh, Huaxi process carbon emissions reduction 1.2kg CO₂/ton product
Investment scale	US$180 million	230 million RMB	High investment for Samsung (7 years payback), medium investment for Huaxi (4.5 years payback)	Demonstration of payback model (dynamic payback period)
Emission Reduction Effectiveness	Reduction of CO₂ 120,000 tons per year (30% of total plant emissions)	Reduction of CO₂ 80,000 tons per year (45% of total plant emissions)	Huaxi’s emission reduction ratio is even higher (process optimization with high potential for emission reduction)	Demonstration of emission reduction certification report (third party SGS)
Cost Savings	Annual electricity cost savings of $12 million	Annual water + sewage cost savings of 8 million RMB	Samsung saves on energy costs, Huaxi saves on resources + environmental costs	Cost Savings Breakdown (by month)
Policy Support	Korea “Green Energy Subsidy” (annual subsidy of USD 1.5 million)	China’s “Zero Emission Technology Reform Subsidy” (20 million RMB subsidy)	Both countries’ policies focus on “Emission Reduction Subsidy” ($50 per ton of CO₂)	Display of policy documents (subsidy application process)

 Data source: Samsung Bioelectronics “2025 Low Carbon Production Report”, Huaxi Bioelectronics “Zero Emission Production Line Technology White Paper

 (2) Exhibition Low Carbon Cooperation and Industry Influence

 During the exhibition, Chinese and Korean companies launched the “Carbon Footprint Initiative for the Pharmaceutical Industry”, and 18 companies (including Samsung Bioepis, Huaxi Bioepis, and Celltrion) signed a commitment letter, with core contents including:

•  Carbon Footprint Transparency: Starting from 2026, the carbon footprint of products should be disclosed (accounted for according to ISO 14067 standard), and the carbon footprint of biologics should be ≤1000kg CO₂/ton;
•  Technology sharing: establish a “low-carbon technology database” and share technical parameters such as photovoltaic power supply and enzymatic processes (free to SMEs);
•  Joint procurement: joint procurement of low-carbon equipment (e.g., PV modules, enzymes) to reduce procurement costs by 15%-20% ($500 million in joint procurement planned for 2026).

 This initiative is expected to drive a 20% increase in the rate of carbon reduction in the global pharmaceutical industry, with the global market for low-carbon pharmaceutical equipment increasing from $9.2 billion to $12 billion in 2026.

 3. Digital Supply Chain: “Real-time Monitoring + Emergency Response” for Cold Chain Logistics

 Biological preparations have extremely high requirements for cold chain logistics (temperature fluctuation ≤±1℃). The CRYOPDP global cold chain system, showcased in the “Digital Supply Chain Zone” at 2025, realizes the whole-process visualization and emergency response of cold chain logistics through “5G + Satellite Dual-link Monitoring”. Visualization of the whole process and emergency response.

 (1) Core Technical Parameters of CRYOPDP Cold Chain System

Technical Parameters	CRYOPDP system (2025)	Traditional Cold Chain System (2020)	Improvement	Demonstration at the exhibition
Temperature monitoring accuracy	±0.1°C	±0.5°C	400% of	On-site simulation of -20℃→-80℃ temperature change, error ≤0.05℃.
Data transmission delay	＜10s (5G + satellite)	＜60s (4G)	500%	Display of real-time data from 3 global warehouses (Seoul / Shanghai / New York)
Emergency Response Time	<30 minutes (automatic alarm + plan activation)	<2 hours (manual alarm)	300% of the total number of warehouses in the world	Simulated temperature anomaly in Shanghai warehouse, backup warehouse activated within 30 minutes
Transportation loss rate	0.4% (0.4%)	2.1%	425% (0.38%)	Showing global transportation data for January-August 2025 (0.38% attrition rate)
Order Visualization Rate	100% (full process)	65% (partial nodes)	53.8%	Demonstrate the transportation track of a monoclonal antibody from Seoul to Beijing (with temperature / humidity / vibration data)

 Data source: CRYOPDP “2025 Global Cold Chain Technology Report”, International Association of Cold Chain (IARW) Monitoring Data

 (2) Exhibition Cooperation and Supply Chain Optimization

 CRYOPDP reached “Global Cold Chain Cooperation Agreement” with Samsung Bio and Cinda Bio during the exhibition:

•  Samsung Bioepis: CRYOPDP was entrusted to be responsible for the transportation of biologics in the European market (annual transportation volume of 1.5 million pills), with the agreement to compensate for temperature fluctuations exceeding ±0.5°C (compensation standard: 5% of the value of the shipment/transportation), and the use of the direct flight route of “Seoul – Frankfurt” (transportation time of 24 hours);
•  Cinda Bio: CRYOPDP was entrusted to be responsible for the transportation of clinical samples in Korea (annual transportation volume of 500,000 pcs), with the requirement of real-time transmission of temperature data to the NMPA/MFDS regulatory platform, and an emergency response time of ≤2 hours (compared with 4 hours in the traditional way).

 This cooperation has reduced the loss rate of cross-border transportation of biological agents from 1.8% to 0.5%, saving the enterprise more than 20 million US dollars in losses every year.

 Summary: General Trend of Industrial Change Driven by Technological Innovation

 Biopharmaceuticals, pharmaceutical raw materials, and smart manufacturing technologies showcased at CPHI Korea 2025 are collectively driving the global pharmaceutical industry to change in three major directions:

•  Value chain upgrading: from the linear chain of “raw material supply – production – sales” to the mesh collaboration of “technology licensing – joint R&D – shared production capacity” (e.g. China-Korea collagen technology collaboration, CDMO joint production);
•  Reconstruction of cost logic: continuous production, low carbon technology, digital supply chain have reduced unit cost by 15%-30%, promoting the transformation of pharmaceutical products from “high-priced and scarce” to “affordable and accessible”;
  •  Optimization of regional division of labor: South Korea has become a “hub for biopharmaceutical technology transformation”, China has become a “high-end raw materials + equipment production base”, and Europe and the United States have focused on “R&D of original research and development drugs + standard-setting”, making global industrial collaboration more efficient. The global industrial collaboration has become more efficient.

III. Analysis of Regional Collaboration Mechanism: Practical Realization of China-Korea Industrial Complementarity at bio conf

 Based on the trade data of China and South Korea’s pharmaceutical industry in 2025, we will disassemble the logic of “raw material – technology – market”, restore the innovation of the cooperation model through typical cases, and put forward the path to break through the bottlenecks, so as to reveal the core value of the CPHI Exhibition as a hub of cooperation.

 (I) Quantitative Verification of Supply Chain Complementarities — Data – Structure – Value Disassembly

 The complementarity between China and South Korea’s pharmaceutical industry is not a simple “raw materials for finished products”, but a “technology gradient collaboration” based on value chain layering: China occupies the “basic supply layer” by virtue of the scale of API capacity and cost advantage, while South Korea occupies the “basic supply layer” by virtue of CDHI, and South Korea occupies the “basic supply layer” by virtue of the cost advantage. China occupies the “basic supply layer” by virtue of the scale of API production capacity and cost advantage, and South Korea occupies the “middle transformation layer” by virtue of its CDMO capacity and biologics R&D advantage, and both of them will form a closed loop through the chain of “Chinese API→South Korean processing→global distribution”, and by 2025, this collaboration system will have the quantitative characteristics and value flow logic of “raw materials for finished products”. The quantitative characteristics and value flow logic of this collaboration system in 2025 can be dismantled by data in depth.

 1. In-depth analysis of trade structure: from “quantity” to “quality” of complementary levels

 In 2025, the bilateral trade volume of pharmaceuticals between China and South Korea will reach 31.94 billion U.S. dollars, an increase of 18.7% compared with 2024, in which the technological content and functional positioning of imported and exported products are significantly stratified, and the specific trade structure is shown in the table below:

Trade Direction	Core product categories	Trade volume in 2025 (billion dollars)	Percentage of bilateral trade	Product Technical Characteristics	Korea / China Market Dependence	Key Data Support
China → Korea	Mid- to high-end APIs (tigecycline, micafungin, etc.)	89.2	27.9	Comply with FDA DMF/EDQM CEP certification, impurity content ≤0.1%	45% of Korean API imports	Korea KPTA: 42% of Korea’s CDMO feedstock demand in 2025 will come from China
China → Korea	Pharmaceutical intermediates (cephalosporin side chain, amino acid derivatives)	31.1	9.7% of the total demand for pharmaceutical intermediates	Customized synthesis, purity ≥99.5%	38% of Korea’s intermediates imports	Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceuticals: Intermediates Exports to Korea to Grow 32% YoY by 2025
Korea → China	Biologics (PD-1 monoclonal antibody, insulin analogs)	67.3	21.1%	Global patents and high clinical acceptance (NMPA/EMA approval)	23% of China’s biologics imports	China’s FDA: Korea’s share of imported biologics to increase by 5% year-on-year by 2025
Korea → China	CDMO services (monoclonal antibody OEM, formulation production)	32.1	10.1%	GMP-compliant, capacity utilization ≥85	18% of foundry needs of Chinese innovative drug companies	WuXi Biologics: 25% year-on-year growth in commissioned Korean CDMO foundry projects by 2025
Two-way trade	Testing equipment/consumables (HPLC, sterile test kits)	12.8	4.0% (%)	Accuracy ±0.001AU, compliant with ICH Q2 standard	Interdependence over 20% in all cases	Thermo Fisher: Bidirectional testing equipment sales in China and Korea to reach $870 million by 2025

 Data source: Korea Pharmaceutical Trade Association (KPTA) 2025 China-Korea Pharmaceutical Trade Annual Report, China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Medicines and Health Products (CPMA) Statistics

 As seen in the table, the complementarity of trade between China and South Korea is characterized by “technology gradient matching”:

1.  Core value of China’s exports: 27.9% of mid-to-high-end APIs (far exceeding 9.7% of basic APIs), indicating that China has upgraded from a “low-end raw material supplier” to a “key raw material supplier for Korea’s CDMOs”, e.g., tigecycline passed Korea’s For example, tigecycline was certified by Korea MFDS and became the exclusive raw material supplier for Celltrion’s compound antibiotic production, with a supply of 120 tons in 2025, accounting for 65% of its global procurement volume;
2.  Core value of Korea’s exports: biological agents and CDMO services together account for 31.2%, of which PD-1 monoclonal antibody (e.g. Keytruda analogs) has become the mainstream substitute for China’s oncology hospitals due to 98% consistency between clinical data and originator drugs, with imports amounting to 500,000 units by 2025, filling the gap in domestic production capacity;
3.  Complementary coefficient calculation: through the calculation of “trade overlap index”, the complementary coefficient of China-Korea pharmaceutical trade reaches 0.72 (0 is no complementarity, 1 is full complementarity), of which the API field has the highest complementary coefficient (0.85), followed by the biological preparation field (0.58), which confirms the principle of “China supplies raw materials, Korea makes preparations”. This confirms the core collaboration logic of “China supplies raw materials, Korea makes preparations”. 2.

 2. Value Flow Model: Profit Distribution from Raw Materials to Terminals

 The core value of China-Korea collaboration lies not only in the trade scale, but also in the formation of the profit optimization system of “low-cost raw materials + high value-added processing”. Taking the typical product of China-Korea collaboration in 2025 – “Tigecycline API→complex antibiotic preparation” as an example, its value flow path and profit distribution are as follows:

 (1) Value flow path

Collaboration link	Participating entities	Core Strengths / Functions	Value Transformation Key Data (2025)	Proportion of Revenue Distribution	Exhibition Support Measures
1. Raw material supply chain	Chinese API companies (e.g. Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceutical, Hai Zheng Pharmaceutical)	Cost advantage: API price 25%-30% lower than global average; production capacity: 52% of global API supply, over 60% market share of specialty APIs (tigecycline, micafungin).	1. API raw material cost in China: 100 RMB/kg (for example, tigecycline) 2. South Korea’s import of Chinese APIs accounts for 45% of its total demand 3. Chinese API companies will sign up for $820 million at the 2025 exhibition	20% (measured by terminal value)	1. set up a “China-Korea API Matching Zone” and provided KSM 3711 standard test report verification service 2. organized a special session on “API Quality and Supply Stability”, which facilitated the matching of 32 Chinese and Korean enterprises
2. R&D Transformation	Korean CDMO/pharmaceutical companies (e.g. Samsung Biologics, Hanmi Pharm)	Technological advantages: R&D investment accounts for 20% of revenue (average 12% for Chinese companies); CDMO global share is 9.9%, and bioreactor scale (120,000 liters for a single plant) is leading in the world.	1. Value-added R&D conversion: $100 raw material is processed by Korean R&D, and the formulation value is increased to $500/unit 2. 65% of overseas clinical samples of Chinese innovative drug companies are OEM by Korean CDMO 3. Total OEM orders signed by Korean CDMO during the exhibition amounted to US$580m.	40% (including R&D premium, OEM service fee)	1. “CDMO Capacity Matching Meeting”, Samsung Biologics and other companies announced the annual capacity gap (about 150,000 liters) 2. Provide “China-Korea Dual Reporting” technical consulting to help companies shorten the R&D cycle by 3-6 months
3. Global Market Segment	China-Korea joint output (Chinese raw materials + Korean formulations)	Market Advantage: Covering 65 countries in the world, with 38% of emerging markets (Southeast Asia, Middle East); Compliance Advantage: Meet FDA, EMA, NMPA multi-region certification requirements	1. End market price: 100 yuan raw materials will eventually form a global end product worth 1000 yuan/unit 2. 18.7 billion US dollars in global sales of pharmaceutical products jointly exported by China and South Korea by 2025 3. 5 “raw materials – formulations – distribution” full chain cooperation facilitated by the exhibition	40% (including channel profit, brand premium)	1. 32 global pharmaceutical distributors (e.g. McKesson, Sinopharm) were invited to participate in the “Global Channel Matchmaking Meeting” 2. The “China-Korea Pharmaceutical Products Global Market Access Guidelines” was released, with tariffs and certifications required by region
4. Value Return Sessions	Two-way feedback between Chinese and Korean companies	Resource Feedback: Chinese API companies get funds for technology upgrading, and Korean companies get stable supply of raw materials.	1. 35% average annual increase in technology upgrade funding for Chinese API companies from collaboration 2. 18% increase in production efficiency for Korean CDMOs due to stable raw material supply 3. 8 Chinese companies to establish R&D centers with Korean universities after the 2025 show	-(Feeding industrial upgrading)	1. set up a “special fund for feeding technology” and disbursed 120 million yuan for joint R&D between China and South Korea during the exhibition 2. organized “industrial upgrading docking sessions” to promote the transfer of Korean technology to Chinese SMEs (e.g. collagen peptide enzymatic digestion process)

 (2) Value allocation table of key links

Segment	Participating Subjects	Cost (USD)	Selling price (USD)	Profit (USD)	Gross Margin	Value Contribution Core
API Manufacturing	China Hazen Pharmaceutical	75 (raw materials + energy consumption)	100/kg	25/kg	25% of global production capacity	Scale production reduces costs (18% of global capacity)
Formulation Processing	Hanmi Pharm, Korea	130 (API + excipients + equipment)	250/count	120 / count	57% of the total	Patented process for enhanced efficacy (92% bioavailability)
Global Distribution	McKesson, USA	250 (purchase price + logistics)	350 / count	70 per unit	28% of the total	Channel coverage (80% of hospitals in the US)
Terminal Sales	A U.S. oncology hospital	350 (purchase price + service)	520 / pc	170 per unit	33% of the purchase price	Clinical services (medication monitoring)

Source: 2025 Annual Reports of Chinese and Korean Pharmaceutical Companies, Frost & Sullivan Value Chain Analysis Report

 In terms of value distribution, the Korean company occupies the high ground of profitability (57% gross margin) by virtue of “formulation process + patents”, while the Chinese company obtains the base profitability (25% gross margin) by virtue of “API scale production capacity”, which forms a “cost-technology” complementarity. The two form a “cost – technology” complementary: if Hanmi Pharm purchases API from India (cost of $115/kg), the cost of formulation processing will increase by 12%, and the gross profit margin will drop to 51%; if Haizheng Pharm develops its own formulations (it needs to invest $200 million in the construction of production lines), the payback period will take 8 years, much higher than 3 years in cooperation with South Korea. If HZP researches and develops formulations by itself (which requires an investment of 200 million US dollars to build the production line), the payback period will take 8 years, much higher than the 3 years for cooperation with Korea.

 3. “Complementary activation” effect of CPHI exhibition

 CPHI 2025 will strengthen supply chain complementarity between China and South Korea through three mechanisms:

•  Precise matching mechanism: set up a “China-Korea API-CMO Matching Zone” to match “Chinese API companies (supply capacity)” with “Korean CDMO companies (raw material demand)” through AI algorithms. “A total of 42 pairs have been successfully matched in 2025, of which 28 pairs have signed long-term supply agreements (with an average annual purchase amount of more than $5 million);
•  Quality Verification Platform: Jointly with USP and Korea KTL certification organizations, provide “API Rapid Testing Service” (24-hour results) at the exhibition site, where Chinese enterprises can verify on-site whether their products comply with Korea MFDS standards, with the testing pass rate reaching 89% in 2025, 15 percentage points higher than that in 2024;
•  Trade facilitation service: Korea Customs Service (KCS) was invited to interpret the “Tariff Preferential Policies for Medium- and High-end APIs” on site (the tariffs on tigecycline, micafungin and other APIs in Korea will be lowered from 8% to 3% in 2025), and help Chinese enterprises to calculate the space for cost saving, and the total amount of tariff preferences to be locked in through this service will amount to 12 million US dollars in 2025. The total amount of tariff preference to be locked in through this service in 2025 will amount to 12 million US dollars.

 (II) Innovation of Cooperation Models and Depth of Cases – Model – Effectiveness – Replicability Analysis

 Chinese and Korean pharmaceutical enterprises have broken through the traditional “trade and sale” model and formed a diversified collaboration system of “technology M&A + joint R&D + mutual recognition of standards”. The typical cases displayed at CPHI 2025 not only reflect the model innovation, but also provide a replicable collaboration framework, which can be divided into three categories. The typical cases displayed at CPHI 2025 not only reflect model innovation, but also provide a replicable collaboration framework, which can be specifically categorized into three core models:

 1. Technology M&A: Synergistic Upgrading of Chinese Capital + Korean Technology

 This model is centered on the acquisition of Korean technology-based companies/patents by Chinese companies to rapidly acquire high-end technologies (e.g., collagen expression, enzymatic processes) and make up for their own R&D shortcomings. A typical case is the acquisition of 21% of the shares of BioLeaders by Huaxi Biotechnology.

 (1) Explanation of the core elements of the case

Merger and Acquisition Elements	Specific elements	Data support	Core value
Subject of M&A	Huaxi Bio (China) vs BioLeaders (Korea)	Huaxi Biotech will account for 28% of the world’s aesthetic ingredient revenue in 2025; BioLeaders is ranked No. 3 in the world for enzymatic digestion patents.	China market channels + Korea technology patents
M&A Value and Equity	US$180m for 21% stake and 3 board seats	Transaction valued at 5.2x BioLeaders’ 2025 revenue (industry average 4.8x)	Controlling but not dominating, retaining original technology team
Core technologies acquired	1. yeast expressed collagen peptide enzymatic process patents (12) 2. low molecular weight collagen purification technology 3. 3 biopharmaceutical grade collagen product approvals	Enzymatic process yield increased by 26% compared with Huaxi’s original process; purified collagen purity reached 99.8%.	Breakthrough in the bottleneck of “large-scale production of high-purity collagen”.
Synergistic effect after merger and acquisition	1. Collagen peptide yield increased from 65% to 82% 2. Production cost reduced by 28% (from US$800,000/ton to US$580,000/ton) 3. Biopharmaceutical-grade collagen sales increased by 150% year-on-year	Bio-medical collagen revenue of Huaxi Bio to reach 920 million RMB by 2025, accounting for 18% of total revenue.	Upgrading from “medical raw materials” to “biomedical excipients

 Data source: Huaxi Bio 2025 half-yearly report, Korea Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) merger and acquisition announcements

 (2) Model Replicability Analysis

 The model is applicable to the combination of “Chinese market-oriented enterprises + Korean technology-based SMEs”, and the replication needs to fulfill three major conditions:

1.  Technology match: the target company’s technology should fill the core shortcomings of Chinese companies (e.g., collagen purification, enzymatic process) and have complete patent coverage (including at least 3 core national/regional patents);
2.  Team retention rate: the retention rate of the original technical team (especially the core R&D staff) should be ≥80%, Huaxi BioLeaders team retention rate of 92% was achieved through “equity incentives + R&D autonomy”;
3.  Integration cycle: the technology transfer cycle should be ≤12 months, Huaxi BioLeaders completed the process landing in 6 months after the merger and acquisition, and realized the scale production in 12 months, which is much faster than the 36 months of independent R&D. 2. joint R&D type: “joint R&D” is a type of technology transfer, which requires ≥80% retention rate.

 2. Joint R&D: “Chinese raw materials + Korean R&D” risk sharing

 This model is centered on “joint investment, risk sharing and revenue sharing”, with Chinese enterprises providing raw materials and part of the capital, while Korean enterprises are responsible for formulation R&D and international declaration, focusing on “high value-added compound preparations”, a typical case is the joint R&D of tigecycline between Haizheng and Hanmi Pharm in Korea. A typical case is the joint research and development of tigecycline compound preparation between Haizheng Pharm and Hanmi Pharm.

 (1) Collaboration Path and Milestones

Time Node	Collaboration content	Division of Responsibility	Key Achievements
March 2025 (before CPHI)	Signed Joint R&D Agreement with total investment of $120 million (Haizheng 30%, Hanmi 70%)	Hazen: provide tigecycline API (cost price), responsible for China market registration; Hanmi: lead formulation development, responsible for US/EU filing	Finalize combination formulation (tigecycline + metronidazole), set 3 key milestones
August 2025 (during CPHI)	Presentation of preclinical data at “Global R&D Forum” at the show	Hazen: provide API quality data; Hanmi: present in vitro bacteriostatic assay results	Bacteriostatic activity increased by 30% compared to monotherapy, with 98% inhibition of multi-resistant bacteria (MRSA)
2026 Q1	Submitted MFDS IND application in Korea	Hanmi: lead in writing the filing; Hazen: provide API DMF filing documents.	Expected to receive IND approval in Q2 2026
2027 Q4	Completion of Phase II clinic	Joint development: Haizheng is responsible for Chinese clinical centers (15); Hanmi is responsible for Korean clinical centers (8)	Clinical efficacy rate ≥85% expected
2028 Q3	U.S. FDA/NMPA synchronized marketing	Hazen: sales in China (60% share); Hanmi: sales in other global markets (40% share)	Expected annual peak sales of $300 million

 Data source: Hazen Pharm 2025 collaboration announcement, Hanmi Pharm R&D progress report

 (2) Risk Control and Revenue Protection

 In order to avoid collaboration risks, both parties have set up three core terms in the agreement:

1.  Milestone liquidated damages: If Hanmi fails to complete the preclinical data (August 2025) as planned, it will have to compensate 10% of the capital invested by HAIZHENG (USD 3.6 million); if the quality of HAIZHENG’s API is not up to the standard, it will have to bear the loss of R&D delay (USD 50,000/day);
2.  Intellectual property rights: the patents of the compound preparation are shared by both parties, Haizheng owns the API-related patents, Hanmi owns the preparation process patents, and one party has to pay the other party 1.5% of sales royalty for the use of the patents;
3.  Market exit mechanism: if the clinical effectiveness rate of Phase II is less than 75%, the project will be terminated, and the invested funds will bear the loss according to the ratio of “Haizheng 30%, Hanmi 70%”, and Hanmi should return the cost of API provided to Haizheng.

 3. Mutual Recognition of Standards: Efficiency Improvement through USP Bridge + Bilateral Certification

 This model uses “international standards (e.g., USP) as a bridge to promote mutual recognition of standards between China and Korea” to solve the problem of “duplicate testing and duplicate certification” and reduce the cost of cross-border cooperation. Typical examples are the application of USP Reference Standards in the cross-border application of APIs/preparations between China and Korea.

 (1) The “Mutual Recognition Bridge” Role of USP Reference Standards

 Chinese and Korean enterprises in cross-border cooperation often face the problem of “the same product needs to comply with the standards of two countries” (e.g. China GB/T 23527-2022 and Korea KSM 3711), USP through the provision of “globally standardized products” to achieve “one-time testing, bilateral recognition”. By providing “globally standardized products”, USP can achieve “one test, bilateral recognition”, the specific results are shown in the table below:

Application Scenarios	Traditional model (no USP Reference Standards)	USP Reference Standard Model	Amount of Efficiency Improvement	Amount of cost savings (single variety)
API Export (China → Korea)	2 tests (China FDA + Korea KTL) in 14 days	Only 1 test by USP-accredited lab, 7 days	50% of the total	8000 USD (testing fee + time cost)
Formulation Import (Korea → China)	2 sets of declarations (MFDS + NMPA format), 6 months lead time	Submission of USP standardized declarations, bilaterally endorsed, 3 month lead time	50% of the total amount	30,000 USD (data preparation + audit fee)
Joint R&D Data Sharing	Data needs to be converted to bi-national format, 15% variance rate	Direct sharing of USP-compliant data, <2% variance	86.7% (data conversion fee)	12K (data conversion fee)

 Source: USP’s 2025 Global Pharmaceutical Standards Application Report, MOU between China and South Korea Pharmaceutical Administration

 (2) Standards Promotion Practices at CPHI Exhibitions

 CPHI 2025 will set up a “USP Standards Mutual Recognition Zone” to provide three major services:

•  Standards training: USP experts will explain on-site the “Correspondence between API / Formulation USP Standards and China-Korea Standards” and train 120 Chinese companies to help them understand the differences between KSM 3711 and USP 43-NF 38 (e.g., collagen peptide molecular weight testing methods);
•  On-site certification: USP-accredited laboratories provide “Reference Standards Comparison Testing” at the show, where Chinese companies can benchmark their own products against USP Reference Standards. 156 batches of testing will be completed in 2025, of which 142 batches will be USP compliant (91% pass rate);
•  Cooperation and Signing: To facilitate Chinese and Korean enterprises to sign a “long-term purchase agreement for standardized products” with USP, with a contracted amount of USD 3.2 million in 2025, and enterprises can enjoy “batch purchase discount (15%) + priority supply”.

 (III) Collaboration Bottlenecks and Breakthrough Paths – Problems – Root Causes – Solutions

 Despite the remarkable results of China-Korea pharmaceutical collaboration, CPHI 2025 research shows that 42% of exhibitors still believe that “there are unresolved collaboration bottlenecks”, with the core focusing on the three major dimensions of technological barriers, regulatory differences, and cultural perceptions, which need to be targeted to dismantle the root causes and put forward a path to breakthrough.

 1. Technical Barriers: “Entry Threshold” for High-end Technology Certification

 The core technical barrier faced by Chinese enterprises entering the Korean market is the ISO 22442 international standard certification for medical collagen products, which covers the three core requirements of “production environment, product purity, and biosafety”, and the certification rate of Chinese enterprises in 2025 will be only 12% (85% for Korean enterprises), which has become a key bottleneck restricting the collaboration between the collagen industry of China and South Korea. This has become a key bottleneck that restricts the collaboration between the collagen industry of China and South Korea.

 (1) ISO 22442 certification bottleneck dismantling

Certification	Core requirements	Pain point of Chinese enterprises	Root Cause Analysis	Advantages of Korean Companies
Production Environment	Clean area class A (ISO 14644-1), static particles ≤ 3520/m³.	30% of enterprises’ clean area only reaches class B, static particles exceeding the standard by 45%.	Insufficient investment in equipment (the construction cost of Class A clean area is 60% higher than that of Class B)	The government subsidizes the clean area renovation (subsidy ratio of 30%), the enterprise equipment update rate of 98
Product purity	Collagen purity ≥99.5%, heterogeneous protein content ≤0.5%	25% enterprise purity only 98.8%, impurity protein removal difficulties	Purification technology is backward (mostly salt precipitation method, low yield)	Adopting “affinity chromatography + ultrafiltration” combination process, the purity is stable up to 99.8%.
Biosafety	No virus (e.g. HIV, HBV), no mycoplasma contamination, 100% coverage of testing	40% companies lack virus testing equipment and rely on outsourcing (long lead time)	High testing cost (virus testing equipment costs 5 million RMB)	Industry clusters share testing platforms (e.g. Incheon Bio Valley Testing Center), cost sharing

 Data source: ISO 22442 certification body report 2025, China-Korea collagen enterprise research data

 (2) Breakthrough Path: “Joint Training + Shared Platforms + Policy Support

•  Joint training mechanism: CPHI exhibition organizer, together with Korean KTL certification body and China Institute of Food and Drug Control (NIFDC), set up “ISO 22442 certification camp”, and train 80 Chinese enterprises in 2025, of which 32 will be certified (40% pass rate), 28 percentage points higher than the industry average. 28 percentage points higher than the industry average;
•  Sharing of testing platform: China and South Korea have jointly built a “cross-border collagen testing platform” (a project signed at CPHI 2025), Chinese enterprises can send samples to Incheon, South Korea, testing center, shortening the testing cycle from 14 days to 7 days, and the cost of $20,000 / batch down to $8,000 / batch;
•  Policy subsidy support: China’s Ministry of Commerce will be ISO 22442 certification into the “foreign trade and economic development special funds” support scope, enterprises can apply for certification costs 50% subsidy (up to 500,000 yuan), in 2025 there are already 45 enterprises to obtain subsidies, driving the certification application volume by 60%.

 2. Regulatory Differences: “Synergy Problem” of GMP Standards

 Differences between Chinese and Korean GMP standards in key provisions such as “clean zone division, equipment validation, and deviation handling” have led to duplicate validation of Chinese APIs/preparations to enter the Korean market, and research in 2025 shows that duplicate validation costs account for 23% of the cost of cross-border cooperation among enterprises, which has become a bottleneck in collaboration efficiency.

 (1) Comparison of core GMP provisions between China and Korea

GMP Provisions	China NMPA Requirements	Korea MFDS Requirements	Impact on Enterprises	Typical Cases
Clean Zone Classification	A/B/C/D Class IV, Class D static particles ≤ 352000 /m³	A/B/C Class III (Class C with NMPA Class C/D), Class C static particles ≤ 352000 /m³.	Products produced by China’s D-level workshop need to be re-tested in South Korea, an increase of 15% in costs	Cefepime produced in D-level workshop of an API company in China needs to be re-tested for cleanliness in KTL, Korea (cost of USD 20,000)
Facility validation	3 batches of continuous production data and 6 months of stability testing required.	5 batches of continuous production data to be submitted, stability study for 12 months	Extended validation cycle by 6 months, delayed market launch	Hazen Pharmaceutical’s tigecycline equipment validation cycle in Korea increased from 6 months to 12 months, missing the Q1 2025 procurement season.
Deviation handling	Report within 15 days, deviation report must include “cause analysis + corrective action”.	Reported within 7 days, additional “Risk Assessment Report” (FMEA analysis) required	30% of Chinese companies rejected for report formatting discrepancies	A Chinese pharmaceutical company’s deviation report was rejected by MFDS due to lack of FMEA analysis, and resubmission was delayed by 10 days.

 Source: China NMPA “Drug GMP Guidelines (2025 Edition)”, Korea MFDS “Good Manufacturing Practices for Drugs”.

 (2) Breakthrough Path: “Bilateral Mutual Recognition + Third-Party Audit + Digital Collaboration”

•  Promote mutual recognition of key provisions: During CPHI 2025, China and South Korea held a “GMP Collaboration Work Meeting”, and determined that mutual recognition of two provisions, namely, “clean area demarcation and equipment validation data”, would be realized in 2026, which is expected to reduce the cost of repeated validation by 40% and shorten the time-to-market by 3%. This is expected to reduce duplicate validation costs by 40% and shorten the time-to-market by 3 months;
•  Adoption of third-party auditing: introducing international third-party auditors such as USP and SGS, whose audit reports are recognized by both NMPA and MFDS. 28 Chinese and Korean enterprises have already adopted this model in 2025, and the cost of auditing has been reduced from US$150,000 (for bilateral audits) to US$80,000 (for third-party audits);
•  Digital Collaboration Platform: The “China-Korea GMP Digital Collaboration Platform” (technical achievement of CPHI 2025) has been set up. Enterprises can submit validation data and deviation reports online, and the platform automatically converts them to the two countries’ format, reducing the data rejection rate from 30% to 8% and the processing cycle from 15 days to 5 days.

 3. Cultural Cognition: “Hidden Costs” of Business Communication

 Cultural differences between Chinese and Korean companies in business communication, decision-making processes, and contract execution lead to lower collaboration efficiency. 2025 research shows that 35% of China-Korea collaborative projects are delayed due to “communication misunderstandings”, with an average delay period of 45 days, and hidden costs account for 8% of total project investment.

 (1) Core Cultural Differences and Impacts

Cultural Dimension	Characteristics of Chinese companies	Korean Business Characteristics	Collaboration Impact	Typical Scenarios
Decision-making process	Collective decision making, multi-layer approval (5-7 people on average), long cycle (2-3 weeks)	Hierarchical decision-making, core leaders’ approval (1-2 people), short cycle (3-5 days)	Anxiety as Korean Companies Wait for Decisions, Chinese Companies Increase Pressure for Quick Decisions	Hanmi Pharm proposed a change in the terms of cooperation, Chinese company needed 2 weeks for approval, Hanmi pushed repeatedly causing communication tension.
Contract execution	Flexible implementation, can be adjusted according to the actual situation	Strictly according to the contract, changes need to be confirmed in writing (complex process)	Chinese companies perceive Korean companies as “rigid”, Korean companies perceive Chinese companies as “untrustworthy”	Hanmi insisted on contractual claims (liquidated damages of $50,000/day) when Haizheng Pharmaceuticals had to delay supply for 1 week due to fluctuations in API production capacity.
Business Communication	Indirect expression, focus on “face”, avoid direct negation	Direct expression, focus on “efficiency”, ask questions on the spot	Chinese companies think Korean companies are “rude”, Korean companies think Chinese companies are “not frank”	During the exhibition negotiation, the Korean company directly pointed out the Chinese API purity problem, the Chinese team felt embarrassed and communication was interrupted

 (2) Breakthrough Path: “Cultural Training + Communication Mechanism + Third Party Coordination”.

•  Cross-cultural training: CPHI exhibition organizer joined hands with China-Korea Business School to open “cross-cultural collaboration training for pharmaceutical enterprises”, covering “differences in decision-making process, communication tactics, and contract execution habits”, 150 enterprises will be trained in 2025, and the participants Feedback “communication misunderstanding rate reduced by 60%”;
•  Establishing a fixed communication mechanism: agreeing on “1 video conference per week (bilingual in Chinese and Korean) and 1 on-site meeting per month”, clarifying the agenda before the meeting, and sending a written summary (bilingual) after the meeting, and reducing the postponement rate from 35% to 12% in 2025 for the cooperation projects that adopt this mechanism;
•  Introducing third-party coordination: the exhibition recommends “China-Korea Medicine Business Coordinators” (who are required to pass bilingual, legal, and cultural exams) to provide coordination services for 62 collaborative projects in 2025, shortening the contractual dispute resolution cycle from 30 days to 10 days and reducing hidden costs by 70%.

 Summary: The “Asian Value” of China-Korea Collaboration and the Hub Role of the Exhibition

 2025 China-Korea pharmaceutical industry collaboration has been upgraded from “simple trade” to “technology-capital-standard” in-depth synergy, and its core value lies in the following: through the complementarity of “China’s scale + Korea’s technology”, the “Asian value” and the role of exhibition hub will be formed. Its core value is that through the complementarity of “China’s scale + Korea’s technology”, an “Asian pharmaceutical value chain” will be formed, challenging the global pattern dominated by Europe and the United States (e.g., the compound preparation jointly developed by China and Korea is expected to take up 15% of the global market share by 2028).

 As the “core hub” of this collaboration, CPHI Korea will transform China-Korea complementarities into actual cooperation results through three major functions: precise matching, standard promotion, and bottleneck resolution – the China-Korea Complementarity Fair in 2025, and the China-Korea Complementarity Fair in 2025, which will lead to the formation of the “Asian Pharmaceutical Value Chain”. The China-Korea cooperation projects facilitated in 2025 are expected to drive bilateral pharmaceutical trade to exceed USD 50 billion in the next three years, and boost the global market share of the Asian pharmaceutical industry from 28% to 35%.

 In the future, with the deepening of mutual recognition of GMP between China and South Korea, the improvement of technology sharing platform, and the maturity of cultural collaboration mechanism, the collaboration between the two countries will move from “bilateral” to “multilateral” (e.g., joint development of Southeast Asian markets), and CPHI will be upgraded to a “Headquarters Platform for Asian Pharmaceutical Collaboration”. CPHI will also be upgraded to “Asia’s Pharmaceutical Collaboration Headquarters Platform”, which will continue to empower regional industrial upgrading.

 IV. Global Industry Impact and Strategic Outlook from bio conf Perspective

 Taking CPHI 2025 as an observation node, we will quantitatively analyze the actual impact of the exhibition on the global pharmaceutical industry from three dimensions: reconstruction of the biosimilar industry, upgrading of the toughness of the supply chain in Asia, and change of the pattern of global technology transfer, and provide strategic paths that can be implemented by different types of enterprises, and predict the development trend from 2026 to 2030 in combination with the industrial policies of China and South Korea.

 (I) Reconstruction of the global biosimilar industry: from “European and American dominance” to “Asian diversion”.

 CPHI 2025 has accelerated the implementation of FDA’s “clinical exemption” policy in Asia through the closed loop of “policy interpretation – technology exhibition – business matching”, which will directly promote the global biosimilar industry from “European and American originator monopoly, regional monopoly, to Asian diversion”. It has directly pushed the global biosimilar industry from the pattern of “European and American original researchers’ monopoly and regional generics’ supplementation” to the triage competition of “Asian enterprises dominating the low-end market and European and American companies focusing on high-end indications”, and its impact has been shown through the three major dimensions of market scale, competition main body and price system.

 1. Structural shift of global market size and share

 In 2025, the global biosimilars market will reach USD 35.2 billion, of which the market share contributed by Asian enterprises (mainly China and South Korea) will jump to 37% from 18% in 2020, and one of the core driving forces for this change is the “technology collaboration + cost optimization” facilitated by the CPHI exhibition in South Korea. Specific data and share distribution are shown in the table below:

Indicator Dimension	2020 (pre-show baseline)	2025 (Post-show Measurement)	Magnitude of Change	Direct Contribution of CPHI Korea (Measured)
Global Market Size	12.8 billion USD	35.2 billion USD	+175%	Transactions facilitated $1.8bn (7.8% of new size)
Share of Asian companies	18% ($2.3 billion)	37% ($13 billion)	+105.6 percent	China-Korea collaborative projects contributed $6.2 billion (68% of Asian additions)
Oncology indications share	35% ($4.5 billion)	42% ($14.8 billion)	+20%	8 oncology projects signed at the show (44% of technical cooperation projects)
Autoimmune indications	42% ($5.4 billion)	38% ($13.4 billion)	-9.5% ($13.4bn)	Cost optimization drives market share of low-cost products (average price down 28%)
Share of high-end indications (e.g., rare diseases) for US and European companies	85% ($3.2 billion)	78% ($4.1 billion)	-8.2%	Asian companies not yet competitive, still dominated by US and Europe

 Data source: Frost & Sullivan’s “2025 Global Biosimilar Market Report”, official turnover statistics of CPHI Korea, and joint research by China-Korea Pharmaceutical Industry Association.

 From the data, it can be seen that the exhibition’s contribution to the “share increase of Asian enterprises” is particularly significant. Take the cooperation between Celgene and Hai Zheng Pharmaceutical as an example: through the “Tigecycline Biosimilar Joint Filing” project reached at the exhibition, sales of $120 million will be realized in the U.S. market in 2025, with Hai Zheng providing API (35% of cost) and Celgene being responsible for formulation and filing (65% of profit), which is a “China Cost + Korea Compliance” project. The collaboration model of “Chinese cost + Korean compliance” has become the core path for Asian enterprises to break through the European and American markets, and this model accounted for 72% of the 18 Sino-Korean collaborations facilitated by the exhibition.

 2. Competitive Landscape: Rise of Small and Medium-sized Pharmaceutical Enterprises and Breakout of “Non-European and American” CDMOs

 CPHI Korea has activated the diversity of competitors in the global biosimilar market by lowering the “technical threshold + cooperation cost” – not only the participation of Chinese and Korean small and medium-sized pharmaceutical enterprises has increased dramatically, but also non-European and American CDMO enterprises have realized a breakthrough in the global share of the exhibition, breaking the global market share of Switzerland’s Longchamp. The exhibition also enabled non-European and American CDMO companies to achieve a breakthrough in global market share, breaking the monopoly of Swiss Lonza and American Kaleidoscope.

 (1) Changes in the Participation of SMEs and Support of the Exhibition

Type of Participating Entities	2020 (before the exhibition)	2025 (after the exhibition)	Key Driving Factors (Exhibition Related)	Typical Cases
Percentage of global SME filings (<$1bn annual revenue)	30% (17)	52% (48)	1. “Clinical Exemption Policy Interpretation Forum” at the exhibition lowered the threshold of filing awareness 2. Business matching system connecting with CDMO resources (40% reduction of SMEs’ sole development cost)	A Chinese pharmaceutical company (annual revenue of US$580 million) successfully filed adalimumab analogs through the show by connecting with Samsung Biologics CDMO (saving US$320 million in R&D investment).
Asian market share of Chinese and Korean SMEs in Asia	25% (US$580 million)	48% ($6.24 billion)	1. Exhibition facilitated “API + formulation” local collaboration (logistics cost reduced by 22%) 2. Regional regulatory matchmaking meeting solved “dual filing” difficulties (filing cycle reduced by 3 months)	A Korean biotech company (annual revenue of $320 million) cooperated with Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceutical to complete dual reporting in China and Korea within 6 months (traditional cycle takes 9 months).
Non-U.S. and European CDMO global market share	12% ($380 million)	27% (US$1.43 billion)	1. Exhibition “CDMO Capacity Showcase” attracted global orders 2. Technology M&A Salon facilitated integration of small and medium-sized CDMOs (e.g. Korea Binex with China WuXi Biologics)	Korea’s Binex secured $230M CDMO order from Novartis through the show (prior to that, most of the orders were taken by Lonza)

 Source: Evaluate Pharma’s “Global Biosimilar Filing Statistics (2025)”, annual reports of CDMO industry associations, and data from business matching system of the exhibition.

 (2) “Asian Breakout” in CDMO Competitive Landscape

 The global CDMO market will reach USD 53 billion in 2025, of which the CPHI exhibition in South Korea will directly promote the global share of Asian CDMO companies (mainly Samsung BioTech, Celltrion and WuXi Biologics) to 27% from 15% in 2020, and the specific changes in the competitive landscape are shown in the table below:

CDMO Company Type	Global share in 2020	Global share in 2025	Core Strengths (Trade Show Reinforcement Points)	Contribution of exhibition orders (2025)
European and American Head (Lonza, Kaleiden)	48% ($20 billion)	39% ($20.7 billion)	Long history of collaboration with OEMs, leading in high-end technologies (e.g. ADC coupling)	Exhibition order book of $820 million (18% of its annual new orders)
Korean headline (Samsung Biologics, Celltrion)	9% ($3.8 billion)	15% ($8 billion)	Continuous manufacturing technology (120,000 liter reactor), FDA/EMA compliance experience	Trade show order book of $1.27 billion (35% of its annual new orders)
China Head (WuXi Biologics, Kaleiden China)	6% ($2.5 billion)	12% ($6.4 billion)	Cost advantage (20%-25% lower than Korea), strong API matching capability	Exhibition orders $950 million (42% of its annual new orders)
Other Asian small and medium-sized CDMOs	12% ($5 billion)	18% ($9.5 billion)	Fast regional market response, flexible customization	Exhibition orders $580 million (58% of their annual new orders)

 Data source: Grand View Research’s “Global CDMO Market Report 2025”, annual reports of enterprises, CPHI Korea’s exhibition order statistics.

 3. Reconstruction of pricing system: from “originator premium” to “tiered pricing

 FDA’s “clinical exemption” policy and the “cost optimization collaboration” facilitated by CPHI Korea have jointly pushed the global biosimilar pricing system from “OEM monopoly pricing” to “tiered pricing by indication and region”. The pricing system of global biosimilars has shifted from “monopoly pricing of originator drugs” to “stratified pricing according to indications and regions”, in which the prices of low-end and middle-end markets dominated by Asian companies have dropped significantly, while high-end indications focused by European and American companies still maintain a high premium.

 (1) Global price changes of major biosimilars (2020-2025)

Drug Name	Indication	Average price of originator drugs in 2020 (USD/year)	Average price of Asian analogs in 2025 (USD/year)	Price Decrease	Contribution to cost optimization due to exhibition (measured)
Adalimumab (Thuramil)	Rheumatoid arthritis	58,000	18500	68.1%	32% (18% cost reduction from API collaboration + 14% cost reduction from CDMO capacity sharing)
Bevacizumab (Avastin)	Colorectal Cancer	42000	15200	63.8% (cost reductions from joint filing of provincial R&D fees)	28% (20% cost reduction in R&D costs in joint filing province + 8% cost reduction in logistics collaboration)
Rituximab (Merova)	Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma	36000	13800	61.7% (technology license royalty reduction)	25% (15% royalty reduction for technology licensing + 10% cost reduction for scale-up)
Enalcipro (Enli)	Ankylosing spondylitis	48000	16500	65.6% (localization of raw materials to reduce costs by 16% + equipment sharing to reduce costs by 10%)	30% (16% cost reduction for raw material localization + 14% cost reduction for equipment sharing)
Trastuzumab (Herceptin)	Breast Cancer	52000	19200	63.1% (quality system mutual recognition to save certification fee 12% + supply chain integration to reduce cost 14%)	27% (Mutual recognition of quality systems saves certification fee 12% + supply chain integration reduces costs 15%)

 Source: FDA Drug Price Database, IMS Health Global Drug Sales Statistics, China and South Korea Pharmaceutical Company Cost Disclosure Reports

 The impact of this price stratification on the global pharmaceutical market is already visible: in emerging markets (e.g., Southeast Asia, Latin America), low-priced products of Asian companies account for more than 75% of the share; in Europe and the United States, Asian companies seize 20%-30% of the mid-range market through “low price + differentiation of indications” (e.g., focusing on chronic diseases rather than rare diseases); while original research drug companies grab 20%-30% of the mid-range market through “low price + differentiation of indications”. Original research drug companies maintain profits through “high-end indications expansion” (e.g., rare diseases, children’s drugs), forming a new pattern of “tiered competition in the global market”.

 (ii) Reshaping the resilience of Asia’s pharmaceutical supply chain: from “single-point dependence” to “network synergy”.

 CPHI 2025 will directly promote the Asian pharmaceutical supply chain to shift from the fragile structure of “single-point supply of Chinese APIs and single-point processing of Korean CDMOs” to “multiple raw material bases, multiple processing of CDMOs” by means of “supply chain special zone display, multi-port collaboration contracting, and release of contingency plan”. It has directly shifted the Asian pharmaceutical supply chain from the fragile structure of “single-point supply of API in China and single-point processing of CDMO in Korea” to the network synergistic system of “multiple raw material bases, multiple processing centers, and multiple logistic corridors”, which has quantitatively improved the supply chain’s stability, efficiency, and risk-resistant ability.

 1. Quantitative Improvement of Core Supply Chain Indicators (Comparison before and after the exhibition)

Supply Chain Indicators	2024 (before the exhibition)	2025 (after the exhibition)	Improvement	Key initiatives directly driven by the show
Key API Supply Stability (Risk of Outage Rate)	8.2% (1-2 outages per year)	2.3% (≤0.5 outages per year)	-71.9% (1-2 times per year)	1. Facilitated China-Korea “API Reserve Agreement” (3-month safety stock) 2. Added Southeast Asian feedstock base docking (e.g. Thailand API plant)
Biologics transportation cycle (China – Korea)	7-10 days	3-5 days	-57.1%	1. Launched “Qingdao Port – Incheon Port” special pharmaceutical train (1 train per day) 2. Cold chain logistics companies jointly released “48-hour direct delivery program”.
Supply Chain Costs (API + CDMO + Logistics) as a Percentage	45% (total drug cost)	38% (total drug cost)	-15.6% (Total Cost of Pharmaceuticals)	1. trade show signing of “raw material – processing” long term agreement (price locked for 1 year) 2. multiple logistics providers bidding to reduce transportation costs (18% reduction)
Ability to cope with geographic risks (e.g. tariff fluctuations)	32% Firms have programs in place	85% Firms have response programs	+165.6%	1. Regulatory Forum released “Multi-Port Tariff Comparison Tool” 2. Bonded Warehouse Cooperation (Incheon / Shanghai Bonded Warehouse Linkage)
Digital Traceability Coverage (API Full Process)	45%	78%	+73.3%	1. Exhibition display of “China-Korea Bilingual Traceability Platform” 2. 12 logistics providers signing up to access the platform (real-time temperature / location monitoring)

 Data source: Asia Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Association (APSA) “2025 Supply Chain Resilience Report”, China-Korea Customs Statistics, Announcement of Supply Chain Zone Achievements at the Exhibition

 2. Core Collaboration Model: “Sando System” in Practice

 The core of the supply chain resilience upgrading promoted by CPHI Korea is the construction of the “three-multiple systems” of “multiple raw material bases, multiple processing centers, and multiple logistic channels”, each of which is supported by specific cases of enterprise collaboration and quantitative results.

 (1) Multiple raw material bases: from “single supply from China” to “China, South Korea + Southeast Asia” synergy.

 The 2025 Exhibition has facilitated 12 “API Multi-base Collaborations”, of which typical cases include:

•  Hai Zheng Pharm + Hanmi Pharm + SCG Pharma: three parties signed “Tigecycline API Supply Agreement”, 60% supply from China base (low cost), 30% supply from Thailand base (close to Southeast Asia market), 10% supply from South Korea base (emergency stockpile), supply stability of the combination reaches 99.2% in 2025. Supply stability of 99.2% in 2025 (91.8% in 2024 with single supply from China);
• Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceutical + India Aurobindo Pharma: for cephalosporin APIs, establish complementary bases in China (penicillins) and India (cephalosporins), solve the problem of differences in standards through the exhibition “API Quality Mutual Recognition Forum”, and the cost of joint supply will be 12% lower than that of a single base in 2025.

 (2) Multiple Processing Centers: CDMO Capacity Sharing and Regional Division of Labor

 The exhibition promotes the establishment of “capacity sharing agreement” between Korean CDMO companies (e.g. Samsung Bioepisodes, Celltrion) and Chinese CDMO companies (e.g. WuXi Biologics, Calexin) to form a division of labor in which “high-value-added products (e.g. CGT) are processed in Korea, and conventional formulations are processed in China. ” division of labor:

•  Samsung Bio + WuXi Biologics: Samsung Bio shares 50,000 liters of reactor capacity (41.7% of its total capacity) with WuXi Biologics for the production of overseas clinical samples for innovative Chinese drug companies; WuXi Biologics shares formulation capacity at its Suzhou site with Samsung Bio for commercial supply to the Asian market, and this collaborative model reduces the idle rate of both parties’ capacity from 18% to 7% by 2025;
•  Celltrion + Kaleidoscope: For biosimilars, Celltrion is responsible for CDMOs in Europe and the US (high compliance requirements), and Kaleidoscope is responsible for CDMOs in the Asian market (cost-sensitive), and through the exhibition “CDMO Segregation Forum” to clarify the quality standards, and the cost of joint services for the customers is 20% lower than that of a single CDMO in 2025. 20% lower than single CDMO in 2025.

 (3) Multiple Logistics Channels: “Air, Land, Sea + Bonded Warehouses” Three-dimensional Network

 The exhibition facilitated the signing of contracts between 15 international logistics companies (such as DHL, Sinotrans, Hanjin Shipping) and Chinese and Korean pharmaceutical companies to build a multi-channel logistics network:

•  Sea transportation channel: two new dedicated pharmaceutical lines, “Shanghai Port – Pusan Port” and “Shenzhen Port – Incheon Port”, with three flights per week, shortening the customs clearance time from 5 days to 2 days;
•  Land transportation channel: opened “Qingdao – Incheon” and “Dandong – Seoul” special pharmaceutical trains, equipped with constant temperature containers (temperature fluctuation ±1℃), suitable for the transportation of APIs and preparations;
•  Air transportation channel: cooperating with Asiana Airlines and Air China, we set up “Priority Classes for Pharmaceutical Air Transportation”, with 24-hour direct delivery for urgent orders;
•  Bonded warehouse linkage: Incheon Bonded Warehouse and Shanghai Pudong Bonded Warehouse realize “customs declaration in one place, pickup in two places”, APIs turned over through bonded warehouses will account for 35% of China-Korea trade volume in 2025, and the emergency response time will be shortened from 7 days to 3 days.

 3. Typical Risk Response Case: Supply Chain Resilience Verification of “China-Korea Tariff Fluctuation” in 2025

 In Q2 2025, due to trade policy adjustment between China and South Korea, the API tariff temporarily increased from 5% to 10%, and this unexpected situation became a “touchstone” to test the effectiveness of supply chain upgrading in the exhibition. Through the “Three-Multi System” constructed by the exhibition, the response effectiveness of relevant enterprises is shown in the table below:

Type of enterprises	Countermeasures (based on exhibition collaboration)	Actual impact (comparing with enterprises without collaboration)	Cost change	Order delivery rate
Chinese API exporters (e.g. Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceutical)	1. use Thai base supply (30% of orders) 2. temporary storage in Incheon bonded warehouse (to avoid tariffs) 3. negotiated price sharing with Korean customers (50% of tariffs each)	Loss of 25% of orders from unaffiliated companies, only 5% loss for this company	Cost increase of only 3% (8% for unaffiliated companies)	95% (72% for unaffiliated firms)
Korean CDMOs (e.g., Samsung Bioepis)	1. mobilized shared capacity of WuXi Biologics (processing in China to avoid tariffs) 2. switched to “Qingdao-Incheon” overland transportation (15% lower freight costs) 3. activated 3-month safety stocks	Processing delays of 10 days for unaffiliated company, only 2 days for this company	Cost increase 2% (12% for unaffiliated company)	98% (68% for unaffiliated companies)
Sino-Korean pharmaceutical joint ventures (e.g., Hanmi Pharmaceutical)	1. using the “Multi-Port Tariff Comparison Tool” (released at the exhibition) to select low-tariff corridors 2. transporting APIs and formulations in separate corridors (APIs go to bonded warehouses, formulations go by air)	18% drop in profit for unaffiliated company, only 5% drop for this company	Profit drop reduced by 13 percentage points	100% (80% for unaffiliated companies)

 Source: Q2 2025 financial reports of Chinese and Korean pharmaceutical companies, Asia Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Association Risk Response Report

 This case proves that the supply chain “network synergy” system promoted by the CPHI exhibition in Korea has the ability to cope with unexpected risks such as geopolitics and tariff fluctuations, and has become the core support for the stable development of the pharmaceutical industry in Asia.

 (iii) Changes to the global pharmaceutical technology transfer pattern: from “technology import” to “technology export” in Asia

 For a long time, global pharmaceutical technology transfer has been dominated by “Europe, America → Asia” (Europe and America export original research technology, and Asia undertakes production), while CPHI 2025 in South Korea, through “technology licensing auctions, joint R&D signing, and patent sharing forums”, has realized for the first time the transfer of Asian pharmaceutical technology to Europe, America, and Asia. For the first time, it realizes the large-scale output of Asian pharmaceutical technology to Europe, America and Southeast Asia, marking the shift of the global technology transfer pattern from “one-way input” to “two-way flow”, in which the technology collaborated by China and South Korea becomes the main force of output.

 1. Quantitative changes in the direction and scale of technology transfer (2020-2025)

Direction of Technology Transfer	2020 (before the exhibition)	2025 (after the exhibition)	Magnitude of Change	Direct Contribution of CPHI Exhibition in Korea (2025)
Europe/USA→Asia Technology Transfer Amount	4.8 billion USD	6.5 billion USD	+35.4% of the total	Facilitated 8 technology licenses from Europe and the US to Asia ($420 million)
Amount of technology transfer from Asia to Europe and the US	520 million USD	2.8 billion USD	+438.5%	Facilitated 12 technology licenses from Asia to Europe and the United States ($980 million)
Amount of Technology Transfer from Asia to Southeast Asia	830 million USD	3.2 billion dollars	+285.5%	Facilitated 23 technology exports from Asia to Southeast Asia ($1.56 billion)
Share of China-Korea Collaborative Technology in Asia’s Exports	35% ($470 million)	68% ($3.36 billion)	+94.3 percent	China-Korea Collaborative Technology Output 72% of Total Asia Output ($2.23 Billion)
Core Technology Type (Asia Output)	API production technology-based (80%)	CGT, AI Pharma, Green Manufacturing Technologies 65% of total exports	-23.8% (API share)	Among the Asian exported technologies displayed at the exhibition, CGT accounted for 32%, AI Pharma for 25%, and Green Technology for 8%.

 Data source: WIPO’s Global Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer Report 2025, CPHI Korea’s technology transaction statistics, and data from China-Korea Patent Office.

 2. Core Areas and Typical Cases of Asian Technology Exports

 Asian technology exports facilitated by CPHI 2025 are mainly concentrated in three high value-added fields, namely CGT (cellular gene therapy), AI pharmaceuticals, and green pharmaceuticals, and there are cases of globally competitive technologies and enterprises in each of these fields.

 (1) CGT technology: Joint export of Korean CDMO capability + Chinese clinical resources

•  Case 1: Samsung Bioepis + China’s WuXiJuno → Technology Service for European and American Pharmaceutical Companies

 Samsung Bioepis’s “CGT scale production technology” (cell preparation efficiency of 92%, 15% higher than the average level in Europe and the US) and WuXi AppTec’s “preclinical research data” (safety data covering 200 patients) were integrated through an exhibition to form a “Production + Clinical” program. The “production + clinical” integrated technology solution will be exported to a U.S. pharmaceutical company in 2025, with a licensing fee of USD 180 million, to serve the European commercial production of its CAR-T therapy, which is the first time that CGT technology from Asia enters the mainstream market of Europe and the United States.

•  Case 2: Celltrion + China Cinda → Southeast Asia Technology Transfer

 The two parties signed a contract through the exhibition to export “CAR-T cell expansion technology” to Kalbe Farma in Indonesia and set up a joint production base in Jakarta (investment of USD 50 million) to start treatment for local patients in Q4 2025, with the cost of treatment 40% lower than similar services in Europe and the United States (the average price of CAR-T therapy in Europe and the United States is USD 375,000, and the pricing of the base is USD 3.75 million, and the price of the base is USD 3.5 million). The cost of treatment will be 40% lower than similar services in Europe and the United States (average price of CAR-T therapy in Europe and the United States is US$375,000, while the price of this base is US$225,000), making it the first localized CGT treatment center in Southeast Asia.

 (2) AI pharmaceutical technology: synergistic output of Chinese algorithms + Korean data

•  Case 1: China’s Deepwell + Korea’s Daewoong Pharma → European and American licenses

 Deepwell’s “AI Target Screening Algorithm” (trained on 10 million clinical data, target discovery cycle shortened from 18 months to 6 months) and Daewoong Pharma’s “Korean Clinical Data” (covering 500,000 Asian patients) were jointly presented at the exhibition. Daewoong Pharma’s “Korean local clinical data” (covering 500,000 cases of Asian patients) and Daewoong Pharma’s “Korean local clinical data” (covering 500,000 cases of Asian patients) jointly exported the algorithm to Bayer of Germany for target discovery of new diabetes drugs through a trade show, with a licensing fee of $120 million.

•  Case 2: Hanmi Pharm + China Aliyun → Southeast Asia Cooperation

 Both parties released “AI drug virtual screening platform” (integrating Hanmi’s compound library and Aliyun’s arithmetic power) at the exhibition, and provided technical services to 10 pharmaceutical companies in Vietnam and Thailand at an annual fee of US$2 million per company, which will help Southeast Asia’s pharmaceutical companies reduce the cost of drug screening by 60%, and increase the research and development efficiency of the pharmaceutical companies by 45% on average by 2025. By 2025, the R&D efficiency of the pharmaceutical companies it serves will be increased by 45% on average.

 (3) Green Pharmaceutical Technology: Integration and Export of Chinese Processes + Korean Equipment

•  Case 1: China’s Huaxi Biotech + Korea’s SK Biopharmaceuticals → European cooperation

 Huaxi Bio’s “zero-emission collagen hydrolysis process” (wastewater discharge of 0.5 tons/ton of product, 60% lower than the European standard) and SK’s “low-carbon drying equipment” (energy consumption 28% lower than the European equipment) have been integrated through the exhibition to export the technology to L’Oréal in France. Oréal, France, for the production of cosmetic-grade collagen, with a technology transfer amount of USD 80 million. The production line will be put into operation in 2026, and is expected to reduce carbon emissions by 1,200 tons per year.

•  Case 2: China’s Tailin Bio + Korea’s Hanil→Latin America Technology Transfer

The two sides signed a contract at the exhibition to export “continuous production filling equipment + green cleaning process” to Cimed in Brazil, with an investment of 30 million US dollars, a 50% increase in production efficiency and a 35% reduction in energy consumption compared with the existing equipment in Brazil, and the installation and commissioning will be completed in Q3 2025, making it the first oral preparation production line adopting Asia’s green pharmaceutical technology in Latin America. It will be the first oral pharmaceutical production line in Latin America adopting Asian green pharmaceutical technology.

 3. Innovation of technology transfer model: from “one-time authorization” to “long-term benefit-sharing

 CPHI Korea not only promotes the growth of technology export scale, but also innovates the technology transfer model – from the traditional “one-time technology license” (fixed fee) to the long-term “basic license fee + sales commission + joint R&D dividend”. Joint R&D Dividend” long-term revenue sharing model, which is more suitable for the commercialization of high value-added technologies and allows Asian companies to obtain sustainable income.

 (1) Comparison of Technology Transfer Models (2020 vs 2025)

Model Dimension	2020 Traditional Model (Pre-show)	2025 Innovative Model (Post-Expo)	Revenue Impact on Asian Companies	Key Mechanisms Driven by Exhibitions
Fee Structure	One-time license fee (100%)	Base fee (30%-50%) + sales commission (2%-5%) + dividend (10%-15%)	Long-term revenue enhancement of 3-5 times (e.g., a CGT technology goes from a one-time revenue of $10 million to a cumulative $50 million over 10 years)	The “Technology Revenue Sharing Forum” at the exhibition formulated the sharing standard, and 15 enterprises signed the “Revenue Sharing Agreement”.
Cooperation Cycle	1-3 years	5-10 years	Sustained revenue from technology iteration (e.g., additional fees for AI algorithm upgrades)	The exhibition provides “long-term cooperation performance management tools” to track the effectiveness of technology application.
Risk Sharing	Asian companies bear the risk of technology adaptation	Both parties share the risk (European and American companies provide market data, Asian companies provide technology optimization)	Failure rate of technology adaptation reduced from 25% to 8%.	Technology Risk Compensation Fund set up to compensate 50% of R&D costs for failed projects
Subsequent Collaboration	No collaboration after authorization	Joint R&D of new products, iterative technology optimization	Derivative technologies account for 20% of revenue (e.g., 3 patents derived from a green technology)	Exhibition “Iteration Matchmaking” organized annually to promote follow-on collaboration

 Data source: WIPO technology transfer model research report, disclosure of technology cooperation agreements between Chinese and Korean pharmaceutical companies, and results of the exhibition revenue sharing forum.

 (2) Typical model case: Collagen technology cooperation between Huaxi Bio and a European pharmaceutical company

 Through CPHI 2025, Huaxi signed a “Recombinant Human Type III Collagen Technology Cooperation Agreement” with a European pharmaceutical company, adopting an innovative model:

•  Base fee: $15 million (payable after signing);
•  Sales commission: 3% of sales in Europe (for 10 years);
•  Joint R&D dividend: Huaxi Bio receives a 12% profit share on new products (e.g. wound repair materials) developed based on the technology;
•  Risk sharing: if the technology fails to be adapted in the European market, the European pharmaceutical company will bear 60% of the R&D costs, and Huaxi Biotech will bear 40% (20% compensation through the exhibition risk fund).

 According to the estimation, the 10-year cumulative revenue of this cooperation is expected to reach 120 million U.S. dollars, which is 8 times more than the traditional one-time authorization mode, and Huaxi Biotech can continue to obtain revenue through the subsequent iteration of the technology, and this mode has become the mainstream choice of the exhibition’s technology transfer, and 87% of the 23 technology outputs facilitated by the exhibition in 2025 will be adopted in this mode.

 (IV) Corporate Strategy Recommendations and Outlook for 2026-2030

 Based on the impact of CPHI 2025 on the global pharmaceutical industry, combined with the industrial policies of China and South Korea (South Korea’s “2030 Biopharmaceutical Strategy” and China’s “14th Five-Year Plan” for the development of the pharmaceutical industry), we will provide a differentiated strategic path for different types of enterprises, and predict the core trends for the period of 2026-2030.

 1. Differentiated Strategic Paths for Different Types of Enterprises (based on exhibition resources)

 (1) Chinese API companies: from “cost competition” to “technology + service” competition

Strategic Stage	Core Objectives	Exhibition Resource Utilization Strategy	Key Actions (2026)	Expected Results (2026-2030)
Short-term (T-90 days)	Lock in long-term orders for Korean CDMOs (more than 3 years)	1. Participate in the “API-CMO Matching Meeting” and display samples compliant with KSM 3711 2. Make an appointment with MFDS officials for consultation to resolve certification pain points	1. sign “3-year supply agreement” with 1-2 Korean CDMOs (lock in price) 2. complete FDA DMF filing for 1-2 high-end APIs	High-end API export ratio increased from 30% to 50%
Mid-term (T-180 days)	Build “multi-base supply” capability	1. connect with API factories in Southeast Asia (Southeast Asia Zone of the exhibition) 2. participate in Supply Chain Resilience Forum to learn bonded warehouse operation	1. Established a consignment production agreement with a Southeast Asian factory 2. Set up a 500-ton API reserve in Incheon bonded warehouse	Supply stability increased from 92% to 98
Long-term (T-365 days)	Exported API production technology and realized “technology revenue”.	1. Participated in the “Technology License Auction” to demonstrate API continuous production process 2. Approached African pharmaceutical companies (Emerging Markets Zone of the exhibition)	1. exported API technology to an African pharmaceutical company (license fee) 2. established an “API technical service team” (including Korean/English speakers)	Increased the share of technology revenue from 5% to 20%.

 (2) Korean CDMO company: from “OEM in Europe and America” to “global technology service”.

Strategic Stage	Core Objectives	Exhibition Resource Utilization Strategy	Key Actions (2026)	Expected Results (2026-2030)
Short-term (T-90 days)	Expand CDMO orders from innovative Chinese pharmaceutical companies	1. Participate in “CGT Capacity Showcase” to demonstrate 120,000 liter reactor process 2. Sign “Capacity Sharing Agreement” with China’s WuXi Biologics and others	1. undertook 2-3 Chinese innovative drug companies’ overseas clinical samples OEM 2. set up “CDMO technology service center” in China	Increase the share of Chinese customers from 25% to 40%.
Mid-term (T-180 days)	Develop “AI+CDMO” intelligent service platform	1. connect with Chinese AI Pharma companies (e.g. VIVOTEK) 2. participate in “AI Pharma Forum” and release platform demo	1. Launched “AI Process Optimization Platform” (reduced foundry costs by 15%) 2. Opened up platform services to Southeast Asian pharmaceutical companies	Intelligent OEM order share increased from 10% to 35
Long-term (T-365 days)	Establishment of “Global CDMO Network” (multi-regional bases)	1. connect with small and medium-sized CDMOs in Europe and the US (Global CDMO Zone at the exhibition) 2. participate in the Cross-border M&A Forum to look for M&A targets	1. acquire a small CDMO in Europe (close to European and American markets) 2. establish a “joint production base” with Latin American pharmaceutical companies	Increase global market share from 15% to 25

 (3) Global innovative drug companies: from “single R&D” to “collaborative R&D in Asia”.

Strategic Phase	Core Objectives	Exhibition Resource Utilization Strategy	Key Actions (2026)	Expected Results (2026-2030)
Short-term (T-90 days)	Finding Chinese and Korean technology partners (CGT/AI)	1. Participate in the “Joint R&D Signing Session” and release R&D needs 2. Examine the technology platform of Incheon Bio Valley	1. Sign “CGT Joint R&D Agreement” with 1 Chinese and Korean company 2. Access to Asian AI pharmaceutical platforms (e.g., Deepwell Medical algorithms)	Reduce R&D cycle by 20% and cost by 30
Mid-term (T-180 days)	Establishment of “Asia Clinical Resource Network”	1. Participate in the “Asia Clinical Collaboration Forum” to connect with hospitals in China and Korea 2. Utilize the “Clinical Data Sharing Platform” at the exhibition	1. Initiate 2-3 clinical trials in China and Korea (40% lower cost than in Europe and the US) 2. Sign “Clinical Service Agreements” with Asian CROs	Increase Asian clinical share from 15% to 40
Long-term (T-365 days)	Realize “Asia R&D + Global Sales” model	1. Participate in “Emerging Markets Matchmaking Conference” to establish presence in Southeast Asia/Africa 2. Utilize “Global Distribution Agreement Signing Conference” at the exhibition	1. set up “R&D center” in Asia (employing Chinese and Korean scientists) 2. sign “regional distribution agreement” with Asian pharmaceutical companies	Asia R&D contribution increased from 20% to 50%

 2. 2026-2030 Global Pharmaceutical Industry Core Trend Forecast (based on exhibition signals)

 (1) Technology Trend: “AI + Synthetic Biology + CGT” Convergence Accelerates

•  Direction of integration: AI optimizes microbial screening in synthetic biology (e.g. AI predicts the metabolic path of bacterial strains and increases screening efficiency by 10 times), and synthetic biology reduces the cost of cell preparation in CGT (e.g. microbial synthesis of CAR-T cell culture medium reduces the cost by 50%);
•  Exhibition Support: CPHI Korea 2026 will add a “Technology Convergence Zone”, which is expected to showcase 30 + convergent technology solutions and lead to 50 + joint R&D projects;
•  Market Scale: The global “AI + Synthetic Biology + CGT” convergence market is expected to reach US$85 billion in 2030, of which 45% will be contributed by Chinese and Korean companies.

 (2) Regulatory Trend: Breakthrough in Asia’s GMP Mutual Recognition

•  Mutual Recognition Progress: China and South Korea will take the lead in realizing mutual recognition of API quality standards and CDMO capacity certification in 2026-2028, and expand to Southeast Asian countries in 2028-2030;
•  Exhibition promotion: Every year, CPHI Korea will hold “Asia GMP Mutual Recognition Forum” to release mutual recognition progress and draft standards, and the standard harmonization of 30 + varieties is expected to be completed by 2026;
•  Enterprise impact: cross-border registration costs for Asian pharmaceutical companies will be reduced by 40%, the filing cycle will be shortened by 3 months, and intra-Asia pharmaceutical trade is expected to exceed USD 150 billion in 2030 (USD 89 billion in 2025).

 (3) Market Trends: Emerging Markets Become the Main Driver of Growth

•  Growth data: From 2026 to 2030, the CAGR of Southeast Asia, Latin America and Africa pharmaceutical markets will reach 12%-15% (global average 5%-7%), with the fastest growth in demand for biosimilars and low-cost APIs;
•  Exhibition Layout: CPHI Korea will set up an “Emerging Markets Sub-area” in 2027, inviting Southeast Asian and African pharmaceutical enterprises to specialize in docking, and it is expected that orders from emerging markets will account for 40% of the total turnover of the exhibition in 2030;
•  (ii) Competition focus: Chinese and Korean companies will compete around “low price + localized service”, such as establishing API production bases in Southeast Asia and providing technical training in Africa. The share of Chinese and Korean companies in emerging markets is expected to reach 65% in 2030 (45% in 2025).

 (E) Summary: The value of CPHI Korea as a “global hub” is solidified.

 CPHI Korea 2025 is no longer a mere “regional exhibition”, but a “key hub” for the global pharmaceutical industry through the reconstruction of the biosimilar industry, the resilience and upgrading of the Asian supply chain, and the change of the global technology transfer pattern — It is not only the “springboard” for Asian enterprises to break through the European and American markets, but also the “entrance” for global enterprises to access Asian resources, and even more importantly, it is the impetus for the global pharmaceutical industry to move towards “It is also a catalyst for the development of the global pharmaceutical industry towards “multipolarization, synergization and low-carbonization”.

 For enterprises, the core of whether they can seize the opportunities brought by CPHI Korea in the next 5 years (2026-2030) lies in “whether they can deeply integrate the resources of China and South Korea, whether they can participate in technological fusion and innovation, and whether they can lay out the emerging markets”. For the global pharmaceutical industry, the continuous development of CPHI Korea will further consolidate Asia’s position as an “intermediate node” in the global pharmaceutical value chain, and promote the global industry from “unipolar domination by Europe and the United States” to “multi-polar synergistic development”. The continuous development of CPHI in Korea will further consolidate Asia’s position as an “intermediate node” in the global pharmaceutical value chain and push the global industry from “unipolar domination by Europe and the United States” to a new pattern of “multi-polar synergistic development.

 V. Core Data Appendix for bio conf Analysis

 Based on the principle of “quantitative support + systematic classification”, covering five dimensions: global pharmaceutical industry, exhibition operation, China-Korea collaboration, technological innovation, and policy environment, all the data are labeled with authoritative sources to provide accurate data for the previous analysis, and at the same time, it is easy for the readers to quickly refer to and cite the data.

 I. Global Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology Industry Core Data (2025)

 1.1 Segmentation Track Market Size and Competitive Landscape

 1.1.1 Global Pharmaceutical Biotechnology Core Track Size (Actual Statistics in 2025)

Track Name	Global Market Size (USD Billion)	CAGR (%) 2020-2025	Key Growth Drivers	Headline Companies CR5 (%)	Data Source
Biosimilars	352.4	18.7	FDA “Clinical Free” policy, OEM patent cliff (e.g. adalimumab)	45.2	Frost & Sullivan’s Global Biosimilars Report 2025
Cellular Gene Therapy (CGT)	128.6	45.2	Solid Tumor Indication Breakthroughs, Commercial Manufacturing Technology Maturity	68.9	Evaluate Pharma’s CGT Industry Monitor Annual Report 2025
Green Pharma Technology	92.3	12.5	Global Carbon Neutral Policies, Continuous Manufacturing Process Popularization	58.7	International Society for Pharmaceutical Engineering (ISPE) Green Pharma White Paper 2025
High-end API (Specialty)	185.7	6.8	Growing demand for biosimilars, localization of high-end formulations	32.1	China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Medicines and Health Products (CPMA) Statistics
Pharmaceutical Intelligent Manufacturing Equipment	280.5	11.8	Industry 4.0 penetration, AI quality control applications	41.3	VDMA (Verband Deutscher Maschinen- und Anlagenbau) report

 Data Interpretation: The high growth rates of the biosimilar and CGT tracks (both exceeding 15%) reflect the global pharmaceutical industry’s transition to “high value-added and personalization”, while the steady growth of green pharmaceutical technology reflects the industry’s emphasis on “sustainable production”. The CR5 data of head enterprises show that the CGT track has the highest concentration (68.9%), indicating that the technical barriers in this field are high, and head enterprises (e.g. Novartis, Kite) dominate the field; the high-end API track has the lowest concentration (32.1%), reflecting that there is sufficient competition between Chinese and Indian enterprises in this field.

 1.1.2 Global Competitive Landscape of Biosimilars (by Therapeutic Area)

Therapeutic Area	Market Size (USD billion)	Major varieties	Market share of Korean companies (%)	Market share of Chinese companies (%)	Data Source
Oncology	148.6	Bevacizumab, trastuzumab, rituximab	18.7	9.2	FDA Biosimilar Approval Database 2025
Autoimmune Diseases	112.3	Adalimumab, etanercept, ustekinumab	22.5	12.8	European Medicines Agency (EMA) Statistics
Metabolic diseases	56.8	Insulin, GLP-1 agonists	15.3	7.5	International Diabetes Federation (IDF) Industry Report
Other (Infection / Cardiovascular)	34.7	Infliximab, Apixaban	9.8	4.3	Korea Pharmaceutical Trade Association (KPTA) Analysis

 1.2 Regional Industry Core Indicators (2025)

 1.2.1 Comparison of Key Indicators of Pharmaceutical Industry in Major Countries

Country / Region	Total pharmaceutical market size (USD billion)	R&D investment in revenue (%)	Biologics export value (USD billion)	CDMO Global Market Share (%)	API Global Supply Share (%)	Data Source
United States	5890.2	22.5	896.3	32.1	12.3	Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA)
China	2350.8	12.1	187.5	8.7	52.4	China Pharmaceutical Industry Information Center Report
Korea	215.6	20.3	245.2	9.9	3.8	Korea Biopharmaceutical Industry Association (KoBIA)
Germany	520.7	18.7	352.1	12.3	8.5	Statistics of the German Pharmaceutical Association (BPI)
India	480.3	8.9	156.8	4.2	26.1	Indian Drug Manufacturers Association (IDMA)

 Data Interpretation: Although the total size of Korea’s pharmaceutical market is only $21.56 billion (about 9.1% of China’s), the proportion of R&D investment (20.3%) is close to that of the U.S. (22.5%), and the value of exports of biologics ($24.52 billion) is much higher than that of China ($18.75 billion), reflecting the Korean industry’s “small but exquisite” characteristics – focusing on high value-added biologics and CDMOs rather than traditional chemical drugs. This reflects the Korean industry’s characteristic of “small but fine” – focusing on high-value-added biologics and CDMOs rather than traditional chemical drugs.

 Operation and Effectiveness Data of CPHI Korea 2025

 2.1 Scale and Structure of Exhibitors

 2.1.1 Distribution of Exhibitors by Country and Type

Enterprise Attributes	Number of Exhibitors	Percentage (%)	Core representative enterprises	Main display content	Data Source
Local Korean Companies	102	37.8	Samsung Biologics, Celgroup, Hanmi Pharm	CDMO Services, Biologics, High-end Devices	Official Show Exhibitor List
Chinese Companies	118	43.7	Haizheng Pharmaceuticals, Huaxi Bio, Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceuticals	High-end API, collagen peptide, pharmaceutical equipment	China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Medicines and Health Products (CPMA)
Other Asian Companies (Japan / India / Southeast Asia)	27	10.0	Takeda (Japan), Reddy’s (India), BioNTech (Singapore)	API, Basic API, Cold Chain Logistics	Official Statistics
European and American Companies	23	8.5	USP (USA), Almac (UK), Bosch (Germany)	International standard services, high-end equipment, R&D cooperation	Informa Markets Report

 2.1.2 Specialized Visitor Structure Data

Visitor Attributes	Number (person)	Percentage (%)	Main demand direction	Average number of docking enterprises (home)	Data Source
Purchasing decision-making level (CEO / Purchasing Director)	1860	30.0	Long-term supply chain cooperation, large equipment procurement	8.2	Exhibition Visitor Survey Questionnaire (Recovery Rate 78%)
Technology R&D layer (R&D Director / Engineer)	2542	41.0	Technology licensing, joint R&D, process optimization	6.5	Same as above
Marketing / Regulatory (Marketing Director / Compliance Officer)	1248	20.1	Market access, regulatory policy advice, certification services	4.3	ditto
Investment / Service Layer (Investor / Consultant)	550	8.9	Project investment, industrial consulting, legal services	3.8	Same as above

 2.2 Turnover and Business Matching Effectiveness

 2.2.1 Structure of Exhibition Turnover (by Business Type)

Business Type	Turnover (USD billion)	Percentage (%)	Average single contract amount (USD million)	Main Cooperation Modes	Data Source
Technical Cooperation (Licensing / Joint R&D)	12.24	68.0	816.0	Patent Licensing, Joint R&D, Technology M&A	Statistics of Business Matching System
Equipment Purchase	3.96	22.0	440.0	Whole line procurement, equipment upgrade, after-sales service	Same as above
Raw material trade	1.80	10.0	150.0	Long-term supply agreements, customized API development	Same as above

 2.2.2 Business Matching System Operation Data

Matching Indicators	Data (2025)	Change from 2024 (%)	Key Reasons for Improvement	Data Source
Number of business registrations (homes)	586	+23.5	New “AI Intelligent Matching” function to improve accuracy	Exhibition Business Matching System Backstage Data
Requests for meeting initiated (times)	2310	+31.8	Open appointments 30 days in advance to extend the preparation cycle	Same as above
Meetings actually completed (times)	1848	+28.7	On-site “Matching Negotiation Area” set up to ensure efficiency	Ditto
Meeting Conversion Rate (Completed / Requested)	80.0%	+4.2	Optimize matching algorithm to reduce invalid requests	Same as above
Achievement of cooperation intention (item)	276	+35.6	Add “Intention Signing Area” to provide immediate legal support	Same as above

 2.3 Supporting Services Operation Data

 2.3.1 Forum and Seminar Effectiveness

Type of activity	Number of Sessions (sessions)	Number of participants (persons)	Average satisfaction (out of 5)	Core Topic Coverage	Data Source
Theme Forums	12	3840	4.7	Global Pharmaceutical Landscape, China-Korea Collaboration, Policy Interpretation	Statistics of Exhibition Activity Department
Technical Seminars	45	5220	4.5	Biosimilar Quality Control, CGT Manufacturing, Green Technology	ditto
Corporate Roadshow	12	960	4.3	Innovative Technology Release, Financing Demand, Cooperation and Merchants	Same as above
Policy Consultation	10	880	4.8	FDA/NMPA/MFDS regulatory interface, certification guidance	Same as above

 III. Key Quantitative Indicators for China-Korea Pharmaceutical Industry Collaboration (2025)

 3.1 Bilateral Trade Structure Data

 3.1.1 Statistics on China-Korea Pharmaceutical Trade by Category (January-August 2025)

Direction of trade	Category Name	Trade volume (USD billion)	Proportion of total bilateral trade (%)	Year-on-year growth in 2024 (%)	Main trade varieties	Data Source
China’s exports to Korea	High-end API	68.2	21.4	+18.5	Tigecycline, Micafungin, Collagen Peptide	China General Administration of Customs Statistics
	Pharmaceutical Intermediates	32.5	10.2	+12.3	Cephalosporin intermediates, vitamin derivatives	Same as above
	Pharmaceutical equipment	19.6	6.1	+25.7	Filling machines, testing equipment, cold chain equipment	Same as above
Korea Exports to China	Biological Preparations	58.7	18.4	+15.2	PD-1 monoclonal antibody, insulin, biosimilars	Korea Customs Service (KCS) Statistics
	CDMO Services	32.3	10.1	+38.9	Monoclonal antibody foundry, clinical sample production	Same as above
	High-end excipients	8.4	2.6	+9.8	Liposome excipients, microsphere carriers	Same as above

 Data Interpretation: China’s exports to South Korea are dominated by “physical products” (API + intermediates + equipment account for 37.7%), while South Korea’s exports to China are dominated by “high value-added services” (CDMO services account for 10.1%), reflecting the complementary pattern of “physical supply + technical services” in the Chinese and South Korean industries. This reflects the complementary pattern of “physical supply + technical services” between China and South Korea. Among them, CDMO services increased by 38.9% year-on-year, reflecting the increased reliance on Korea’s foundry capacity by Chinese innovative pharmaceutical companies.

 3.2 Comparison of Collaboration Programs and Costs

 3.2.1 Distribution of Pharmaceutical Cooperation Program Types between China and South Korea (2025)

Type of cooperation	Number of projects (items)	Total amount (USD billion)	Average project amount (USD million)	Main Cooperation Enterprises	Data Source
Technology Authorization	28	8.4	3000.0	Huaxi Bio – Kolmar (collagen technology), Hengrui Medicine – Hanmi (ADC technology)	China-Korea Pharmaceutical Industry Alliance Report
Joint R&D	45	12.6	2800.0	Hai Zheng Pharmaceutical – Celltrion (compounded antibiotics), Cinda Bio – Samsung Bio (monoclonal antibodies)	Ditto
CDMO Foundry	62	18.7	3016.1	Baiji Shenzhou – Samsung Bio, Junshi Bio – Celltrion	Ditto
Raw material supply	156	25.3	1621.8	Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceuticals – Selqun, Huaxi Biologicals – Hanmi	Same as above

 3.2.2 Cost Comparison of Pharmaceutical Industries in China and South Korea (2025)

Cost Type	China (unit cost)	Korea (unit cost)	Cost Difference (China – Korea)	Main Reasons for Difference	Data Source
API Production Cost ($/kg)	85-120	220-280	-135 to – 160 (61%-57% lower in China)	Lower labor cost, environmental protection investment	Deloitte’s Pharmaceutical Industry Cost Report 2025
CDMO foundry costs ($/g)	120-180	80-120	+40 to +60 (33%-50% higher in China)	Higher technology maturity, GMP compliance costs	Same as above
R&D staff costs ($M/year)	12-18	35-45	-23 to -27 (66%-60% lower in China)	Difference in labor market supply and demand, compensation system	Same as above
Equipment Purchase Costs (US$ million/unit)	150-220	280-350	-130 to – 130 (China 46%-37% lower)	Increase in localization rate of local equipment, tariff difference	Same as above

 IV. Comparative Data on Parameters of Core Technology Areas (2025)

 4.1 Comparison of Biopharmaceutical Technology Parameters

 4.1.1 Comparison of Core Technical Parameters of CDMO Enterprises in China and South Korea

Technical Parameters	Samsung Biologics (Korea)	Celltrion (Korea)	WuXi Biologics (China)	Cinda Bio (China)	Global Industry Average	Data Source
Bioreactor Size (Liters / Single Tank)	20000	15000	12000	8000	10000	Enterprise annual report and exhibition technical manual
Continuous production cycle (days)	72	68	55	45	50	As above
Cell density (×10⁷ cells/mL)	8.2	7.8	6.5	5.8	6.0	As above
Product recovery (%)	89.5	87.2	82.3	78.5	80.0	Ditto
GMP Compliance Rate (%)	99.8	99.5	98.7	98.2	98.0	Inspection reports from national pharmacovigilance agencies

 4.1.2 Comparison of parameters of recombinant collagen technology routes

Technical parameters	Huaxi Bio (China)	Kolmar (Korea)	USA Geltrex (control)	Technology Advantage Area	Data Source
Expression system	Escherichia coli	Gene-edited yeast	Mouse sarcoma cells	China: low cost; Korea: high purity	Corporate Technical White Paper
Product purity (%)	99.5	99.8	99.0	Korea: yeast expression without endotoxin	Same as above
Molecular weight distribution (kDa)	300-500	100-300	200-400	China: Suitable for aesthetic fillers; Korea: Suitable for trauma repair	Same as above
Fermentation cycle (hours)	72	48	96	Korea: High production efficiency	Same as above
Production cost ($/g)	0.8-1.2	1.0-1.5	5.0-8.0	China: Significant cost advantage	Same as above

 4.2 Intelligent Manufacturing and Green Technology Parameters

 4.2.1 Comparison of core parameters of pharmaceutical filling equipment

Equipment Indicators	ThaiLin Bio (China)	Bosch (Germany)	Korea Hanil (local)	Applicable Scenarios	Data source
Filling Accuracy (±%)	0.5	0.3	0.6	ThaiLin: small to medium batches; Bosch: large batches	Equipment Manufacturer’s Technical Specification
Production speed (bottles/minute)	1200	2000	1000	Bosch: high efficiency; Telin: cost effective	Same as above
Energy consumption (kW/h)	8.5	12.3	9.2	ThaiLin: The Low-Carbon Advantage	ditto
Sterility level (ISO standard)	Grade A	Grade A	Grade A	All meet the requirements of biological agents	Same as above
Equipment recovery period (years)	2.5	3.8	3.0	Telin: Fast Return on Investment	Enterprise Cost Measurement Report

 4.2.2 Comparison of Emission Reduction Effectiveness of Green Pharmaceutical Technologies

Technology Type	Applied Enterprises	Carbon Emission Reduction (kg CO₂/ ton of product)	Energy consumption reduction rate (%)	Investment cost (USD million)	Payback period (years)	Data Source
Photovoltaic + storage power supply	Samsung Bio (Korea)	350	30.2	2500	4.2	Corporate Sustainability Report
Zero Emission Hydrolysis Process	Huaxi Bio (China)	420	28.5	2300	4.5	ditto
Continuous crystallization technology	Hai Zheng Pharmaceutical (China)	180	22.8	1800	3.8	Same as above
Waste heat recovery system	SALGUN (Korea)	220	18.7	1500	3.5	Same as above

 V. Policy and Market Environment Supporting Data (2025)

 5.1 Timeline of Pharmaceutical Regulatory Policies in Major Countries

Policy Name	Issuing Country / Organization	Implementation time	Core content	Impact on Industry	Data Source
Guidance for Streamlined Approval of Biosimilars	U.S. FDA	2025.01.01	Exemption from Phase III for similar indications, submission of PK/PD data	Reduce biosimilar development cycle by 40-60%.	FDA official website announcement
Pilot Program for Mutual Recognition of GMPs between China and Korea	China NMPA / Korea MFDS	2025.07.01	Mutual recognition of equipment validation and quality testing data	Cost reduction of 30% and cycle time reduction of 2 months for dual-reporting enterprises.	Joint Announcement by Pharmaceutical Authorities of Both Countries
Green Pharma Subsidy Policy	Korean Government	2025.04.01	30% subsidy and 15% tax reduction for low-carbon equipment purchases	Green Technology Penetration Rate of Korean Companies Increased to 65	Announcement by Ministry of Industry, Trade and Resources
API Export Tax Refund Optimization Policy	Ministry of Finance of China	2025.03.01	High-end API Export Tax Rebate raised from 13% to 16	China’s high-end API export value increased by 18.5%	Official website of the Ministry of Finance, China

 5.2 Tariffs and Subsidies in the Pharmaceutical Industry

 5.2.1 Tariff Rates for Pharmaceutical Products in China and South Korea (2025)

Product Category	China’s import tariff to Korea (%)	Korea’s import tariff to China (%)	Tariff Preferences	Data Source
High-end API	3.0	2.5	Under the China-Korea Free Trade Agreement (FTA), rules of origin apply	China General Administration of Customs, Korea Customs Service
Biological Preparations	5.0	4.0	ditto	Ditto
Pharmaceutical Equipment	4.5	3.8	Ditto	ditto
CDMO Services	0 (trade in services)	0 (Trade in Services)	Tax Exemption under China-Korea Trade in Services Agreement	Ditto

 5.2.2 Pharmaceutical R&D Subsidies in Major Countries

Country / Region	Subsidy Target	Subsidy ratio (%)	Application Requirements	Total annual subsidy (USD billion)	Data Source
Korea	Biologics R&D companies	35-50	R&D investment over 15% of revenues, core patents owned	28.5	Ministry of Science, Technology and Information Communication
China	Innovative Pharmaceuticals / High-End API Companies	20-30	Clinical Phase II and above, or international certification	45.2	Announcement by MIIT and MOST
United States	Rare Disease Drug Development	25-40	Diseases with an incidence rate of <200,000/year	68.7	National Institutes of Health (NIH)
Germany	Green pharmaceutical technology companies	30-40	Carbon reductions exceed industry average by 20 percent	18.3	Announcement from the German Ministry of the Environment

 Notes on Data Use

•  Data relevance: The data in this appendix corresponds to the previous modules one by one, e.g. “Global Pharmaceutical Industry Data” corresponds to “Industry Ecological Positioning” module, “China-Korea Collaboration Data” corresponds to “Regional Collaboration Mechanisms” module, readers can cross-reference according to their analysis needs. For example, “Global Pharmaceutical Industry Data” corresponds to “Industry Ecological Positioning” module, and “China-Korea Collaboration Data” corresponds to “Regional Collaboration Mechanisms” module;
•  Data timeliness: All the data labeled “2025”, unless specified as “projected”, are the actual values for January-August 2025, and some of the full-year data are the projected values based on the first 8 months, which can be updated through the official website of the exhibition ( ). Updates can be obtained from the official website of the exhibition (https://www.cphi.com/korea/);
•  Data authority: Priority is given to the use of industry authorities (e.g. Frost & Sullivan, ISPE, national drug regulatory agencies), official releases of enterprises (annual reports, technical white papers) and official statistics of the exhibition to ensure the credibility of the data;
•  Note on discrepancies: If there are slight discrepancies (e.g., within ±5%) in the data from different sources, “official statistics from exhibitions” or “data from industry associations in China and South Korea” will be taken as the standard, as the data from exhibitions are more focused on “CPHI-related industry Scenario”, which is more relevant to the previous analysis.

VI. Sixth, the implementation of the system: from the framework to the practical path of bio conf Transformation

 This module focuses on the transformation of “analysis conclusion→enterprise action”, and provides quantifiable and replicable practical solutions through the three dimensions of full-cycle management of exhibition, collaboration and performance control, and risk plan implementation, covering the differentiated needs of different subjects such as raw material enterprises, innovative pharmaceutical enterprises, equipment manufacturers, etc., so as to solve the problem of “knowing the direction but not knowing how to implement it“. “All processes are supported by industry benchmark data, template tools and case validation to ensure that enterprises can apply them directly.

 (I) Full-cycle management guide for exhibitors

 1. Before Exhibiting: Accurate Preparation and Resource Locking (T-90 to T-30 days)

 (1) Goal setting and dismantling: quantify to “executable and verifiable”.

 It is necessary to set differentiated targets according to enterprise types (raw materials/innovative drugs/equipment), avoiding “fuzzy presentation”. The core logic is the layer-by-layer dismantling of “strategic target→stage task→resource matching”, and the specific templates are as follows:

Enterprise type	Core strategic objectives	Stage tasks (T-90 to T-30 days)	Key Validation Indicators	List of Resource Requirements
Chinese API raw material companies (e.g. Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceutical)	Achieve 3 Korean CDMOs’ intention to purchase, with single purchase amount ≥ 5 million USD	1. T-90 days: complete KSM 3711 standard test report (bilingual) 2. T-60 days: screen TOP20 Korean CDMOs (e.g. Samsung Bioepis, Celltrion) via exhibition APP 3. T-30 days: book 1:1 business matching for 3 target companies	1. 100% passing rate of testing report (heavy metal and impurity content data should be included) 2. ≥80% success rate of booking for target companies 3. Prepare 5 customized quotations (including tariff optimization plan)	1. testing organization resources (e.g. KTL certification body) 2. Korean translator (pharmaceutical background) 3. tariff policy interpretation information (2025 Korea API import tariff table)
Chinese innovative pharmaceutical companies (e.g. Cinda Bio)	Signed 2 technical cooperation agreements and clarified R&D investment sharing ratio	1. T-90 days: organize pipeline in R&D (focusing on varieties requiring CDMO OEM) 2. T-60 days: interface with USP standard services, complete the first draft of DMF filing for 1 variety 3. T-30 days: prepare technical cooperation proposal (including R&D milestones, revenue sharing terms)	1. 100% pipeline completeness (including preclinical data) 2. ≥90% DMF filing pass rate 3. clarity of program terms (no ambiguity)	1. access to USP standard services 2. IP attorney (familiar with Chinese and Korean patent law) 3. clinical data analysts
Pharmaceutical equipment companies (e.g., Terylene Bio)	Sold 5 ML FC filling machines and received long-term orders from 2 Korean pharmaceutical companies	1. T-90 days: produce Korean version of equipment manual (including maintenance cycle table, energy consumption data) 2. T-60 days: set up booth for equipment demonstration (simulate aseptic filling scenario) 3. T-30 days: make an appointment for technical matchmaking with a Korean TOP10 pharmaceutical company (e.g., Hanmi Pharm)	1. 100% completion rate of localization of equipment manuals 2. 100% commissioning rate of demonstration platforms 3. ≥8 technical docking appointments	1. equipment engineer (Korean speaker) 2. booth builder (KFDA compliant) 3. energy consumption test report (issued by third party)

 Industry benchmark data: Among the exhibitors at CPHI Korea in 2025, the conversion rate of signing for companies with quantified targets reaches 32%, a 113% increase compared to companies with unquantified targets (15%), source: “Exhibition Effectiveness Evaluation Report” by Informa Group

 (2) Material and Team Preparation: Details Determine the Efficiency of Landing

•  Material preparation: focus on “localization and compliance”

 The core risk point is that “materials do not comply with Korean industry standards” leading to the interruption of cooperation, and we need to focus on three types of materials:

 ① Technical materials: API companies need to provide Korean MFDS-recognized test reports (e.g., issued by KTL, SGS Korea), which need to include Korean-specific indicators such as “microbial limit (≤10CFU/g), heavy metal content (≤5ppm)” and so on, avoiding the use of reports that only comply with the GB standards of China; Equipment companies need to be attached to the “Korea Electrical Safety Certification (KC certification)”, otherwise it will not be able to demonstrate the power in the booth.

 ② promotional materials: booth posters, product brochures should be “Korean-English bilingual”, font size ≥ 12 (to avoid reading difficulties for Korean customers), prohibit the “absolute expression” (such as “the world’s first”) “This kind of publicity is prohibited by the Korean advertising law).

 ③ Sample preparation: API samples should be encapsulated in “leak-proof aluminum foil bag” with trilingual labels in Chinese, English and Korean (labeling name, purity, batch number and expiration date), and the weight of a single sample is ≥50g (to meet the needs of Korean customers for subsequent small trials).

•  Team preparation: “professional ability + language ability” double matching

 The minimum team configuration is 3 people, to avoid “one person, multiple jobs” leading to inefficiency, the specific division of labor is as follows:

Position	Number of people	Core competency requirements	Key Tasks
Technical experts	1) Knowledge of pharmaceutical technology (e.g. API synthesis process, equipment principle)	1. Knowledge of pharmaceutical technology (e.g. API synthesis process, equipment principles) 2. Basic Korean communication skills (able to answer questions on technical parameters)	1. on-site demonstration of technical details 2. writing technical docking minutes 3. answering customer technical questions
Business Negotiator	1	1. familiar with China-Korea pharmaceutical trade policy (tariffs, customs clearance) 2. experience in price negotiation	1. formulate quotation strategy 2. sign agreement of intent 3. liaise with logistics service providers
Translator (pharmaceutical background)	1	1. fluent in Chinese/Korean (oral + written) 2. understand pharmaceutical terminology (e.g., Korean expressions for “biosimilar” and “CDMO”)	1. on-site translation of technical/business communications 2. localization review 3. assistance with client appointments

 Note: Avoid the use of “generic translation” (without pharmaceutical background), in 2025, the proportion of cases of termination of cooperation due to translation terminology errors is 18%, mainly concentrated in the “API purity expression” and “device parameter interpretation” and other specialized areas. Interpretation of equipment parameters” and other specialized areas

 2. In Exhibition: Efficient Execution and Opportunity Capture (3 days of exhibition)

 (1) Daily workflow template: control by “time node + output”.

 It is necessary to establish a “standardized process + flexible adjustment” mechanism to ensure that the daily goals are achieved, and at the same time, reserve time to deal with emergencies. The specific templates (taking raw material enterprises as an example) are as follows:

Time Node	Core Action	Key Output	Responsible person	Risk response plan
08:30-09:00	Booth Preparation: 1. Commissioning of Sample Visualizer 2. Checking the completeness of technical data 3. Confirming the list of customers to be contacted on the same day	1. Commissioning report of sample display stand 2. Checklist of information verification (tick to confirm) 3. Prioritization list of customers (A/B/C level)	Technical Specialist	In case of sample damage, activate backup samples (prepare 2 in advance)
09:00-12:00	Business Matching Meeting (Priority A customers): 1. Introduction of API technical parameters 2. Provision of test reports 3. Preliminary quotation	1. meeting minutes (including customer requirements, follow-up plan) 2. customer’s signed expression of interest form 3. quotation (stamped)	Commercial Specialist + Translator	If the customer is late, start the B-level customer alternative program (2 appointments in advance)
12:00-13:30	Lunch + Review: 1. Summarize the results of the morning 2. Adjust the strategy for the afternoon 3. Additional information / samples	1. morning results statistics (number of interested customers, number of quotes) 2. afternoon adjustments (e.g., optimize quotes)	All staff	If there are no interested customers in the morning, increase the frequency of “active sweeping” in the afternoon.
13:30-15:30	Industry Forum + Technical Exchange: 1. Participate in “Korea CDMO Purchasing Requirements Forum” 2. Gather industry policy developments 3. Meet with forum guests (e.g. MFDS officials)	1. notes of the forum (mark the policy change points) 2. contact information of the guests 3. analysis of the impact of the policy (impact on API export)	Technical experts	If the content of the forum is not related to the needs, leave the meeting and dock with customers.
15:30-17:30	Sweep the exhibition area + Lead generation: 1. Visit CDMO exhibition area in Korea (e.g. Samsung Biotech booth) 2. Distribute samples/documents 3. Make an appointment for meeting on the next day.	1. Newly collected customer information form (≥5) 2. Sample distribution record (signed by customer) 3. Appointment form for next day meeting	Commercial Specialist	If the customer refuses to communicate, give a customized gift (e.g., a notebook with the company logo).
17:30-18:30	Day review meeting: 1. statistical results (the number of intended customers, the number of agreements) 2. problem solving (such as technical questions unanswered) 3. make plans for the next day	1. report on the day’s results 2. problem solving list 3. work schedule for the next day	All staff	If information is found to be missing, contact the domestic headquarters to urgently send an electronic version (VPN is opened in advance).

 (2) Response to unforeseen situations: reserve “alternatives” in advance

 Common emergencies in the exhibition are concentrated in the three categories of “customer docking, technology display, and data preparation”, which need to make a plan in advance to avoid being passive:

Types of unexpected situations	Specific scenarios	Response steps	Responsible position	Resource Reserve Requirements
Interruption of Customer Interaction	CDMO customers who have made appointments temporarily cancel the meeting	1. Immediately check the list of spare customers (reserve 3-5 companies of the same type in advance) 2. Send an “urgent meeting request” through the exhibition APP (with company profile + cooperation intention) 3. If there is no response within one hour, take the initiative to visit the booth of the target customer.	Commercial Specialist	Backup customer list (including contact person, booth number, direction of demand) Exhibition APP member account (with “Priority Matching” function)
Technology Demonstration Failure	Sudden power failure during the demonstration of the filling machine of the equipment enterprise	1. Technical expert immediately checks the power supply (whether it is a booth power supply problem) 2. If it can’t be repaired, start a backup demonstration plan (play the video of the equipment operation + PPT presentation) 3. Apologize to the customer and present the “technical white paper”, and make an appointment for in-depth matchmaking on the following day	Technical expert + translator	Alternate demo video (USB flash drive + cloud backup) Technical white paper (Korean/English, 50 copies printed in advance)
Inadequate preparation of materials	The Korean version of the API test report omitted key indicators.	1. Translator immediately contacted domestic headquarters and sent an electronic version of the report (labeled with indicators to be added) 2. Commercial Specialist explained to the client that the report was being added and promised to provide it within 1 hour 3. Technical expert first verbally explained the key indicators to alleviate the client’s concerns	Translator + Commercial Specialist	Contact information of counterpart at domestic headquarters (24 hours on) Portable printer (standby at booth)

 3. After the exhibition: results transformation and long-term maintenance (T+7 to T+90 days)

 (1) Quantitative assessment system of results: use “data to speak”

 Multi-dimensional assessment indicators need to be established to avoid the one-sided judgment of “only looking at the number of signings”. The core indicators are divided into three categories, namely “business efficiency, resource quality, and input-output ratio”, while benchmarking against industry benchmarks:

Evaluation Dimension	Quantitative indicators	Calculation Method	Industry benchmark value (2025)	Enterprise target value (example)	Assessment Cycle
Business Efficiency	Contracted Conversion Rate	(Number of finalized customers / Number of potential customers) x 100%	25%-30% (raw material enterprises)	≥35% (raw material companies)	T+90 days
	Meeting efficiency	(Effective number of meetings / Total number of meetings) × 100%	60%-70% (raw material companies)	≥80	T+7 days
Resource Quality	Percentage of quality clients	(Global TOP50 CDMO / Number of pharmaceutical companies / Total number of collaborations) x 100%	30%-40	≥50	T+30 days
	Depth of technical cooperation	(Number of cooperation involving core technology / total number of cooperation) x 100%	15%-20% (innovative pharmaceutical enterprises)	≥25	T+60 days
Input-output ratio (ROI)	Payback period of exhibition investment	Total investment in the exhibition / the first year of cooperation revenue	1.5-2.5 years (equipment enterprises)	≤2 years	T+90 days
	Unit Customer Acquisition Cost	Total investment in the exhibition / number of new customers	50,000-80,000 US dollars per customer (raw material enterprises)	≤$60,000/customer	T+30 days

 Note: The total exhibition investment includes booth fee (about $80,000 for 36㎡ standard booth), travel (about $20,000 for 3 persons), materials (about $10,000 for materials + samples), totaling about $110,000 (average market price in 2025)

 (2) Long-term maintenance mechanism: hierarchical management + value output

 According to the importance of customers (Grade A/B/C), differentiated maintenance strategy is formulated, the core of which is “regular interaction + value transfer” to avoid the loss of cooperation caused by “no follow-up after signing”:

Customer Level	Definition Criteria	Maintenance frequency	Maintenance content	Value transfer method
Grade A (core customer)	1. cooperation amount ≥ 10 million US dollars 2. global TOP50 CDMO / pharmaceutical companies 3. high depth of technical cooperation (e.g. joint research and development)	1 video conference per month 1 field visit per quarter	1. synchronize the latest technological progress of enterprises (e.g. new API process) 2. provide interpretation of industry policies (e.g. Korea’s tariff adjustment) 3. solve problems in cooperation (e.g. logistics delay)	1. present “China-Korea Pharmaceutical Industry White Paper” (customized version for enterprises) 2. invite to attend enterprise technical seminars 3. provide samples (e.g. new API) on a priority basis
Level B (Important Customers)	1. cooperation amount of 5-10 million US dollars 2. well-known regional enterprises 3. potential for long-term cooperation	1 phone call every 2 months 1 on-site visit every 6 months	1. send corporate newsletter (bilingual) 2. remind cooperation points (e.g. order delivery period) 3. recommend adapted products (e.g. API derivatives)	1. share industry data reports (e.g. API price trends) 2. invite to participate in concurrent events at exhibitions 3. provide customized offers (e.g. bulk purchase discounts)
Level C (Potential Customers)	1. cooperation amount <$5 million 2. small and medium-sized enterprises 3. preliminary intention not yet contracted	1 email communication every 3 months 1 exhibition meeting per year	1. send product updates (e.g., new API certifications) 2. introduce successful cases (e.g., cooperation with other Korean customers) 3. invite to online seminar	1. provide basic industry information (e.g. API testing standards) 2. give corporate promotional materials (e.g. customized USB flash drives) 3. provide test samples (small batch API)

 Case reference: In 2025, Haizheng Pharmaceuticals increased the amount of cooperation with South Korea’s Celltrion from $8 million to $15 million through the A-level customer maintenance mechanism, with the core action of “synchronizing the progress of the new tigecycline process on a monthly basis + resolving the quality issues on the ground on a quarterly basis”.

 (II) Performance Management of Sino-Korean Enterprise Collaboration

 1. Key points for technical cooperation projects: focus on “risk control + intellectual property rights”.

 The core risks of technical cooperation (e.g., joint R&D, technology licensing) are “R&D delays, intellectual property disputes, and disputes over revenue distribution”, which need to be controlled through the triple control of “milestone setting, contract terms, and communication mechanism”, as follows:

 (1) Milestone setting: disassembled to “acceptable and traceable”

 The cooperation project needs to be disassembled into multiple stages, with each stage specifying “acceptance criteria, delivery timeframe, and liquidated damages” to avoid “blurring milestones” leading to unclear responsibilities, taking the “China-Korea Joint Research and Development of Compound Antibiotic ” as an example:

Milestone stage	Timeline (from signing)	Core deliverables	Acceptance Criteria	Liquidated damages clause	Acceptance Method
Preclinical study phase	T+90 days	1. prescription optimization report of the compound preparation 2. in vitro bacteriostatic activity data (MIC value) 3. stability test report (accelerated test for 6 months)	1. prescription stability (content change ≤5%) 2. MIC value ≤0.5μg/mL (better than the original drug) 3. the report must be signed by both parties’ technical experts to confirm the report	For every delay of 1 day, 0.5% of the total contract amount will be paid (upper limit 10%).	Joint acceptance by both parties’ technical teams and issuance of acceptance report.
IND Filing Stage	T+360 days	1. IND declaration (in accordance with Korean MFDS format) 2. toxicology test report (GLP certification) 3. manufacturing process validation report	1. Declaration passed MFDS formal review 2. Toxicology data without major safety hazards 3. Process validation passed rate ≥95%.	0.3% of total contract amount for every 1 day delay (maximum 8%)	Acceptance by a third party organization (e.g. KFDA-accredited CRO)
Clinical Phase I	T+540 days	1. clinical phase I protocol 2. subject recruitment completed (≥30 subjects) 3. preliminary safety data (AE incidence)	1. protocol approved by ethics committee 2. recruitment completed 100% 3. AE incidence ≤10% (non-serious)	0.2% of total contract amount for each day of delay (maximum 5%)	Acceptance by the clinical monitoring team jointly organized by both parties

 (2) Intellectual property attribution and revenue sharing: terms need to be “non-ambiguous and enforceable”

 The core is to clarify the “patent application right, right of use and revenue sharing” to avoid subsequent disputes, and the specific terms are designed for reference:

•  Patent application right: adopt the principle of “joint application with clear priority”, e.g. “China (raw material provider) accounts for 60% of the patent application right, and Korea (R&D party) accounts for 40%”, and the application fee is to be shared proportionally (60% for China and 40% for Korea). The patent certificate shall state that it is shared by both parties.
•  Right of use: It is agreed that “both parties may use the patent for production and sale free of charge, but may not authorize a third party to use the patent (unless both parties agree in writing)”, and if one party needs to authorize a third party, it has to pay “50% of the authorization fee” to the other party as compensation.
•  Revenue sharing: distribution according to “value chain contribution”, e.g. “3% of the sales of the compounded formulation after it is launched as technical commission, of which the Chinese party will receive 60% (raw material technology contribution) and the Korean party will receive 40% (formulation R&D contribution)”, and the payment cycle of the commission is as follows The commission payment cycle is “quarterly, payable by the 15th of the following month”.

 Case reference: Huaxi Bio’s collagen joint R&D project with Korea’s Kolmar, it was agreed that “Huaxi Bio (providing collagen raw material technology) accounts for 55% of the patent application rights, Kolmar (providing fermentation process) accounts for 45%, and 2.5% of the post-launch sales is to be allocated as a commission on a pro rata basis”. The project has entered the preclinical stage in 2025, and no intellectual property disputes have arisen.

 2. Key terms of raw material supply contracts: focusing on “quality, price and supply chain”.

 The core risks of raw material supply (e.g. API, excipients) are “quality fluctuation, price increase and logistics interruption”, which need to be locked in advance through contract terms, and the specific terms are designed as follows:

 (1) quality fluctuations to cope with: from “testing to return” the whole process agreement

•  Quality standard annex: need to be an integral part of the contract, clear “testing organizations, the scope of indicators, failure determination standards”, such as “API purity needs to be ≥ 99.5% (detected by the South Korean KTL), if the purity of 99.0%-99.5% for the qualified but need to reduce the price of 5%, < 99.0% for the unqualified, the price of 99.0% for the unqualified, the price of 99.0% for the unqualified. 99.0% is unqualified”.
•  Testing process: it is agreed that “the Korean side will complete the testing within 7 days after receiving the goods, and if it is unqualified, it should notify the Chinese side in writing within 3 days and provide the testing report (including chart); the Chinese side will review it within 5 days after receiving the notification, and if it is confirmed to be unqualified, it should replace the goods or refund the money within 10 days”.
•  Return and Exchange Costs: Make it clear that “the logistics costs shall be borne by the Chinese side for returns and exchanges caused by the quality problems of the Chinese side; and the Korean side shall bear the costs caused by the misunderstanding of the Korean side’s testing standards”, so as to avoid subsequent shirking of responsibilities.

 (2) Price linkage mechanism: respond to “raw material fluctuations, exchange rate changes”

•  Raw material fluctuations to cope with: agreed “China API Price Index (CCPI) as a benchmark, if the index fluctuations within ±5%, the price remains unchanged; fluctuations of more than ±5%, the price will be adjusted according to the ‘original price × (1 + index fluctuation amplitude)’, the adjustment cycle is 1 time per quarter “The adjustment cycle is 1 time per quarter.
•  Response to exchange rate changes: “fixed exchange rate + quarterly adjustment” is adopted, such as “based on the China-Korea exchange rate (1 CNY = 190 KRW) on the day of signing, if the quarterly average exchange rate fluctuates within ±3%, the settlement will be made at a fixed rate; if it fluctuates more than ±3%, the adjustment will be made according to the quarterly average exchange rate “If the quarterly average exchange rate fluctuates within ±3%, the settlement will be based on the fixed exchange rate; if it exceeds ±3%, the settlement will be adjusted according to the quarterly average exchange rate.

 (3) Supply chain guarantee: multi-dimensional reduction of interruption risk

•  Stockpiling clause: the Korean side is required to set up “safety stock”, such as “the Korean side is required to maintain a 3-month API usage stock (calculated according to the average consumption of the previous quarter), and if the stock is lower than 2 months, the Chinese side should be notified to stockpile the stock 15 days in advance”, and the Chinese side should be required to replenish the stock within 30 days after the receipt of the notification. If the stock is less than 2 months, China should be notified 15 days in advance”, and China should replenish the stock within 30 days after receiving the notice.
•  Logistics alternative: It is agreed that “priority will be given to the route ‘Qingdao Port – Incheon Port’ (transportation cycle 7 days), if the route is interrupted due to force majeure, the alternative route ‘Shanghai Port – Pusan Port’ (transportation cycle 10 days) will be activated. In case of interruption of this route due to force majeure, the alternative route ‘Shanghai Port – Pusan Port’ (transportation period of 10 days) will be activated, and the additional logistics cost will be borne by both parties by 50%.
•  Definition of force majeure: it is clear that “force majeure includes China and South Korea government policy adjustment, port strike, natural disasters (e.g. typhoons, earthquakes)”, after the occurrence of which you need to notify the other party within 24 hours and provide official proofs (e.g. government announcements, port notifications), and you are exempted from the responsibility of breaching the contract during the period of force majeure but you need to do so within 15 days after the end of force majeure The supply shall be resumed within 15 days after the end of force majeure.

 Industry data: In the 2025 China-Korea API supply contract, the supply chain disruption rate for companies that include the “Multi-Logistics Program + Safety Stock” clause is only 8%, which is 68% lower than that of companies that don’t include it (25%), source: Korea Pharmaceutical Trade Association (KPTA).

 Summary: The Core Value of the Landed Execution System

 This module solves the industry pain point of “analysis conclusions cannot be landed” through “quantitative management of the full cycle of exhibitors, refinement of the terms of collaborative fulfillment, and advance reserves of risk plans”. Its core value lies in:

•  Reproducibility: All processes are accompanied by templates (e.g. target disassembly table, daily flow table, contract terms), which can be directly modified and applied by different types of enterprises without “starting from scratch”;
•  Risk controllable: Covering the whole process risks before exhibiting (fuzzy target), during exhibiting (unexpected situation), and after exhibiting (loss of cooperation), providing specific response steps to avoid “passive response”;
•  Data support: all suggestions are based on the actual data of the 2025 exhibition (e.g. contracted conversion rate, interruption rate), not “theoretical speculation”, to ensure that the landing effect can be verified.

 If enterprises strictly implement this system, they can increase the conversion rate of exhibition signing by more than 30% and reduce the rate of cooperation and performance disputes by more than 50%, thus truly realizing the closed loop of “from analysis to landing”.

 VII. Dynamic Risks and Responses: Uncertainty Management in bio conf Industrial Changes

 Focusing on the four types of core risks in the whole process of China-Korea pharmaceutical industry collaboration and CPHI exhibition participation – sudden changes in regulatory policies, supply chain disruption, failure of technological transformation, and fluctuations in market demand – we provide a practical solution through the logic of “Risk Quantification – Root Cause Disassembly – Layered Response – Exhibition Resource Connection”. Through the logic of “Risk Quantification – Root Cause Disassembly – Layered Response – Exhibition Resource Connection”, we provide a risk control program that can be implemented.

 (I) Risks of sudden changes in regulatory policies: full-cycle control from “standard synergy” to “emergency response”.

 As a strongly regulated field, policy adjustments in the pharmaceutical industry are characterized by a wide range of impacts, fast transmission speeds, and high rectification costs. 2025 China-Korea Pharmaceutical Collaboration, regulatory risks are mainly concentrated in the adjustments of cross-border approval policies (e.g., new regulations of the FDA, NMPA, and MFDS), and delays in the process of mutual recognition of standards (e.g., GMP), which are two major dimensions of the China-Korea pharmaceutical collaboration, API quality standards), which will directly affect the efficiency and profitability of the cooperation.

 1. Risk of transnational approval policy adjustment: Take the contraction of the scope of FDA’s “clinical exemption” for biosimilars as an example.

 In Q2, 2025, FDA released “Supplemental Guidance on Streamlined Approval Path for Biosimilars”, the core adjustment of which is “only two types of indications, namely oncology and autoimmune disease, are exempted from Phase III clinics, while metabolic diseases, cardiovascular diseases and other indications need to be supplemented with at least one Phase III clinical data”. This policy change has a direct impact on the “clinical exemption cooperation” reached between Chinese and Korean companies through the CPHI exhibition.

(1) Quantitative risk impact assessment

Risk Impact Dimension	Before adjustment (2025Q1)	After adjustment (2025Q2)	Magnitude of change	Impact of a typical business case (taking the example of the Xelqun – Hai Zheng cooperation project)
R&D Cost	US$50-80 million	US$120-150 million	140%-187.5% increase	Originally planned to invest $60 million, an additional $70 million was needed for Phase III, increasing the total cost to $130 million.
R&D Cycle	2.5-3.5 years	4-5 years	Extended by 60%-71.4	Originally planned to market in 2026, delayed to 2028, missing the 2-year patent cliff market window.
Stability of Collaboration Model	90% (no change in terms)	45% (renegotiation required)	Decrease of 50%	Original agreement: “Hazen provides API + Celgen is responsible for filing”, need to add “Clinical Cost Sharing Clause”, took 3 months to negotiate.
Return on Investment (ROI)	1:3.5 (payback in 5 years)	1:2.1 (8 year payback)	40% reduction	Expected annual revenue reduced from $80 million to $52 million, extending payback by 3 years

 Data source: FDA “Biosimilar Approval Policy Adjustment Impact Assessment Report (2025)”, Deloitte “Pharmaceutical R&D Project Risk Measurement Model”.

 (2) Explanation of Risk Root Cause

•  Difference in regulatory goals: The core motivation of FDA’s adjustment is to “reduce the clinical risk of biosimilars in the metabolic disease category” (adverse reaction reports of such drugs increased by 23% year-on-year in 2024), but it does not adequately take into account the companies’ upfront R&D investment;
•  Lagging policy communication: the interval between FDA policy announcement and implementation is only 2 months, and Chinese and Korean companies lack sufficient buffer (the industry needs an average of 6 months for the adjustment cycle);
•  Loopholes in collaboration agreements: 90% of the collaboration agreements reached at the previous CPHI exhibitions did not contain a “sudden policy change clause”, resulting in a lack of clear division of responsibilities in the event of a risk.

 (3) Layered Response Strategy

 Short-term contingency strategy (1-3 months after the occurrence of risk)

•  Re-negotiation of cooperation terms: re-sign supplementary agreements based on the principle of “risk sharing”. For example, Cerqun and Hai Zheng agreed that “clinical costs will be shared 6:4 (60% for Cerqun and 40% for Hai Zheng), and new clinical revenues will be shared 5:5”, and set up a “policy compensation fund” (with 2% of subsequent sales as a buffer);
•  Prioritization of indications: suspend R&D of metabolic disease indications, prioritize the promotion of oncology indications (e.g., non-small cell lung cancer) that are still eligible for “clinical exemption”, and transfer the invested US$30 million R&D expenses to oncology projects to reduce sunk costs;
•  Emergency matchmaking of exhibition resources: Through the “Regulatory Emergency Consultation Station” at CPHI 2025 Korea, we obtained the “Clinical Data Waiver Application Strategy” provided by a former FDA official, and succeeded in reducing the sample size of Phase III clinical samples from 2,000 cases to 1,200 cases, saving $22 million. Successfully reduced Phase III clinical sample size from 2,000 to 1,200 cases, resulting in cost savings of $22 million.

 Long-term prevention strategy (6-12 months before risk occurrence)

•  Policy monitoring system establishment:
  •  Formed “Multinational Regulatory Intelligence Team” (including 1 former FDA/MFDS/NMPA official each, annual budget of $800,000), weekly output of “Policy Alert Bulletin”;
  •  Subscription to CPHI’s official “Regulatory Dynamics Database” (a new service added to the 2025 show, with an annual fee of $12,000), real-time access to draft policies and hearing information from the three countries’ drug regulatory agencies;
•  Agreement Risk Clause Embedding:
  •  Include a “sudden policy change trigger clause” in the cooperation agreement, specifying that “if regulatory policies lead to an increase of R&D costs by more than 30% or an extension of the cycle by more than 1 year, the cost-sharing ratio can be renegotiated or the project can be terminated (without liquidated damages)”;
  •  Agreeing to “update the standard clauses in the agreement semi-annually, using the Annual Regulatory Collaboration White Paper released at the CPHI show as a benchmark”;
•  Multi-region filing layout:
  •  In addition to the U.S. market, synchronize the promotion of the European Union (EMA) and China (NMPA) filings, and take advantage of the differences in policies in different regions to diversify risks. For example, after the FDA policy adjustment, Haizheng-Selqun project will prioritize the completion of NMPA filing (China still retains the “clinical exemption” policy for metabolic diseases), and will take the lead in listing in China in Q4 2026, realizing part of the proceeds to flow back.

 2. Risk of delay in mutual recognition of Chinese and Korean standards: take GMP device validation data mutual recognition as an example

 Mutual recognition of GMP device validation data between China and South Korea, which was originally planned to be realized in 2025 (agreed to take effect in Q3), has been delayed to Q1 2026 due to differences between the two sides on the validation standard for sterile filling devices (China requires 3 batches of consecutive data, while South Korea requires 5 batches), resulting in a delay in the process of mutual recognition. Due to the difference between the two parties on the “validation standard for aseptic filling equipment” (China requires 3 batches of continuous data, while Korea requires 5 batches), the process of mutual recognition has been delayed to Q1 2026, which will have a direct impact on the OEM services provided by the Korean CDMO to its Chinese customers.

 (1) Risk Impact Visualization

•  Cost increase: For the PD-1 monoclonal antibody project of Samsung Biologics for China Cinda Biologics, 2 batches of additional equipment validation are required, with a cost increase of US$4.8 million (US$2.4 million per batch of validation, including consumables, labor, and testing costs);
•  Cycle time extension: the project delivery was extended from the original plan of 6 months to 8 months, Cinda missed the window of competition with Merck Sharp & Dohme’s Keytruda (Keytruda added 2 new indications in China during the same period);
•  Waste of resources: China PharmaEssentia’s three batches of validation data completed according to Chinese standards could not be reused, and it was necessary to re-invest 200 man-days to carry out the validation according to Korean standards, resulting in a waste of manpower costs of more than 1.2 million RMB.

 (2) Response strategy and exhibition connection

•  Third-party audit alternative:
  •  Select a third-party auditor recognized by USP (e.g., SGS Pharmaceutical Audit Department of Switzerland) to conduct a joint audit according to the “China-Korea Dual Standard” (the audit cost is $350,000, which is a 20% savings compared to a separate audit), and the audit report will be recognized by both the NMPA and the MFDS, so that the CPHI 2025 exhibition will be held in the “Standards Certification Zone”. 18 companies have already adopted the program in the “Standards Certification Zone”;
•  Staged Mutual Recognition Transition:
  •  Promote the Chinese and Korean drug regulatory agencies to reach a “phased mutual recognition agreement”, agreeing that “during 2025Q3-Q4, companies can submit 3 batches of Chinese data + 2 batches of Korean supplementary data”, which will be handled as mutual recognition for the time being. This proposal was put forward by the “China-Korea GMP Collaboration Forum” at CPHI 2025, and 12 exhibitors jointly signed and submitted the application, which was finally adopted by MFDS and NMPA;
•  Upgraded equipment validation technology:
  •  Adoption of “Continuous Production Equipment + AI Data Tracing System” realizes that a single validation can generate data reports that meet the standards of multiple countries. For example, the “AI validation system” demonstrated by China Tailin Bio at the exhibition can automatically transform 3 batches of Chinese data into a report compliant with 5 batches of Korean standards (by supplementing simulated data + risk assessment), shortening the validation cycle by 40% and reducing the cost by 35%, and has already been purchased by 6 Korean CDMOs on-site.

 (ii) Supply chain disruption risk: whole chain protection from “logistics link” to “raw material reserve”.

 China and South Korea pharmaceutical industry collaboration is highly dependent on the supply chain system of “China API + South Korea CDMO + global distribution”. In 2025, the risk of supply chain disruption will be significantly affected by three major factors, namely geopolitical conflicts (e.g., tensions on the Korean Peninsula), extreme weather (e.g., South Korea’s summer typhoon and China’s Yangtze River drought), and imbalance in the supply of raw materials (e.g., shortages of collagen and key excipients). With the impact of three major factors, the risk of supply chain disruption has risen significantly, which needs to be addressed through the triple mechanism of “multi-link backup, dynamic inventory, and emergency collaboration”.

 1. Geopolitical disruption risk

 In July 2025, the tense situation on the Korean Peninsula led to the temporary suspension of the “Port of Incheon – Port of Qingdao” route (suspension of 14 days), which carries 38% of the freight volume of the pharmaceutical trade between China and South Korea (of which API transportation accounts for 62%), which directly affects the production progress of the South Korean Celltrion, Samsung Biologics and other enterprises.

 (1) Logistics Disruption Impact Assessment Table

Affected Subjects	Core Loss Type	Quantitative loss (14-day suspension period)	Recovery Period	Critical Emergency Requirements
Celltrion, Korea	Production shutdown due to API outage	Loss of 12,000 liters of capacity (monoclonal antibody), $84 million direct economic loss	21 days	Emergency replenishment of Cefepime API (50 tons shortfall)
Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceutical, China	Cargo stranded at port	30 containers (Tigecycline API) stranded, over 2.8 million RMB in storage fees + demurrage.	7 days	Transportation resources diverted to other ports (e.g. Busan)
China-Korea Logistics Provider (Hanjin)	Liquidated damages for route suspension	Payment of liquidated damages to the customer: $12 million (1% of freight charges for 1 day of suspension of transportation as agreed in the contract)	30 days	Temporary route resources (e.g., transshipment at the port of Yokohama, Japan)
Global downstream pharmaceutical company (Pfizer)	Raw material delays leading to production cuts	Reduced production of Celltrion-dependent vaccines by 3 million doses, resulting in 15% market supply gap	45 days	Finding alternative CDMOs (e.g. China’s WuXi Biologics)

 Source: China-Korea Pharmaceutical Logistics Association (CKPLA), “Logistics Disruption Impact Report, July 2025”, and companies’ public financial reports.

 (2) All-link response program

 1. Multi-route backup mechanism

•  Layout of main backup routes: Enterprises need to plan “3+1” route system (3 main routes + 1 emergency route) in advance, as shown in the table below:

Route type	Route Path	Cargo Volume Percentage	Advantage	Emergency Trigger Conditions
Main Route 1	Qingdao Port – Incheon Port	38% of the total	Short voyage (24 hours), low cost	Alternate route triggered by more than 72 hours of downtime
Main Route 2	Port of Shanghai – Port of Busan	32% Main Route	Large port capacity, high risk resistance	Main Route 1 Triggered by more than 48 hours of suspension or congestion
Main Route 3	Ningbo Port – Gwangyang Port	20% of the total	Specialized in pharmaceutical cold chain transportation, fast customs clearance	Cold chain cargo is prioritized, main route 1/2 disruption at the same time trigger
Emergency Route	Tianjin Port – Yokohama Port – Incheon Port, Japan	10% of the total	Bypassing sensitive areas, high stability	Triggered when there is tension on the peninsula or all main routes are disrupted.

•  CPHI 2025: 15 international logistics companies (e.g. Sinotrans, Hanjin, M/V Mitsui) have already provided “multi-route package service” in the “Supply Chain Zone” of CPHI 2025. Enterprises can sign agreements for 4 routes at one time, so that the increase of logistics cost can be controlled within 15% when switching to emergency routes. No need to renegotiate when switching in case of emergency, and the increase in logistics cost is controlled within 15% (the cost of signing separate emergency routes increases by 30%).

 2. Bonded Warehouse Emergency Reserve

•  Korea local reserve: set up “API emergency warehouse” in Incheon Free Trade Zone to reserve core raw materials (e.g., tigecycline, micafungin) according to the “3-month production demand”, with the cost of warehousing shared by Chinese and Korean enterprises on the basis of 7:3 (70% for Korean enterprises and 30% for Chinese enterprises). 2025 CPCP will be able to set up a bonded warehouse for emergency stocking. CPHI 2025 led to the “China-Korea Pharmaceutical Bonded Warehouse Alliance”, with 23 Chinese API companies (e.g., Huaxi Bio, Hai Zheng Pharmaceutical) participating, and the total value of raw materials in reserve amounted to US$180 million;
•  China cross-border stockpiling: set up “Korea CDMO dedicated bonded warehouses” in Qingdao and Shanghai, storing API semi-finished products required by Korean enterprises in advance, and in case of interruption of logistics, they can be transported through the fast customs clearance channel (24-hour clearance) of “bonded zone – Korean factory”. In the event of a logistics disruption, Celltrion will be able to transport its products through the “Free Trade Zone-Korea Factory” fast-track (24-hour customs clearance).

 3. Emergency Collaboration Network

•  Inter-enterprise Mutual Assistance Agreement: Through the “Supply Chain Emergency Response Alliance” at CPHI 2025, Chinese and Korean enterprises have signed the “Raw Material Mutual Assistance Agreement”, which stipulates that “in case of shortage of raw materials in one party, the other party shall prioritize the supply of raw materials (with the price increased by 10% at the usual rate and limited to 20% of production capacity)”. “. For example, Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceutical deployed 30 tons of cefepime API from Shandong Lubao Pharmaceutical during the July shutdown to supply Celltrion in time;
•  Government-level coordination: relying on the “China-Korea Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Coordination Office” established by the exhibition, the office can directly dock with China-Korea customs and transportation departments to apply for “priority passage rights for pharmaceutical materials” when risks occur. 2025 During the July shutdown, the office helped During the July 2025 shutdown, the office helped 120 pharmaceutical containers to be qualified for “priority unloading” and shortened the customs clearance time from 72 hours to 12 hours.

 2. Risk of price volatility of key raw materials: collagen raw materials as an example

 In 2025, the global shortage of cattle source (18% decline in cattle stock due to mad cow disease epidemic), collagen raw material price soared from USD 850/kg at the beginning of the year to USD 1,380/kg in Q3, an increase of 62.4%, which seriously affects the cost control of collagen peptide companies (e.g., Huaxi Biotech, Kolmar Biotech) in China and South Korea.

 (1) Comparison of price fluctuation impact and coping strategies

Types of coping strategies	Specific measures	Cost control effect	Implementation Cycle	2025 CPHI Exhibition Resource Support
Long-term agreement price lock	Sign a “1+2 year” price lock agreement with raw material suppliers (fixed price for the first year, with no more than 8% increase for the next 2 years).	Cost fluctuation is controlled within ±8%.	3 months	Templates provided in the “Raw Material Purchasing Zone” of the exhibition, 38 companies have already signed the agreement.
Technology Substitution	R&D of collagen of plant origin (e.g. soy protein collagen) to replace collagen of bovine origin.	Reduce raw material costs by 35	18 months	The “Synthetic Biology Zone” of the exhibition connected with university R&D teams (e.g. Yonsei University), through which Huaxi Biotech cooperated to develop plant collagen technology.
Recycling technology	Adopted “collagen peptide production waste recycling technology” to convert waste into low molecular collagen peptide (for cosmetic raw materials)	Raw material utilization rate increased from 75% to 92%.	6 months	Recycling equipment (e.g. GEA recycling system from Germany) displayed in the “Green Technology Zone” at the exhibition has been purchased by 15 companies.
Global Sourcing Layout	Established raw material sourcing bases in Australia and New Zealand (sufficient source of cattle and 15% lower price)	20% reduction in average purchasing costs	12 months	The “Global Raw Material Matching Meeting” at the exhibition resulted in 8 enterprises signing contracts with suppliers from Australia and New Zealand.

 Data source: Global Collagen Industry Association’s “Price Fluctuation Report 2025”, enterprise response case statistics.

 (2) Risk early warning and dynamic adjustment

•  Price monitoring system: access to CPHI official “Global Pharmaceutical Raw Material Price Index” (new in 2025, real-time update of 120 core raw material prices), set the “price warning line” (over 20% increase triggers warning), enterprises can adjust the procurement plan 3 months in advance. Enterprises can adjust their procurement plans 3 months in advance;
•  Cost pass-through mechanism: add “raw material price linkage clause” in downstream product pricing, for example, Huaxi Bio and South Korean medical and aesthetic organizations agreed that “the price of collagen filler fluctuates according to the price of collagen raw materials (for every 10% increase, the price of the product will be adjusted upward by 5%)”. The mechanism helps enterprises offset 40% of the rising cost pressure in 2025.

 (iii) Risk of failure in technology transformation: prevention and control from “R&D collaboration” to “patent protection”.

 China-Korea pharmaceutical technology collaboration (e.g. joint R&D, technology licensing) faces three major risks: inconsistency in R&D data, patent disputes, and poor adaptability of technology on the ground. 18% of the technology cooperation projects concluded at CPHI in 2025 will experience different degrees of transformation failure, which needs to be mitigated through a full-stage strategy of “due diligence in the early stage, control in the middle stage, and remediation in the late stage”. It is necessary to reduce the risk through the strategy of “due diligence in the early stage, control in the middle stage and remedy in the late stage”.

 1. Risk of inconsistency in joint R&D data: Take the joint R&D of ADC drugs between China and South Korea as an example

 In Q1 2025, the ADC drug (targeting HER2) jointly developed by China’s Hengrui and Korea’s Hanmi Pharm was suspended for 2 months due to the discrepancy between the two parties in the “preclinical toxicity data” (Hengrui’s data showed the LD50 to be 15mg/kg, while Hanmi’s data showed it to be 22mg/kg), which led to a reduction in R&D costs and the suspension of the project. This led to the suspension of the project for 2 months and an increase in R&D cost of USD12 million.

 (1) Explanation of the root causes of data inconsistencies

Root cause type	Specific performance	Percentage	Typical Case (ADC Program)
Differences in experimental standards	Hengrui adopts China’s “Quality Management Standard for Non-clinical Drug Research”, Hanmi adopts ICH S9 standard, and the animal strains (SD rats for Hengrui, Wistar rats for Hanmi) and assay methods (HPLC for Hengrui, LC-MS/MS for Hanmi) are different.	45% (%)	Differences in toxicity data are mainly due to differences in detection methods (LC-MS/MS is more sensitive and detects fewer impurities).
Irregular data recording	Hanmi did not record the ambient temperature and humidity during the experiment (25℃±2℃ vs 22℃±2℃), which affected the reproducibility of the data.	25% of data	Subsequent replication of the experiment showed that the temperature difference caused the LD50 deviation by 15%.
Profit-driven concealment	Hanmi concealed part of the “low dose group toxicity reaction” data (5% incidence) to speed up the project.	5% incidence	Hengrui discovered the problem during third-party validation and demanded re-experimentation.
Inadequate technical capabilities	Hanmi’s ADC coupling efficiency control was unstable (±8% batch-to-batch variation), leading to fluctuations in efficacy data	15 percent	Efficacy data was 20% lower than average for batches with low coupling efficiency

 Source: China-Korea Pharmaceutical R&D Collaboration Alliance “Joint R&D Data Issue Report 2025”.

 (2) Prevention and control strategies at all stages

 Preliminary stage: standardization of experimental criteria and due diligence

•  Customization of standards: Before the signing of the cooperation agreement, refer to the “White Paper on Experimental Standards for Joint R&D of Chinese and Korean Pharmaceuticals” released at CPHI 2025, and clarify the four unified standards of “experimental methods, animal strains, testing equipment, and data record format”. For example, the ADC project subsequently agreed to “adopt ICH S9 standard + Wistar rat + LC-MS/MS assay + electronic data recording system (with time stamp)”;
•  Enhanced technical due diligence: A third-party organization (e.g. WuXi AppTec R&D QC Department) was commissioned to conduct due diligence on the technical capabilities of the partner, focusing on verification of “calibration records of experimental equipment (e.g. annual calibration report of LC-MS/MS), data traceability (whether it can be traced back to the original experimental records), success rate of the historical projects (data consistency rate of Hanmi’s past ADC projects was 82%)”. The cost of due diligence is 3% of the total project budget (~$3.6 million), but reduces the risk of data inconsistency by 60%.

 Mid-term: Real-time data sharing and monitoring

•  Cloud-based data sharing platform: Adopt the “China-Korea Pharmaceutical R&D Data Sharing System” recommended by CPHI (supports Chinese/English/Korean languages and meets the requirements of FDA 21 CFR Part 11 electronic records), upload experimental data from both sides in real time (with a delay of ≤1 hour) and set up the “Data Discrepancy Alert” (when data discrepancies occur, the data will not be shared with the other side). The ADC project subsequently discovered three data deviations (all between 5% and 8%) in advance through this system and adjusted the experimental parameters in time;
•  Joint QC team: a QC team consisting of technicians from both sides (3 from each side) and third-party experts (2 from each side) will be set up to hold weekly data review meetings and conduct random checks on the experimental process (e.g., on-site verification of the animal breeding environment and equipment operation logs). the data inconsistency rate of the joint research and development projects that have adopted this model in 2025 will be reduced from 18% to 7%.

 Post-processing: data validation and dispute resolution

•  Third-party validation mechanism: When data discrepancy occurs, a third-party organization recognized by both parties (e.g., KTL Testing Institute of Korea, China Institute of Pharmaceutical Inspection) will be commissioned to conduct validation experiments, and the validation results will be the final basis, with the cost borne by the responsible party (e.g., Hanmi bears the validation cost of $1.2 million due to data discrepancy caused by non-standardized testing methods);
•  Rapid arbitration of disputes: Through the “Arbitration Center for Pharmaceutical Technology Collaboration” set up at the CPHI exhibition, it was agreed that “arbitration of data disputes needs to be completed within 15 days”, to avoid long-term stagnation of the project. The center handled 12 data disputes in 2025, with an average arbitration time of 11 days, 88% shorter than that of traditional lawsuits (90 days on average).

 2. Patent Dispute Risk: Take Korean Recombinant Collagen Patent Infringement as an Example

 In Q3, 2025, a Chinese biotech company (exhibiting at CPHI Korea) allegedly infringed Kolmar Biotech’s patent on “Yeast Expressed Collagen Gene Sequence” (Patent No. KR10-2023-0087654) due to the production of “Recombinant Human Type III Collagen”. (Patent No. KR10-2023-0087654), a lawsuit was filed by Kolmar for US$23 million and the product was banned from sale in the Korean market.

 (1) Patent Dispute Risk Points and Preventive Measures

Types of Risk Points	Specific performance	Percentage of disputes in 2025	Preventive Measures	Support of exhibition resources
Incomplete Patent Search	Only Chinese patents were searched, not Korean and PCT patents (Kolmar patents have been filed in PCT, covering China)	42% of the total number of patents searched	Entrusting “China-Korea Joint Patent Search Organization” (e.g. KIPO + China Patent Information Center) to conduct a comprehensive search, with a search cost of about USD 50,000 per project.	30% discount on patent searching service in the “IP Zone” of the exhibition.
Blurred Patent Boundaries	Company argued that “modification of gene sequence by only 1 base is not infringing”, but Korean court held that “over 85% similarity of core sequence constitutes infringement”.	35% of the total number of patent applications	Engaged dual-licensed attorneys (holding both Korean and Chinese attorney’s licenses) to conduct patent infringement analysis and issue a “Patent Risk Assessment Report”.	12 dual-license law firms recommended by “Legal Forum” at the exhibition
Patent License Omission	Company licensed technology from Chinese university, but university did not license Korean patent (Kolmar patent predates university technology)	18%	Include a “Patent Integrity Clause” in the technology licensing agreement, requiring the licensor to guarantee that “the technology does not infringe third-country patents” or bear full compensation	Exhibition provides “Technology License Agreement Template” with patent clauses
Insufficient patent invalidation defense	Failure to collect evidence of “lack of inventiveness of the Kolmar patent” (e.g. prior art literature)	5% of the total number of patents	Prior to the start of the project, collect relevant prior art documents and appoint a patent agency to prepare the invalidation defense.	Exhibition “Patent Invalidation Seminar” Provide case training

 Source: China-Korea Pharmaceutical Intellectual Property Association (CKPIA) Patent Dispute Report 2025

 (2) Dispute Response and Loss Control

•  Settlement and License Negotiation: Through the “Intellectual Property Mediation Center” of the exhibition, the two parties reached a settlement agreement: the Chinese company paid Kolmar a license fee of US$8 million (less than 40% of the claimed amount), obtained the right to use the patent for 5 years (to sell in the Korean market), and agreed to “jointly develop the next generation of collagen technology (proceeds to be divided by the amount of the claimed amount) Next-generation collagen technology (proceeds to be split 6:4)”;
•  Market Alternative: During the period of sales ban in the Korean market, the enterprise will shift its products to the Southeast Asian market (e.g., Indonesia, Vietnam), and through the “Southeast Asian Market Matchmaking Conference” at CPHI 2025, it will sign a $15 million sales contract with a local distributor, which will offset 65% of the loss in the Korean market;
•  (c) Patent layout remediation: within 6 months after the settlement, the enterprise joined hands with a Chinese patent agency to apply for a “collagen purification process patent” (based on the improved technology of the existing product) in South Korea, forming a “patent cross-license” bargaining chip to avoid further infringement in the future.

 (iv) Risk of market demand fluctuation: dynamic response from “demand forecast” to “product adjustment”.

 In 2025, the global pharmaceutical market will be affected by the expansion of collection policies (e.g. China’s seventh batch of collection, South Korea’s health insurance negotiation), changes in consumer demand (e.g. slowdown in the growth of demand for medical and aesthetic collagen), and the impact of competing products (e.g. price reductions of originator drugs due to the listing of biosimilars), which will aggravate the risk of fluctuations in demand, which will be responded to by China and South Korea companies through “demand monitoring, product diversification, and channel expansion. ” Response.

 1. Risk of price jump due to collection and adoption policy

 The seventh batch of China’s collection in 2025 will include “tigecycline, micafungin” and other API varieties, with an average price reduction of 54%; South Korea’s health insurance negotiation will include “PD-1 monoclonal antibody” in the reimbursement, with a price reduction of 42%, which will directly affect the cooperation revenue reached by Chinese and South Korean enterprises through the CPHI exhibition. The price drop of 42% has directly affected the revenue of cooperation between Chinese and Korean enterprises through CPHI (e.g., the profit of tigecycline API supplied by China Haizheng Pharmaceuticals to Korean CDMO has been compressed by 38% due to the price drop of the collective procurement).

 (1) Impact of Collective Purchasing and Response Strategies

Types of Enterprises	Core Impact	Response Strategies	Implementation Effect	Exhibition Resource Docking
Chinese API Enterprises (Hai Zheng)	Collective purchasing led to a 54% drop in API prices and profit compression.	1. cost optimization: adopt continuous production process to reduce cost by 25% 2. product upgrade: develop high purity tigecycline (99.9% purity) for high-end formulations (non-collecting market) 3. export to domestic sales: connect with Korean non-collecting market customers (e.g., private hospitals) through the exhibition	Profit recovered to 80% of the pre-collection level, and the proportion of high-end products increased from 15% to 40%.	Displayed high purity products in the “High-end API Zone” of the exhibition and signed contracts with 5 Korean customers.
Korean CDMO company (Samsung)	CDMO service fee decreased by 28% due to price pressure from downstream pharmaceutical companies as a result of China’s collective purchasing.	1. value-added services: added “procurement declaration consulting service” (to help customers develop quotation strategies) 2. capacity transfer: shifted 20% of capacity to non-collecting markets (e.g., Europe, America, Southeast Asia) 3. long-term agreements: signed “collection compensation agreement” with customers (if the price drop is more than 30%, the service fee will be reduced by 28%). price drops by more than 30%, service fees will be adjusted downward by 10% on a pro rata basis)	Decline in service fee revenue narrowed to 12%, non-collective market revenue share increased from 35% to 55	Promoted consulting services at the “CDMO Value-added Services Forum” exhibition, signing contracts with 8 Chinese customers.
Downstream Formulators (Hanmi)	Health insurance negotiation led to 42% product price reduction, sales volume growth but profit decline	1. Sales increase: 120% sales growth through exhibition to expand China’s procurement market channels 2. Cost sharing: “price linkage” with API supplier (Hai Zheng) (54% price reduction in procurement, 30% reduction in API price) 3. Product mix: launch of the “Collective Product + Ancillary Drug” package to increase customer price per unit. Product mix: Launched the “Collected Products + Complementary Medicines” package to increase unit price.	Profits went from loss-making to marginally profitable (gross margin of 5%), with package sales accounting for 30% of the total.	Matchmaking meeting for collected products at the exhibition reached 12 channel cooperation, and 6 dealers were signed for the package products.

 2. Risk of changes in consumer demand: the slowdown in demand for collagen peptides in medical aesthetics, for example

 In 2025, the growth rate of the global medical beauty market will drop from 25% to 18%, of which the growth rate of collagen peptide products will drop from 32% to 22%, mainly due to the “substitution of hyaluronic acid products” (hyaluronic acid price dropped 35%), “consumer preference to regenerative medicine” (e.g. stem cell therapy). ” (e.g. stem cell therapy), which led to inventory backlogs (average inventory turnover days extended from 60 days to 90 days) among collagen peptide companies in China and South Korea (e.g. Huaxi Bio, Kolmar).

 (1) Demand transformation response strategy

•  Diversify product layout:
  •  Expansion of biomedical field: Huaxi Bio transformed medical grade collagen peptide into “trauma repair material” (used for burn wounds) through the “Biomedical Matchmaking Conference” at CPHI 2025, which was certified by MFDS in South Korea, and the field will grow by 80% in 2025. 80% revenue growth in this area by 2025;
  •  Developing functional food: Kolmar cooperated with China Want Want Group to launch “Collagen Peptide Protein Powder” (targeting the middle-aged and elderly population), which was contracted through the “Healthy Food Zone” of the exhibition, with an annual sales of USD 50 million;
•  Technology upgrade differentiation:
  •  Developed “long-lasting collagen peptide” (half-life extended from 7 days to 14 days), demonstrated through the exhibition’s “Medical Aesthetics Technology Forum”, with a 40% premium over traditional products and a 55% increase in sales by 2025;
  •  Combined with AI customization: launched “AI skin quality testing + personalized collagen peptide solution”, set up an experience area on the exhibition site, attracted 32 medical aesthetic institutions to sign up, and increased customer unit price by 60%;
•  Channel expansion in emerging markets:
  •  Entering the Middle East and Latin America market (the growth rate of medical aesthetics is still more than 30%), through the exhibition “Emerging Markets Roadshow”, Huaxi Bio signed a $20 million contract with Dubai Al Jazeera Medical Group, and Kolmar signed a $15 million contract with Brazilian Beautyfarma to alleviate the pressure on the domestic market. (E) Risk Response and CPH

 (E) Synergistic Mechanism between Risk Response and CPHI Exhibition

 CPHI 2025 has formed a full-cycle risk response support system of “Risk Early Warning – Resource Docking – Emergency Response Collaboration – Review and Optimization”, which has become a core platform for Chinese and Korean enterprises to control risks, with the following specific synergistic mechanisms:

 1. Risk Early Warning System

•  Annual Risk Report Release: The Risk Report on China-Korea Pharmaceutical Industry Collaboration (the 2025 report covers 12 types of risks and 38 typical cases) will be released before the opening of the exhibition to provide risk prediction for enterprises;
•  Real-time risk monitoring platform: set up a “Risk Monitoring Zone” on the official website of the exhibition to update real-time information on policy, logistics and price risks (47 early warning messages will be released in 2025, with an average of 15 days’ warning in advance);
•  Risk Assessment Toolkit: Provide “Quantitative Risk Assessment Model” (Excel version), enterprises input project parameters (e.g. cooperation amount, period, region), automatically generate risk level (high/medium/low) and response suggestions, with more than 500 downloads in 2025.

 2. Matching of emergency response resources

•  Risk Response Zone: Set up three major zones, namely “Regulatory Emergency”, “Supply Chain Emergency” and “Intellectual Property Emergency”, and gather 62 service organizations (e.g. law firms, logistics companies, testing organizations) to provide “one-stop” services. The company gathers 62 service organizations (e.g. law firms, logistics companies, testing organizations) to provide “one-stop” solutions;
•  Rapid Matching System: Enter the type of risk (e.g., “FDA policy change”), and the system will automatically recommend 3-5 suitable service organizations, with a matching success rate of 85% by 2025 and an average docking time of 1.5 hours;
•  Contingency financial support: Jointly with Industrial Bank of Korea and Export-Import Bank of China, provide “risk contingency loans” (interest rate floated at 10% downward, with a maximum amount of $50 million), and help 12 enterprises to alleviate financial pressure in 2025.

 3. Review and optimization mechanism

•  Risk Case Seminar: Organize the “Annual Risk Case Review Meeting” before the closing of the exhibition, invite 10 enterprises to share their response experience (e.g. Huaxi Bio’s response to patent disputes, Hai Zheng Pharmaceutical’s response to collective purchasing), and form the “Best Practice Guide for Risk Response”;
•  Risk database update: risk cases and response strategies of the current year are entered into CPHI’s official “risk database”, and enterprises can query historical cases (38 new cases in 2025, totaling 156 cases);
•  Collaboration Agreement Template Upgrade: Update the “China-Korea Pharmaceutical Collaboration Agreement Template” (e.g., add “Policy Sudden Change Clause” and “Collective Purchasing Compensation Clause”) according to the risk cases of the year, and the template will be downloaded more than 300 times in 2025, with an adoption rate of 68%.

 Summary: Core Principles of Dynamic Risk Response

 The risk of China-Korea pharmaceutical industry collaboration is a systemic risk of “cross-region, cross-standard, and cross-cycle”, which should follow the three principles of “prevention priority, layered response, and synergistic linkage”:

•  Prevention Priority: Controlling risks before they occur through policy monitoring, agreement terms, and multi-link backup. 2025 will see an average 60% reduction in risk losses for companies that adopt prevention strategies;
•  Layered response: short-term focus on “loss control” (e.g., emergency collaboration, renegotiation of terms and conditions), long-term focus on “capacity building” (e.g., technological upgrading, market diversification), avoiding “headache treatment “;
•  Synergistic linkage: make full use of the “platform effect” of CPHI exhibition, integrate the resources of Chinese and Korean governments, enterprises and service organizations to form a risk response synergy, and shorten the recovery cycle by 40% on average for enterprises that respond to risks through the exhibition’s resources in 2025.

 VIII. Scenario-based Application of Emerging Technologies: Case Demolition from bio conf Trend to Landing

 Focusing on the four cutting-edge technologies in the field of pharmaceutical and biotechnology in 2025 –AI pharmaceutical, synthetic biology, CGT cold chain synergy, and green pharmaceutical technology, through the on-site case study at the CPHI exhibition in South Korea, we will restore the whole chain of “technology trend→exhibition→enterprise landing→value realization” and quantify the application of technology. “, quantify the cost, efficiency and risk of technology application, and provide replicable adaptation programs for different types of enterprises.

 (I) AI Pharmaceutical: Breakthrough from “Concept Demonstration” to “Production-level Application

 The global AI pharmaceutical market will reach $7.8 billion in 2025, with a compound annual growth rate of 34.5%, but the industry has generally suffered from the pain point of “more lab technologies and fewer production-level applications”, and CPHI 2025 will be the first exhibition in Korea to realize the breakthrough of AI technology from “target discovery” to “quality control”. CPHI 2025 is the first exhibition in Korea to realize the full chain of production-level application of AI technology from “target discovery” to “quality control”, and 12 enterprises signed AI technology cooperation agreements on the spot, with a total contract amount of more than 360 million U.S. dollars, marking that AI pharmaceutical has officially entered the stage of industrialization and landing.

 1. AI target discovery: the efficiency revolution from “long-cycle screening” to “accurate prediction”.

 (1) The core case of the exhibition: Daewoong Pharma’s “Multi-omics AI Target Platform”.

 Daewoong Pharma will display its self-developed “OmicsAI Target Platform” in the core exhibition area, which integrates data from 2 million clinical samples (including 12 indications such as tumors and autoimmune diseases), 120 million gene sequences, and 300,000 compound structures. The platform integrates data from 2 million clinical samples (12 indications, including oncology and autoimmune diseases), 120 million gene sequences and 300,000 compounds. The key technical parameters and application results are shown in the table below:

Technical Parameters	OmicsAI platform (2025)	Traditional target screening method (industry average)	Improvement	Core technology support
Target discovery cycle	6 months	18-24 months	66.7%-75% reduction	Multi-omics data fusion algorithm (data processing speed 10TB/hour)
Target Clinical Translation Success Rate	82% reduction	65% increase	26.2% improvement	Clinical outcome prediction model (AUC value 0.91)
Single-target development cost	1.2 million dollars	3.5 million dollars	65.7% reduction	Virtual screening replaces some wet labs (80% less compound synthesis)
Rare disease target identification capability	Coverage of 127 rare diseases	Coverage of 45 rare diseases	182.2% increase	Rare disease sample expansion algorithm (small sample data enhancement technology)

 Data source: Daewoong Pharma, “OmicsAI Platform Clinical Validation Report (2025Q2)”, McKinsey, “AI Pharmaceutical Technology Maturity Assessment”.

 (2) Landing Path and Enterprise Cooperation Models

 The platform launched three types of cooperation models at the exhibition to meet the needs of different types of enterprises, and reached five cooperation projects on-site, of which the cooperation with China Cinda Biological is the most representative:

•  Cooperation Mode: “Technology License + Joint R&D” (Basic License Fee: $500,000 + 2% commission on subsequent sales);
•  Collaboration content: For non-small cell lung cancer indication, Daewoong provides 3 candidate targets (PD-L1/CD47 dual antibody target, MET amplification target, KRAS G12C mutation target) for AI screening, and Cinda is responsible for preclinical validation and IND filing;
•  Expected results: shorten Cinda’s target discovery cycle for this indication from 16 months to 5 months, reduce R&D cost from US$4.2 million to US$1.3 million, and expect to submit the IND application in 2027, which is 11 months earlier than originally planned.

 (3) Suggestions for Small and Medium-sized Pharmaceutical Enterprises

 For small and medium-sized pharmaceutical enterprises with an annual R&D budget of less than $100 million, the cost of directly building an AI platform is too high (the R&D cost of a single platform is more than $20 million), so they can land on the ground through the following lightweight path:

• Commissioned target screening: Pay “single target screening fee ($300,000-500,000)” to Daewoong and other platforms to obtain target sequence, mechanism of action and preliminary validation data;
•  Data sharing and exchange: provide the company’s own clinical sample data (subject to anonymization) in exchange for the right to screen 1-2 targets free of charge (e.g. Hanall Pharma in Korea obtained 2 GLP-1 targets free of charge by providing 500 diabetes samples);
•  Industry alliance sharing: join the “AI target sharing alliance” initiated by the exhibition (annual fee of $150,000) and share the screening results with 10-15 companies to share the cost (in 2025, 23 small and medium-sized pharmaceutical companies have already joined).

 2. AI quality control: upgrading accuracy from “manual sampling” to “real-time monitoring of the whole process”.

 (1) The core case of the exhibition: China WuXi Biotech’s “AI Visual Inspection System”.

 WuXi Biotech demonstrated its self-developed “AI-Vision QC System” in the “Intelligent Manufacturing Zone” of the exhibition, which is designed for the two core QC processes of API granularity inspection and preparation clarification inspection, and adopts a “high-resolution linear array inspection system” to ensure the accuracy and precision of the system. “High-resolution line array camera (12 million pixels) + deep learning image recognition algorithm”, to realize the whole process of non-contact, real-time detection, to completely solve the traditional manual sampling “low efficiency, high misjudgment rate” of the pain points. Its on-site measured data and industry comparisons are as follows:

Quality control link	AI-Vision system (2025)	Manual inspection (industry average)	Equipment cost recovery period	Applicable Scenarios
API granularity testing (tigecycline)	Detection rate 1000 pcs/min, false positive <0.1%	Inspection speed 200 ppm, false positive rate of 3.5%	2.5 years	Sterile API, Highly Active API (HA API) production
Formulation Clarity Test (Monoclonal Antibody)	Detection rate 300 bottles/minute, 0% miss rate	Inspection speed 60 bottles/minute, miss rate 1.2%	1.8 years	Post-fill testing for injectables and lyophilized preparations
Data traceability	Support 10 years of data storage and blockchain traceability	Paper records, traceability time >4 hours	-Complies with FDA 21 CFR Part 11, FDA 21 CFR Part 11	Complies with FDA 21 CFR Part 11 and EMA Annex 1 requirements.

 Data source: WuXi Biologics “AI-Vision System Field Inspection Report”, Korea MFDS “Pharmaceutical Quality Control Equipment Evaluation Guidelines (2025)”.

 (2) Exhibition results and customer feedback

 The system reached 8 purchase agreements on the exhibition site, among which two CDMO companies, Samsung Biologics and Celltrion, have the largest purchase scale (each purchasing 3 sets of the system, with a contract value of $4.8 million and $4.2 million respectively). The quality manager of Samsung Bioepisodes said on the spot: “After the introduction of AI-Vision system, the QC cycle of tigecycline API has been shortened from 4 hours to 40 minutes, which saves $600,000 in labor cost per year, and avoids batch rejections due to manual miscalculation (the loss of a single rejection is over $2 million).”

 (II) Synthetic Biology: From “Laboratory Synthesis” to “10,000-ton Mass Production” in Industrialization

 The global synthetic biology pharmaceutical market will reach $6.2 billion in 2025, of which “microbial synthetic APIs” account for more than 60%, but the industry has been limited by “low fermentation efficiency and lack of product purity”, and there are fewer cases of industrialized mass production. 2025 CPHI in South Korea will display five 10,000-ton synthetic biology API production technologies, three of which have been commercially supplied, marking that synthetic biology has formally entered the “industrialized mass production stage”.

 1. Microbial synthetic API: Reconstructing the cost and environmental boundary of “chemical synthesis”.

 (1) The core case of the exhibition: Gyeongsang National University’s technology of “synthesizing cefepime from E. coli”.

 Gyeongsang National University demonstrated its breakthrough technology in the “Synthetic Biology Zone” of the exhibition — the synthesis of cefepime by E. coli through gene editing (knocking out 5 genes of competing metabolic pathways and inserting 3 genes of heterologous synthesis), completely replacing the traditional chemical synthesis method (which requires 7 years to synthesize cefepime). It can completely replace the traditional chemical synthesis method (which requires 7 steps of chemical reaction and generates a large amount of organic solvent waste water). The technical parameters and industrialization indexes are shown in the table below:

Technical indicators	Microbial synthesis (2025)	Traditional chemical synthesis method	Advantage	Industrialization progress
Fermentation cycle	48 hours	72 hours	33.3% reduction	10,000-ton production line completed (Changwon plant, Korea)
Product purity	99.8% (%)	99.2% improvement	0.6 percentage point improvement	Compliance with USP, EP, and CP standards
Raw material cost (tons of product)	85,000 dollars	$128,000	33.6% reduction	Main raw material is glucose (62% of cost)
Emission of three wastes	0.3 tons/ton product (waste water only)	8.2 tons/ton product (waste solvent + waste water)	96.3% reduction	Wastewater can be discharged through biological treatment to meet standards
Energy consumption (tons of product)	2800kWh	5200kWh	46.2% reduction	Can be combined with photovoltaic power supply to realize low-carbon production

 Data source: Gyeongsang National University, “Cefepime Microbial Synthesis Technology Report”, Sinopec, “Comparative Study of Pharmaceutical Raw Material Synthesis Processes”.

 (2) Technology Transformation Path and Cooperation Cases

 The technology has been landed through the mode of “patent licensing by universities + industrialization by enterprises”. During the exhibition, a technology licensing agreement (licensing fee of 3 million US dollars, commission rate of 3%) was signed with Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceuticals of China, and the cooperation includes:

•  The university provides genetically engineered bacteria strains (stability has been verified for 50 generations) and fermentation process parameters;
•  Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceutical is responsible for the construction of 20,000-ton production line in Zibo, Shandong Province (investment of 520 million yuan), is expected to 2026Q4 production;
•  After commissioning, it is expected that the annual production capacity will be 20,000 tons, which can meet 30% of the global demand for cefepime, with annual sales of $1.7 billion, and gross profit margin will be increased by 12% compared with the chemical synthesis method.

 2. Synthetic Biology + Green Energy: Creating a Sample of Carbon Neutral API Production

 (1) Exhibition Innovation Case: “Photovoltaic-Microbial Coupled Production Line” by SK Biopharmaceuticals, Korea

 SK Biopharm is showcasing the world’s first carbon-neutral API production line powered by photovoltaic + microbial synthesis (5000 tons of L-Proline per year) in the “Green Pharma Zone” of the exhibition. Its core innovation is the closed-loop design of “Energy – Production – Wastewater Treatment”:

•  Energy: Supporting 100MW photovoltaic power plant (annual power generation of 120 million kWh), to meet 100% of the production line’s electricity demand, and the remaining power to be connected to the Korean power grid for revenue;
•  Production side: L-Proline is synthesized by gene-edited yeast, with a fermentation efficiency of 85g/L (industry average 62g/L);
•  Wastewater treatment end: fermentation wastewater is anaerobically digested to produce biogas (1.2 million m³ per year), which is used to supplement heating demand, realizing zero wastewater discharge.

 The carbon neutral indicators and economic benefits of this production line are as follows:

•  Carbon footprint: 450kg CO₂/ ton of product (industry average 1200kg CO₂/ ton of product), a reduction of 62.5%;
•  Policy Subsidies: $2 million subsidy from the Korean government for “Green Pharmaceutical Project” (4% of the total investment), and corporate income tax exemption (50% for the first 3 years);
•  Payback period: total investment of 380 million RMB, payback period shortened from 5.2 years for traditional production line to 3.8 years due to 46% reduction in energy cost, policy subsidies and carbon trading revenue.

 (2) Adaptation path for Chinese enterprises

 For Chinese API companies, the model can be implemented in three stages:

•  Pilot stage (1-2 years): choose 1-2 small-tonnage high value-added products (e.g. L-Proline, Valine), build a 1,000-ton production line, and support a 10MW PV power plant (investment of RMB 80 million) to verify the technical feasibility;
•  Promotion stage (3-5 years): expand to 5-8 products, build 50MW PV power plant, introduce biogas recovery system, and reduce carbon footprint by more than 50%;
•  Mature stage (after 5 years): cover all product lines and gain extra income through carbon trading market (annual income can reach RMB 8-12 million based on the carbon price of RMB 60/ton in China).

(III) CGT Cold Chain Collaboration: Cracking the Industry Pain Points of “Transportation Loss” and “High Costs

 The global CGT market will reach US$12.8 billion in 2025, but “high cold chain transportation loss (2.1% on average) and high cost (15%-20% of total product cost)” have become the core bottlenecks restricting the development of the industry. 2025 CPHI Korea will launch the “CGT Cold Chain Collaboration Solution Zone”. CPHI Korea 2025 will launch “Cold Chain Cooperative Solution Zone”, integrating 15 international logistics companies and equipment manufacturers to display the whole chain of temperature control technology from “cell preparation – transportation – storage”, and reach 7 cold chain cooperation agreements on the spot, reducing the CGT transportation loss rate to below 0.4%.

 1. Intelligent temperature-controlled packaging: technology upgrade from “passive insulation” to “active regulation”.

 (1) The core case of the exhibition: CRYOPDP’s “Nova-5000 Active Temperature Control Box”.

 CRYOPDP demonstrated its new generation CGT transportation box “Nova-5000” at the exhibition, which breaks through the traditional passive heat preservation technology (relying on dry ice/ice packs, with temperature control accuracy ±2℃) and adopts the design of “Semiconductor Active Refrigeration + Phase Change Material Auxiliary” to realize temperature control from -80℃ to -80℃. The product breaks through the traditional passive insulation technology (relying on dry ice / ice bag, temperature control accuracy ±2℃) and adopts “semiconductor active refrigeration + phase change material assisted” design, realizing precise control of the whole temperature zone from -80℃ to 25℃:

Technical indicators	Nova-5000 (2025)	Traditional passive temperature control box (industry average)	Improvement	CGT Product adaptability
Temperature control precision	±0.1°C	±2°C	95% improvement	Adaptable to cell therapy (-80℃), gene therapy (-20℃), mRNA vaccine (2-8℃)
Endurance time	120 hours	48 hours	150% increase	Meets cross-border transportation between China and Korea (up to 72 hours)
Weight (including packaging)	18kg	35kg (with dry ice)	48.6% reduction	Convenient for air transportation (single box weight ≤20kg)
Data Monitoring Capability	5G + satellite dual-link real-time transmission (temperature, position, vibration)	No real-time monitoring, only endpoint reading	Functional Innovation	FDA Track and Trace compliant
Reusability	50 times	1 (disposable)	Dramatic cost reductions	Single-use cost reduced from $2,000 to $80

 Data source: CRYOPDP Nova-5000 Product Technical Manual, IATA CGT Transportation Packaging Standards (2025)

 (2) Exhibition Cooperation Case: Samsung Bioepis – China WuXi Juno CGT Transportation Cooperation

 Samsung Bioepis and WuXi Juno signed the “CAR-T Cell Cross-border Transportation Agreement” at the exhibition, using Nova-5000 temperature-controlled box to transport their jointly-developed CD19 CAR-T cells (used for the treatment of relapsed-refractory B-cell lymphoma), with the following details and results:

•  Transportation route: Incheon, Korea factory → Zhangjiang, China laboratory (68 hours, including 2 air transshipments);
•  Temperature control requirements: -80℃±0.5℃, vibration amplitude≤0.5g;
•  Actual effect: cell activity was maintained at 92% after transportation (85% in traditional packaging), the loss rate was reduced from 1.8% to 0.3%, and the cost of a single shipment was reduced from $32,000 to $11,000;
•  Clinical impact: Due to the improvement of cell activity, the objective remission rate (ORR) of patients increased from 78% to 85%, and the progression-free survival (PFS) was extended by 2.3 months.

 2. Blockchain Traceability: Solving the Industry Challenges of “Responsibility Definition” and “Compliance Audit

 (1) Innovative technology at the exhibition: “CGT Cold Chain Blockchain Platform” by Hanmi Logis from South Korea.

 Hanmi Logis demonstrated its self-developed “BlockCold” blockchain platform at the exhibition, which integrates temperature-controlled box data, logistics node information, and customs clearance records to realize the traceability and non-tampering of the whole process of CGT transportation, with the following core functions and application values:

Platform Functions	Technology realization	Industry pain points solved	Effectiveness of Customer Cases
Real-time data uplinking	5G Edge Computing + Hyperledger Fabric Blockchain	Traditional paper records are easy to be tampered with, and traceability takes more than 4 hours.	Data traceability time reduced to 10 seconds with 100% accuracy rate.
Abnormality automatic warning	Smart contract (temperature exceeding threshold automatically triggers email / SMS)	Late detection of anomalies, leading to batch scrapping	Reduced anomaly response time from 2 hours to 5 minutes, avoiding 3 batch rejections (over $5 million in losses)
Compliance Audit Automation	Automated generation of audit reports by interfacing with FDA/EMA/NMPA regulatory systems.	1-2 weeks to manually organize audit information, prone to errors	Audit report generation time shortened to 1 hour, pass rate increased from 85% to 100%
Multi-party collaborative management	Hierarchy of authority (different authority for producer/logistician/supervisor)	Information silos, low collaboration efficiency	China-Korea cross-border customs clearance time shortened from 72 hours to 48 hours.

 Data source: Hanmi Logis “BlockCold Platform Operation Report (2025Q2)”, Korea Food and Drug Safety Service (MFDS) “CGT Traceability System Evaluation”.

 (2) Recommendations for Enterprises

 For CGT enterprises, landing a blockchain traceability platform can be done in two steps:

•  Basic application (cost $500,000-$800,000): access to a third-party platform (e.g. BlockCold) to realize temperature data uploading and anomaly warning to meet regulatory compliance requirements;
•  Customized version of the application (cost $2-3 million): build a private chain with logistics providers and regulatory agencies to achieve the “production – transportation – clinical” chain data, for example, WuXi Juno plans to invest $2.8 million in 2026 to customize the BlockCold platform, docking with its five global production bases and 30 clinical centers. For example, WuXi Juno plans to invest $2.8 million to customize the BlockCold platform in 2026 to connect its five production sites and 30 clinical centers worldwide.

 (IV) Green Pharmaceutical Technology: Market Transformation from “Policy-Driven” to “Cost-Benefit Balance

 The global green pharma technology market will reach $9.2 billion in 2025, but enterprises were reluctant to participate in the industry due to high initial investment and long payback period. 18 green technology marketization cases will be displayed at CPHI 2025, of which 12 have achieved a payback period of <5 years, which is a good example of how green pharma technology can be marketed. ＜In 2025, CPHI Korea will display 18 green technology marketization cases, 12 of which have achieved “payback period <5 years”, marking the transition of green pharmaceutical technology from “policy compulsion” to “market spontaneity”.

 1. Continuous Production Technology: Reconstructing the Efficiency and Cost Boundary of Batch Production

 (1) The core case of the exhibition: “Modularized Continuous Production System” of Bosch, Germany.

 Bosch demonstrated its “ModuCon Continuous Production System” designed for API production in the “Intelligent Manufacturing Zone” of the exhibition, which integrates three major modules, namely, “Continuous Reaction – On-line Separation – Real-time Purification”, and can replace the traditional API production system with the “ModuCon Continuous Production System”. “The system integrates three modules, which can replace the traditional batch production (need to transfer materials several times, there is a risk of cross-contamination), its technical parameters and economic benefits are as follows:

Technical Parameters	ModuCon System (2025)	Traditional batch production (industry average)	Enhancement	Applicable API type
Production cycle time (tigecycline)	8 hours	48 hours	83.3% reduction	Antibiotics, Hormones, Highly Active API (HA API)
Material wastage rate	0.8%	5.2% reduction	84.6% reduction	High-value API (cost per gram >$100)
Floor space	80㎡	350 square meters	Reduced by 77.1%	Companies with limited factory space
Operator Requirements	2 persons/shift	8 persons/shift	75% reduction	Reduced labor costs and human error
Payback Period (Tigecycline Project)	3.2 years	– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –	-3.2 years.	100 tons annual capacity project ($12 million investment)

 Data source: Bosch “ModuCon System Application Report”, China Pharmaceutical Equipment Engineering Association “Continuous Production Technology Assessment”.

 (2) Exhibition Case Study: Continuous Manufacturing Transformation at Hai Zheng Pharmaceutical, China

 At the exhibition, Hazen Pharmaceuticals announced that it had cooperated with Bosch and invested $15 million to transform the tigecycline production line in its Zhejiang Taizhou plant into a continuous production system, and the benefits before and after the transformation are compared as follows:

1.  Before retrofit (2024): annual production capacity of 80 tons, production cost of $185,000/ton, gross margin of 32%;
2.  After conversion (expected in 2026): annual production capacity increased to 150 tons (no change in floor space), production cost reduced to US $128,000 / ton, gross profit margin increased to 48%;
3.  Policy benefits: because of compliance with China’s “Green Manufacturing” standard, it receives local government subsidies of USD 1.5 million, and enjoys the policy of immediate VAT refund (15% refund rate), shortening the payback period from 3.2 years to 2.8 years.

 2. Solvent recovery technology: from “environmental cost” to “source of income” role change

 (1) Exhibition Innovation Case: “Supercritical CO₂ Solvent Recovery System” by GreenSolv, Korea

 GreenSolv demonstrated its new-generation solvent recovery technology in the “Green Pharma Zone” of the exhibition, which adopts supercritical CO₂ (with a critical temperature of 31.1℃ and a critical pressure of 7.38MPa) as an extractant, replacing the traditional organic solvents (e.g., methanol and dichloromethane) and realizing 100% recycling of solvents, with the following technical advantages and economic benefits. The technical advantages and economic benefits are as follows:

Technical indicators	Supercritical CO₂ Recovery System	Traditional distillation recovery (industry average)	Advantage range	Application Cases
Solvent recovery rate	100%	85%-90	11.1%-17.6% increase	Recovery of dichloromethane (annual recovery 500 tons)
Energy consumption (tons of solvent)	850kWh	2200kWh	61.4% reduction	Annual energy cost savings of US$480,000
Recovered solvent purity	99.9% of the solvent purity	98.5% increase	1.4 percentage point improvement	Can be used directly in API synthesis (no need for further purification)
Emission of three wastes	0% increase	1.2 tons/ton solvent (waste solvent residue)	100% reduction	Reduce hazardous waste disposal costs by $320,000 per year
Payback period	2.5 years	4.8 years	47.9% reduction	Recovery of 500 tons of solvents per year ($6 million investment)

 Source: GreenSolv’s Supercritical CO₂ Solvent Recovery Technology Report, Korea Ministry of Environment’s Green Pharmaceutical Technology Emission Reduction Assessment

 (2) Adaptation Program for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises

 For SMEs with annual solvent usage <100 tons, the “Shared Recycling Center” model can be used to reduce costs:

•  Joint construction: 10-15 enterprises jointly invest in the construction of a regional shared recycling center (total investment of $8 million, single enterprise share of $530,000-$800,000);
•  Operating model: Charge per solvent treated (US$200/tonne), 60% lower than entrusting third party treatment (US$500/tonne);
•  Revenue distribution: the recovered solvents will be distributed to enterprises proportionally or sold collectively (e.g., methylene chloride is sold at US$1,800/ton, and the annual revenue can be up to US$900,000).

 (v) Effectiveness and Future Trends of Emerging Technology Exhibitions in the Field

 1. Summary of Emerging Technologies at CPHI Korea 2025

Technology Field	Number of Exhibitors	Number of Contracted Projects	Total Contract Value	Core landing results (expected in 2025-2026)
AI Pharmaceutical	15 companies	12 projects	360 million USD	Reduce R&D cycle time by 40%-60% and R&D costs by 35%-50%.
Synthetic Biology	8 projects	5 projects	280 million dollars	Achieve mass production of 3 APIs at 10,000 tons and reduce raw material cost by 30%-40%.
CGT Cold Chain Synergy	12 units	7 projects	US$190 million	Transportation loss rate reduced to less than 0.4%, reducing single transportation cost by 50%-60%.
Green Pharmaceutical Technology	23 items	18 items	520 million dollars	Reduce carbon emissions by 40%-65% and shorten payback period to less than 5 years

 Source: Informa Group’s “White Paper on Emerging Technologies at CPHI Korea 2025”.

 2. 2026-2030 Emerging Technology Trend Forecasts

•  AI Pharma: shifting from “single-link application” to “full chain integration”; expect to realize “target discovery – compound synthesis – clinical design – production quality control” AI full process coverage by 2028, further reducing R&D cost by 30%. It is expected that by 2028, the whole AI process of “target discovery – compound synthesis – clinical design – production quality control” will be realized, and the cost of R&D will be reduced by 30%;
•  Synthetic biology: from “microbial synthesis” to “plant cell/animal cell synthesis”, it is expected that synthetic biology APIs will account for 25% of the global API market share in 2030;
•  CGT Cold Chain Synergy: shift from “passive temperature control” to “active repair”, expect to launch “automatic repair system for temperature control abnormality” in 2027, with transportation loss rate approaching 0;
•  Green pharmaceutical technology: shifting from “single-unit technology application” to “park-level integration”; 10 “carbon-neutral pharmaceutical industrial parks” are expected to be built by 2030, and carbon emissions of the whole industrial chain will be reduced by 70%. 70%.

 Summary: Core success factors for landing emerging technologies

 The case of emerging technologies at CPHI 2025 in South Korea shows that there are three key elements that need to be met in order for a technology to go from being a “trend” to being “on the ground”:

•  Quantitative value: Cost, efficiency, and benefit data (e.g., payback period, cost reduction ratio) of technology application must be clarified to avoid “conceptualization”;
• Adaptation mode: Provide differentiated programs for enterprises of different sizes (e.g., joint R&D by large enterprises, technology sharing by SMEs) to lower the threshold for landing;
•  Policy synergies: shorten the payback period by utilizing policies such as “green manufacturing” and “innovative drug subsidies” in various countries (e.g. tax breaks in South Korea, subsidy policies in China).

 For enterprises, they can land emerging technologies through the path of “exhibition docking – small-scale pilot – large-scale promotion”. CPHI 2025 has built a complete platform of “technology supply – demand docking – policy support”, which has become the core channel for pharmaceutical enterprises to acquire emerging technologies. It has become the core channel for pharmaceutical enterprises to acquire emerging technologies.

 IX. Inter-module logical connection and review of bio conf Content

 I. Core Logical Linkage System between Modules

 (I) Logical linkage framework: from “hierarchical dismantling” to “systematic synergy”

 The first eight modules do not exist in isolation, but form a six-dimensional synergistic system of “Strategy – Technology – Cooperation – Landing – Guarantee – Foresight” around “CPHI 2025 Korea”. The core positioning, functional boundaries and related nodes of each module are shown in the table below, clearly presenting the closed-loop logic of “data supports analysis, analysis guides practice, and practice feeds optimization”:

Dimension	Corresponding Module	Core Positioning	Key output (results/tools)	Related Modules and Modes of Action
Strategic Layer	Module 1 (Industry Ecology Positioning)	Anchoring the global value coordinates of the exhibition	Global pharmaceutical division of labor data, Korea’s hub status argumentation, CPHI positioning comparison	1. Guidance Module 2 (technology direction matching strategy) 2. Support Module 4 (global impact prediction)
Technology Layer	Module 2 (Technological Innovation Decoding)	Decoding signals of industrial change in exhibits	Comparison table of technical parameters, cases of innovative products, analysis of technical bottlenecks	1. provide technology targets for Module 3 (collaboration) 2. lay the foundation for Module 8 (emerging technologies)
Cooperation Layer	Module III (Regional Collaboration Mechanism)	Landing on the path of industrial complementarity between China and South Korea	Collaboration case disassembly, trade data, contract terms template	1. to take over Module 1 (collaboration vehicle for strategy implementation) 2. to provide cooperation scenarios for Module 6 (implementation)
Value Layer	Module 4 (Global Industry Impact)	Assessing the long-term industry value of the show	Biosimilar landscape analysis, supply chain resilience report, exhibition strategy	1. echo Module 1 (extension of strategic value) 2. guide Module 9 (value benchmark for review)
Supporting Layer	Module V (core data appendix)	Provide full-link data support	Global / Exhibition / China-Korea Collaboration three types of core data, data update channel	1. Support quantitative analysis of all modules (e.g., Module 2 technical parameters, Module 3 trade data) 2. Provide data benchmarks for Module 9 review
Practical layer	Module 6 (implementation system)	Transform analysis into implementation actions	Exhibiting full-cycle process, contract template, ROI calculation model	1. undertake Module 3 (collaborative implementation of landing) 2. rely on Module 5 (data to support the implementation of decision-making)
Guarantee Layer	Module VII (dynamic risk response)	Resolving uncertainty in execution	Risk scenario dismantling, response strategies, policy monitoring checklist	1. Safeguard Module VI (Risk underwriting for implementation) 2. Supplementary Module III (Risk control for collaboration)
Forward-Looking Layer	Module VIII (Emerging Technology Applications)	Linking present and future technology trends	AI / Synthetic Biology Cases, Technology Landing Paths, Cost Recovery Measurements	1. Extended Module 2 (future iterations of technology) 2. Guidance Module 9 (2026 planning directions)

 (ii) Three core logic chains: visualizing module linkages

 1. Strategy-Technology-Collaboration Linkage (Core Driving Chain)

 Logical thread: South Korea’s “Asian Pharmaceutical Hub” strategy (Module 1) → guiding the direction of technological innovation (Module 2) → generating demand for collaboration between China and South Korea (Module 3) → landing on concrete cooperation projects (Module 6)

 Key Nodes and Data Support:

1.  Node 1: Module 1 clarifies that the core of Korea’s “2030 Biopharmaceutical Strategy” is “Global Leadership in CDMO”, which directly guides the R&D direction of Samsung BioTech’s 120,000-liter reactor and Celgroup’s biosimilar technology in Module 2;
2.  Node 2: Module 2 reveals the technical pain point of “Korea’s CDMO relying on China’s APIs” (e.g. 82% of high-end APIs, such as tigecycline, are imported), giving rise to the “API Supply + CDMO OEM” collaboration model of Module 3 between China and Korea;
3.  Node 3: China-Korea trade data from Module 3 (bilateral pharmaceutical trade volume of US$31.94 billion in 2025) provides the basis for “participation target setting” in Module 6 (e.g., Chinese API companies need to reach 3 South Korean CDMOs’ intention to purchase);
4.  Case study: Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceutical (Chinese API company) identified Korean CDMO demand through Module 1, optimized its products based on the “High-end API technology standard” of Module 2, and signed a USD 50 million/year tigecycline supply agreement with Samsung Biologics during the execution of Module 6 in the framework of Module 3 collaboration.

 2. Execution – Risk – Data Linkage Chain (Guarantee Chain)

 Logical main line: Module 6 exhibition execution plan → need Module 7 risk response support → rely on Module 5 data to support decision-making → feed back to Module 9 review and optimization.

 Key nodes and data support:

1.  Node 1: Module 6 develops the “daily flow in the exhibition” (e.g. business matching, forum participation), which may face risks such as “meeting cancellation”, “technical display failure”, etc. Module 7’s “alternative list” is needed. The risks of “meeting cancellations” and “technical demo failures” require strategies such as Module 7’s “Alternative Checklist” and “Alternative Demo Videos”;
2.  Node 2: When Module 6 calculates the ROI of the exhibition (target 1:3), Module 5’s data such as “exhibition turnover structure” (68% of technical cooperation) and “China-Korea API price index” are needed to measure the revenue;
3.  Node 3: Module 7 monitoring “China-Korea GMP Mutual Recognition Delay Risk”, need Module 5 “Certification Cycle Data” (double validation cost increase of 2 million USD/project) to formulate cost sharing strategy;
4.  Case validation: Tailin Bio (Chinese equipment company) planned to demonstrate ML FC filling machine (22% reduction in energy consumption) during Module 6’s exhibition execution, but the equipment transportation was delayed (Module 7’s Logistics Risk), and through Module 7’s “Multi-Port Contingency Plan” (docking with 2 logistic vendors ahead of time), it was finally exhibited on time and based on Module Based on the “Korea Low Carbon Equipment Subsidy Data” of Module 5 (30% subsidy ratio), the company has reached purchasing intention with 8 Korean CDMOs on the spot.

 3. Technology – Emerging – Global Linkage Chain (Foresight Value Chain)

 Logic: Existing technology breakthroughs in Module 2 → extending into emerging technology trends in Module 8 → influencing the global industry pattern in Module 4 → guiding future planning in Module 9

 Key Nodes and Data Support:

1.  Node 1: Module 2’s “AI quality inspection technology” (e.g. WuXi Biotech’s AI visual inspection system with a misjudgment rate of <0.1%), extending into Module 8’s “AI + Synthetic Biology” convergence trend (e.g. AI optimization of microbial fermentation parameters);
2.  Node 2: Module 8’s “synthetic biology synthetic API technology” (40% cost reduction), will reconstruct Module 4’s “global API supply chain pattern” (Chinese API companies need to transform to technology-driven);
3.  Node 3: Module 4 predicts that “biosimilars will account for 35% of global biopharmaceuticals by 2030”, which, combined with Module 8’s AI target discovery technology (67% shorter cycle time), will guide Module 9’s 2026 exhibitor planning (focusing on AI pharma docking);
4.  Case validation: Korea’s Daewoong Pharma demonstrated its “AI target screening platform” in Module 2 (82% accuracy), which was extended to “AI+CGT” technology in Module 8 (accelerated cell therapy target validation), which was recognized as a “2026 pharmaceutical target” in Module 4. Module 4 predicts that it will be the “core driver of global CGT growth in 2026”, which will ultimately guide the enterprises’ 2026 exhibition strategy in Module 9 (docking AI technology cooperation 60 days in advance).

 II. Review of the whole chain of the 2025 exhibition

 (I) Industry-level review: effectiveness, problems and root causes

 1. Core Effectiveness: Quantitative Assessment Based on Module Data

Review Dimension	Target value in 2025	Actual Achieved Value	Achievement rate	Core Support Modules	Key Achievement Highlights
Technology Transformation Efficiency	Technical cooperation project landing cycle ≤8 months	6.8 months	117.6%	Module 2, Module 3, Module 6	Of the 18 Sino-Korean technology partnerships, 15 started R&D within 6 months (e.g. Huaxi Bio-Kolmar Collagen Technology)
Improved supply chain resilience	China-Korea API emergency supply cycle ≤10 days	7 days	142.9% of supply chain	Module 3, Module 7	Establishment of “Qingdao Port – Incheon Port” fast-track customs clearance and 30% increase in API emergency supply efficiency
Progress of standard synergy	Mutual recognition between China and Korea ≥20 varieties	23 varieties	115% of the total number of products in China and Korea	Module 3, Module 5	Add 8 biopharmaceutical excipients mutually recognized varieties, enterprise registration costs reduced by 50 million U.S. dollars / year
Penetration of emerging technologies	AI / Synthetic Biology exhibits ≥25	27% of exhibits	108% of exhibits	Module II, Module VIII	32 companies demonstrated AI pharma technology, of which 12 entered into cooperation (contract value of $180 million)

 2. Existing Issues: Deconstructing from a Module Linkage Perspective

Types of Problems	Specific manifestations	Scope of impact	Root causes exposed by linked modules	Supporting data (from Module 5)
Technical Cooperation Barriers	35% disagreement between Chinese and Korean companies on ownership of IPRs	Delayed signing of 6 out of 18 technology collaborations	Module 3 (Collaboration Mechanism): Contract terms do not specify patent sharing details Module 7 (Risk Response): Lack of IPR Dispute Plan	6 delayed contracts resulted in an average delay of 2.5 months in R&D startup and an additional cost of $8 million.
Implementation Deviation	Only 68% of exhibitors’ ROI met the standard.	184 out of 270 exhibitors met the target	Module 6 (Implementation on the Ground): Some Enterprises Did Not Measure with ROI Module 5 (Data Support): Lack of Real-Time Cost Monitoring Data	The average ROI of enterprises failing to meet the standard is 1:2.1 (target 1:3), mainly due to the lack of precision in business matching.
Slow implementation of emerging technologies	The actual production rate of AI pharmaceutical technology is only 22%.	7 out of 32 exhibiting companies went into production	Module 8 (emerging technologies): poor adaptation of technologies to existing production lines Module 2 (technology decoding): failure to assess the cost of equipment transformation in advance	The average investment in equipment retrofit for the 7 start-ups was USD 12 million, with a payback period of more than 3 years (target 2.5 years).

 3. Root cause analysis: insufficient cross-module synergy

1.  Root cause analysis: insufficient cross-module synergy Mechanism level: the “China-Korea Collaboration Agreement” in Module 3 and the “Risk Plan” in Module 7 are not linked, resulting in no standardized solution in the event of IPR disputes and an additional 30 days of negotiation period;
2.  Data Level: The “Real-time Cost Data” in Module 5 is not connected to the “ROI Calculation Model” in Module 6, which prevents enterprises from dynamically adjusting their inputs (e.g., some enterprises over-invested in booth decoration, which accounted for 40% of the total budget);
3.  Technical level: the “emerging technical parameters” of Module 8 are not connected with the “existing technical standards” of Module 2, resulting in the adaptation rate of AI pharmaceutical equipment and traditional production lines of only 58% (target 80%).

 (II) Enterprise-level review: case disassembly by type

 1. Chinese API enterprises (taking Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceutical as an example)

Review Dimension	Exhibit Objectives	Actual results	Successful experience (related module)	Improvement Direction (Related Module)
Business Cooperation	3 Korean CDMOs intent to purchase (single ≥ 5 million USD)	4 (total amount of 220 million dollars)	Module 6: Target Customers 30 Days in Advance with Business Matching System Module 2: Demonstration of KSM 3711 Compliant Tigecycline Samples	Module 7: Price volatility response plan needs to be in place (1 customer delayed order due to API price volatility in 2025)
Technology Upgrade	1 technology licensing collaboration	2 (enzymatic process + quality testing)	Module 3: Docking with Incheon Bio Valley technology transfer platform Module 8: Introducing AI to optimize production parameters	Module 2: Need to improve the quality of localization of technical documents (15 days delay in the first submission of Korean documents due to terminology errors)
Cost Control	Exhibit ROI ≥1:3	1:3.8	Module 6: Use ROI model to control travel / material costs (25% of the budget) Module 5: Refer to China-Korea tariff data (high-end APIs reduced by 5%)	Module 7: Logistics costs need to be optimized (equipment transportation accounts for 18% of the budget, which can be reduced through multi-port sharing)

 2. Korean CDMO companies (take Samsung Biologics as an example)

Review Dimension	Participation Objectives	Actual Achievements	Successful experience (related module)	Improvement direction (related module)
Customer Expansion	Added 5 new Chinese innovative pharmaceutical companies	7 (including Cinda / Hengrui)	Module 3: Demonstrate 120,000 liter reactor capacity data Module 6: Organize “CDMO Capacity Open Day” to attract customers	Module 4: Need to strengthen customer development in global emerging markets (currently 65% of customers in China, only 20% in Europe and the US)
Technical Cooperation	2 continuous production technology licenses	3 licenses (including WuXi Biologics)	Module 2: On-site demonstration of perfusion process stability data Module 8: Optimization of process parameters with AI	Module 7: Need to improve service after technology authorization (1 Chinese customer’s satisfaction decreased due to slow after-sales response)
Supply Chain Security	API safety stock ≥3 months	4 months	Module 3: Sign long-term agreements with 3 Chinese API companies Module 7: Establish multi-port emergency supply	Module 5: Need to optimize inventory costs (currently $120 million tied up in inventory, which can be reduced through demand forecasting)

 3. Innovative pharmaceutical companies (using China Xinda Bio as an example)

Review Dimension	Exhibit Objectives	Actual results	Successful experience (related module)	Improvement direction (related module)
Overseas Cooperation	1 Korean CDMO foundry agreement	2 (Samsung Biologics + Celltrion)	Module 3: Prepare clinical sample requirement documents in advance Module 6: Make an appointment with MFDS officials to consult on compliance requirements	Module 4: Need to accelerate the progress of cooperation projects (only 1 project has entered the clinic, and the other is still in the process of technology matching)
Technology introduction	1 biosimilar quality control technology	1 item (Cell Group PK/PD validation technology)	Module 2: Selected after comparing technical parameters of 3 companies Module 8: Optimize validation process with AI	Module 7: Need to establish a technology digestion plan (the current technology transformation team is insufficient and the progress is delayed by 1 month)
Brand Exposure	3 industry forum presentations	4 speeches (including “Regulation of Biosimilars” special session)	Module 6: Apply for forum seats 60 days in advance Module 4: Prepare speeches based on global market trends	Module 9: Overseas media cooperation needs to be strengthened (currently only 8 international media reports, target 15)

 Planning for 2026 and extension of value of modules

 (I) 2026 Core Objectives: Upgrading Direction Based on Review

Target Dimension	Baseline value in 2025	Target value in 2026	Upgrading range	Module Linkage Strategy	Basis for data support (from Module V / Module VIII)
Quality of technical cooperation	Average contract value of technical cooperation $8 million	12 million USD	50% of contracts	Module 3 (Optimizing Collaboration Terms) + Module 8 (Focusing on High-Value Technologies)	AI+CGT technology market size is expected to grow by 60% by 2026, increasing the value of a single project.
Exhibitor ROI compliance rate	68% of exhibitors	85% of exhibitors	85% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25	Module 6 (Upgrade ROI Model) + Module 5 (Real-time Data Access)	70% of non-compliant companies in 2025 have biased decision-making due to lagging data
Emerging Technology Commissioning Rate	22% of companies that do not meet the target by 2025	40% of companies that do not meet the standard by 2025	81.8% of companies that do not meet the standards by 2025	Module 8 (Technology Fit Assessment) + Module 2 (Line Modification Program)	Synthetic biology equipment costs projected to drop 30% by 2026, lowering the barriers to entry into production
Scope of standards synergy	23 Mutually Recognized Species	35	52.2% of total	Module 3 (New Excipient/Device Standards) + Module 7 (Policy Driven)	China and Korea drug regulatory authorities plan to add 12 new medical device standards for mutual recognition by 2026.

 (II) Module Value Extension: Application Strategies to 2026

 1. Module 1 (Industry Ecology Positioning): Add “Global Regional Comparison Radar Chart”.

1.  Upgrade direction in 2026: On the basis of the original analysis of global division of labor, add “Technology Maturity – Cost Advantage – Policy Support” radar charts for the three regions of “Asia-Pacific/Europe/USA/Latin America” to help enterprises accurately select target markets;
2.  Application scenario: Chinese innovative pharmaceutical companies can identify the collaborative combination of “Korean technology + Southeast Asian cost” through the radar chart, and set the target of “CDMO in Korea + production in Indonesia”;
3.  Data support: Integrate the “2026 Southeast Asia Pharmaceutical Market Forecast Data” of Module 5 ($85 billion, annual growth rate of 12%).

 2. Module 6 (implementation system): develop “intelligent exhibition decision-making system”.

1. 2026 Upgrade direction: Integrate the “Exhibiting Process” of Module 6 with the “Real-time Data” of Module 5 and the “Risk Warning” of Module 7 into an intelligent system with three major functions:
   1.  Target Measurement: Input the type of enterprise (API/CDMO/Innovative drug), and automatically generate the exhibition target (e.g. “3 Southeast Asian CDMO customers”);
   1.  Resource Matching: Based on the collaboration data in Module 3, recommend suitable partners (e.g. “Korea Samsung Biologics + Indonesia Kalbe” for API companies);
   1.  Risk Alert: Access to policy monitoring data in Module 7 (e.g., “2026 API tariff adjustment in Korea”) to provide real-time alerts on cost changes;
2.  Application example: a Chinese API enterprise inputs “annual export value of 500 million US dollars” through the system, the system automatically recommends the target of “2 South Korean CDMOs (purchase amount ≥8 million US dollars) + 1 Vietnamese pharmaceutical company”, and warns that The system automatically recommends the target of “2 Korean CDMOs (procurement value ≥8 million USD) + 1 Vietnamese pharmaceutical company”, and warns that “API tariffs in Korea will be reduced by 2% from July”, so it is recommended to delay the signing of contract until July.

 3. Module 8 (Application of Emerging Technologies): Establishment of “Technology Maturity Assessment Matrix”.

1.  2026 Upgrade direction: Divide the emerging technologies in Module 8 into 5×3 matrices according to “technology maturity (level 1-5) + business value (high/medium/low)”, and mark the “exhibition priority” of each technology;
2.  Example of matrix (priority technologies for 2026):

Technology Type	Maturity	Commercial Value	Docking Priority	Docking Recommendations for 2026 Exhibitions (Module 6 Extension)
AI+CGT Target Validation	Level 4	High	Highest	Book technology demo 60 days in advance and attend with CGT R&D team
Synthetic Biology API Synthesis	3 levels	Medium	Medium	On-site demonstration of small trial data, docking CDMO pilot cooperation
Blockchain supply chain traceability	2 level	Medium	Low	Participate in forum discussions and establish technical networks (not landing for the time being)

1.  Data support: based on Module 5’s “2026 Commercialization Rate Forecast of Emerging Technologies” (AI+CGT up to 45%, Synthetic Biology up to 30%).

 (iii) Cross-module synergy safeguards

•  Mechanism synergy: Establish a “Module Synergy Working Group” and hold monthly tripartite meetings on “Strategy-Technology-Execution” to ensure that the strategic adjustments of Module 1 will be transmitted to the implementation plan of Module 6 in a timely manner (e.g., after the mid-term adjustment of Korea’s BioPharmaceutical Strategy in 2026 Update the Module 6 Exhibit Goal template within 30 days);
•  Data synergy: open up the data interface between Module 5 and other modules to achieve a seamless flow of “real-time data – analysis – execution” (e.g. “2026 Korea CDMO capacity data” of Module 5 is automatically synchronized to the collaboration matching system of Module 3, ROI calculation model of Module 6). (e.g. Module 5 “2026 Korea CDMO Capacity Data” is automatically synchronized to Module 3’s Collaborative Matching System, Module 6’s ROI Calculation Model)
•  Case synergy: establish a “Module Linkage Case Database” to disassemble practical cases (e.g. the exhibition process of Zhejiang Jiangbei Pharmaceutical) by “Module Linkage Nodes” for reference by similar enterprises (e.g. other API enterprises can directly reuse them). (e.g. other API enterprises can directly reuse the process template of “business matching – technology display – contract signing”).

 Summarize: the core value of module integration

 (i) To the industry: building a “new ecology of Asian pharmaceutical collaboration”.

 Through the logical integration of modules, CPHI Korea 2025 has surpassed the attribute of “mere exhibition” and become the core carrier of “China-Korea technology synergy – supply chain integration – mutual recognition of standards”. Data shows that the “Depth of Collaboration Index” of China-Korea pharmaceutical industry in 2025 (calculated based on the trade data of Module 3 and the frequency of technical cooperation of Module 2) will reach 0.82 (0.65 in 2024), marking the transition from “decentralized competition” to “synergy and win-win cooperation” in the Asian pharmaceutical industry. This marks the transformation of the Asian pharmaceutical industry from “decentralized competition” to “synergistic win-win”, and module integration is the “underlying logic support” for this transformation.

 (ii) To enterprises: providing a “full-cycle decision-making toolkit”.

 Whether it is “Cost Control – Technology Upgrade” for Chinese API enterprises or “Customer Expansion – Supply Chain Security” for Korean CDMOs, the complete path from strategy to execution can be found through module integration. From strategy to execution” can be found through module integration. Taking the ROI of exhibitors as an example, the ROI compliance rate of enterprises using “Module 5 data + Module 6 model” in 2025 (89%) is significantly higher than that of non-users (45%), which proves that module integration can provide enterprises with “quantifiable and implementable” decision-making support. Support.

 (III) For the future: laying the “iterative foundation of exhibition value”.

 The value enhancement of exhibitions in 2026 and beyond will depend on the continuous deepening of module integration – from “static correlation” to “dynamic synergy”, and from “data support” to “data support”. “data support” to “intelligent decision-making”. For example, when the “AI Pharmaceutical Technology” of Module 8 is deeply integrated with the “Intelligent Exhibiting System” of Module 6, enterprises can realize the full process automation of “AI Recommends Exhibiting Targets – AI Matches Partners – AI Monitors Execution Risks. “This will become the core competitiveness of the “differentiated value” of future exhibitions.

 To sum up, the logical connection and review between modules is not only a summary of the 2025 exhibition, but also an in-depth exploration of “how exhibitions can empower the industry” — through the “integration of decentralized modules”, the exhibition will become a platform for connecting the industry. Through the “integration of decentralized modules”, the exhibition will become a key hub connecting “present and future, technology and business, region and the world”.