We are witnessing a decentralization and dissemination of innovation and entrepreneurial hubs, shifting attention toward alternative and unexpected jurisdictions with previously unexplored opportunities (e.g., Estonia, Singapore). Moreover, given that the life sciences and health entrepreneurship sector is composed of multiple segments with distinct characteristics, additional forces are accelerating this transformation: the democratization of access to tools such as AI, the emergence of alternative research hubs (e.g., China, South Korea, India), the rise of markets with regulatory and strategic advantages, and the digitalization and global circulation of medical data (e.g., global biobank networks, AI-based diagnostic development using multinational datasets). Together, these developments are collectively reshaping the global landscape.

At the same time, many may assume that the Greek life sciences and health innovation ecosystem is underdeveloped and burdened by long-standing challenges. This is not unique to Greece; several talent-rich countries in Eastern and Southern Europe exhibit a similar pattern. However, evaluating Greece solely through the lens of a single successful ecosystem – such as Cambridge (UK) or Cambridge (US) – with their well-known advantages (the presence of prestigious academic and research institutions in close proximity, geographic concentration that fosters inspiration, density, and serendipitous synergies, standardized intellectual property pathways, and abundant access to risk-tolerant capital) is misleading. It is a trap. What may appear as underdevelopment could instead represent slow but steady maturation – an incremental fermentation that is now enabling the ecosystem to form a more dynamic and distinctive character. With a proven track record and success stories in the broader field of innovation, Greece is now positioned to focus on more specialized domains such as health and life sciences. This shift is already visible in recent public-private initiatives aimed at improving access to infrastructure, networks and mentorship, as well as programs encouraging scientists to adopt an entrepreneurial mindset and return from abroad. These efforts are beginning to reinforce the local life sciences and health innovation landscape. Notably, the growing presence of health-focused venture capital firms establishing operations in Greece and actively seeking investment opportunities across the region reflects this momentum and invites deeper analysis.

Could Greece become one of these emerging life-sciences and health innovation hubs? Recent signs – a modest brain-gain, growing investment interest, and a number of individual initiatives – suggest it can. How are ecosystem-dependent mechanisms currently functioning in the Greek context and what adjustments and improvements are needed moving forward? Coupled with long-standing local strengths and ecosystem-adjusted endeavors, these developments could drive home-grown innovation and translation of it into a real-world, global impact. There is both much for Greece to learn and much it can teach. To explore these questions, five Greeks who occupy key local roles and who also have professional exposure abroad – people who have chosen to found organizations, repatriate their practices, or bring programs home – share their views and insights.

Defining Greece’s unique landscape: A paradox of strength without translation

There is unanimous agreement that Greece is an under-saturated environment with an abundance of human resources eager to create value, and the necessary means to do so are gradually becoming established within the country’s reality. “Greece consistently produces a high number of top-tier scientists – particularly when including the Greek diaspora – both highly skilled and remarkably loyal. The next country with a higher number of scientists than Greece compared to GDP is the United Kingdom, which has more than double the GDP per capita,” notes Ioanna Mylonaki, partner at Untethered Ventures. Victoria Kimonides, CEO of Biomet.life and member of the board of directors of BioInnovation Greece, reinforces this, adding: “On the research front, although Greek scientists do not always lead EU-funded projects, their participation in research consortia is quite high, as are the associated high-impact publications. Bio-innovation activity and opportunities span the entire spectrum – from biotechnology and bioinformatics that can support the evolution of traditional pharma, to the broader bioeconomy.”

She continues: “The diaspora is a driving force, as a significant number of Greek scientists and bio-entrepreneurs abroad are re-engaging with the domestic ecosystem, bringing back expertise, networks, know-how and, in some cases, capital.” Indeed, the Greek diaspora appears to be pivotal in the positive transformation taking place. Stefanos Capsaskis, partner at Corallia Ventures, explores this further, highlighting the distinctive advantage of a bilateral interplay: “The rapidly developing integration between the ecosystem emerging domestically and the wider, interlocking set of bio-innovation ecosystems in which diaspora Greeks are active – each contributing positive attributes to the whole. The former [the domestic ecosystem] contributes dynamism and scientific excellence, while the latter contributes expertise in business generation and nurturing. It is the presence of these diaspora ecosystems that makes this combination unique.”

Another key element is highlighted by Alex Tzoukas, managing partner and co-founder of Kos Biotechnology Partners: “Greece’s ecosystem remains relatively underdeveloped in translational biology, resulting in a gap between high-quality research output and the formation of investable biotech ventures.” Indeed, when focusing on the biotech segment – which entails drug discovery and the development of novel therapeutics – it is the most resource-intensive and time-consuming domain. For this reason, Greece may not yet be the most suitable ecosystem for hosting the entire pipeline, from preclinical development to market launch. As Capsaskis explains: “The area that is unlikely to grow within the Greek ecosystem is drug development. Notwithstanding the high quality of such research in Greece, the combination of long lead times from bench to commercial product and the lack of ‘patient funding’ (i.e., capital with a duration exceeding the typical 10-year life of conventional venture capital funds) makes – and will continue to make – this very challenging in Greece.” However, there are stages within this pipeline where Greece could be a competitive player, such as clinical trials, thanks to its EU-standards-compliant healthcare facilities and strong scientific workforce. Moreover, life sciences and health entrepreneurship extend far beyond traditional biotech, which represents only a small portion of the broader potential for impactful health innovation that could emerge locally and scale globally. “I have witnessed companies – whose founders have no prior ties to Greece – choose to conduct early-stage clinical trials in the country. Greece has proven fertile ground for early-stage clinical trials in medical devices and digital health. This may be due to a more streamlined decision-making process within Greek healthcare centers compared to more hierarchical systems abroad,” notes Mylonaki. Kimonides adds: “The talent profile in Greece, combined with the country’s strategic location, makes it a natural testbed for cross-sectoral innovations such as agri-biotech, marine biotech, biomaterials, and agri-food.” While Greece’s market size may not support large-scale company expansion, it offers an ideal environment for validating product-market fit.

Existing challenges and persistent barriers: Structural, not scientific

Despite growing optimism and Greece’s competitive advantages, the current high momentum still encounters some of its timeless obstacles that block the way forward, with experts consistently highlighting structural weaknesses, cultural barriers, and systemic gaps. Spyros Sapounas, president of the National Organization for Medicines, summarizes some of the country’s fundamental weaknesses: “The path from lab discovery to clinical application and then to market is often fragmented and slower than it should be. What we really need is a single national entry-point for translational support, with aligned rules on tech transfer and IP, and funding that follows results and milestones rather than bureaucracy. The point is to spend our energy on innovation, not on paperwork.” Capsaskis agrees: “The friction generated by bureaucracy and centralized decision-making in and around Greek academia dampens the emergence of bio-innovation from the lab into the wider world.” Navigating technology transfer and IP protection is globally challenging, particularly for early-stage ventures. In Greece, however, the burden is even greater – not only due to bureaucratic complexity, but also because of unclear regulations, ambiguous processes, fragmented tech transfer structures, and the absence of centralized and streamlined pathways. Currently, the fragmented structures operate independently across academic institutions and research organizations. Tech Transfer Offices (TTOs) operating in this way, however, struggle to sustain or maintain patents due to insufficient follow-up capital and inadequate guidance on exploitation options, such as licensing, which arise after patents are granted. Furthermore, unclear communication and limited awareness of IP regulations and terms leave stakeholders uncertain about IP ownership – a spinoff remains an unfamiliar concept among academics, and the idea of generating commercial value from research assets is still largely unthinkable. Developing unified, professionalized, and efficient TTOs is therefore imperative to address these challenges and build robust IP portfolios. 

The implementation of a solid IP strategy is only one of the many early steps that would secure potential investments and market access for aspiring entrepreneurs. However, it is costly. Kimonides focuses on the matter: “With challenges in early-stage funding, the transition to an entirely commercial set-up is slow and founders often need to bootstrap and seek grant funding. The fact that there is limited appetite to take risks does not help.” Notably, a significant share of the increasing influx of investment capital is not flowing to early-stage biotech companies; the number of large later-stage rounds (Series C and D) is rising as well. Major efforts are being made to bridge this funding gap: “The European Investment Fund has taken a decisive step to strengthen the ecosystem. Through the EquiFund II mandate, new healthcare- and life-science-focused venture funds will bring the specialized knowledge and capital needed to nurture high-potential companies, further supported by the Hellenic Development Bank of Investments. This coordinated effort is already translating into tangible progress: At least four dedicated healthcare and life science funds are now under formation in Greece, aiming to inject more than €150 million into the market,” Mylonaki says. 

This lack of coordination, predictability, and enabling mechanisms inevitably negatively impacts the general entrepreneurial culture. As Kimonides notes: “Looking at the profile of the founders, the biggest challenge is the lack of business mindset.” This gap – common in research-driven but commercially immature ecosystems – creates a bottleneck between invention and venture creation. In addition, significant legal constraints remain, for example regarding clinicians’ ability to engage in entrepreneurial activities, with recent legislation only superficially framed as supportive. Under the current legal framework, Greek medics cannot pursue entrepreneurial activities while practicing, preventing them from transforming real-world problems into ventures – an issue that demands urgent reform if Greece aims for translational medicine and medtech to thrive.

Sapounas describes another problematic aspect of the situation: “Access to medicines is another key issue. High clawbacks and tight hospital budgets can discourage new launches and strain the system. We need a more stable, multi-year approach that ties clawbacks to real-world outcomes and value, while at the same time boosting uptake of generics and biosimilars fairly, without punishing true innovation. Measures like the cap on patient co-pays for generics are a positive step toward equity but we need a broader, coherent framework.” Innovation friendliness doesn’t necessarily reflect healthcare systems with high willingness-to-pay thresholds, as there are alternative ways to embrace innovation without substantial allocation of state capital. Greece’s private healthcare providers, generally more agile and quicker to spend, could be used as an initial barrier to test the Greek population-adjusted effectiveness and cost-efficiency of novel diagnostics and therapeutics. “Greece stands to benefit greatly by adopting breakthrough innovations that reduce costs and enhance care, then scaling these solutions globally,” Mylonaki underscores.

Future perspectives: A realistic, high-potential route for Greece

Looking ahead, what structural reforms should Greece implement and promote to convert emerging opportunities into concrete outcomes? Greece must chart its own pathway, leveraging its unique strengths rather than attempting to replicate models that emerged under entirely different conditions. Identifying the country’s natural niche is therefore essential. Existing infrastructure gaps already shape the direction of innovation, orienting activity toward specific segments. As Kimonides notes, “wet labs, GMP facilities, and clinical trial networks” remain limited, pushing many early ventures toward digital products rather than biotech R&D that requires substantial physical infrastructure. Mylonaki echoes this trajectory: “Our fund focuses on healthtech – spanning digital health, AI- and data-driven R&D enablement, healthcare infrastructure, and medtech.” Yet infrastructure constraints do not preclude other strategic avenues. Sapounas highlights an often underappreciated opportunity: “We should not forget manufacturing. Without skilled people in GMP and operations, we will hit a ceiling. Targeted postgraduate programs and industry residencies can close that gap. And with targeted support for biologics, sterile manufacturing, and advanced therapies, Greece can scale production, boost exports, and keep more of the innovation pipeline inside the country rather than watching ideas fly abroad.” Tzoukas further emphasizes “the expansion of pharmaceutical and biotech services that can cater to global clients, leveraging Greece’s skilled workforce, cost advantages, and strategic geographic position” as one of the country’s most promising routes. Indeed, Greece has the talent base to support CROs, CDMOs, AI-enabled drug discovery services, and specialized research platforms serving international clients – domains where expertise, not large volumes of long-term capital, defines competitiveness. 

A strategic principle for Greece’s next chapter is the integration of global expertise and capital rather than the reinvention of existing models – an approach that blends local strengths with extroversion and international reach. As Victoria Kimonides emphasizes, “Establishing collaboration corridors with world-class centers in bio-innovation is key for further developing the local ecosystem and finding its niche in the global landscape, contributing with its unique attributes.” This perspective is echoed by Alex Tzoukas, who notes that the country’s future in biotech “lies in the transplant of global ideas and the infusion of expert capital to bridge the gap between research and commercialization. By channeling strategic investment and international expertise into local ventures, Greece can accelerate the development of innovative biotech companies while fostering a supportive network of ancillary pharmaceutical services and AI-driven tools.” Mylonaki further underscores the importance of outward-looking design and ambition: “There is strong potential for global growth. As a small market, Greece must design healthcare products and services with export and international expansion in mind. Achieving this requires early access to global networks for market validation and partnerships. It is encouraging to see that some VCs currently in formation in Greece are international by design and committed to helping their portfolio companies scale globally from inception.” In her vision, “a vibrant and globally connected Greek health-innovation ecosystem” is not only possible but increasingly within reach.

Two particular directions appear to be gaining traction among experts: health data and clinical trials. Mylonaki is a clear advocate for the digital health trajectory: “While many European countries are ahead of Greece in digital health maturity – integrating electronic health records, enabling cross-border data flows, and embedding digital therapies into reimbursement models – Greece is rapidly closing the gap. The country has achieved over 98% e-prescription coverage, with integrated e-dispensation and e-referral systems, creating one of the most interoperable e-health infrastructures in Southern Europe. It has also established a national patient registry, BI-Health analytics platform, and teleconsultation services. The Hellenic Digital Health Cluster (HDHC), founded in 2021, brings together companies and research institutions to advance digital innovation. Recent government reforms and the National Digital Health Plan aim to further modernize infrastructure and expand the ecosystem. Although digital health still represents a small share of Greece’s €17 billion healthcare market, it is one of its fastest-growing segments.” Sapounas is aligned with this direction, encouraging Greece to leverage European data initiatives: “With the European Health Data Space now in force, Greece must build the right governance, security, and access structures so real-world data can support research, AI tools, and precision medicine – safely, ethically and efficiently. If we do this well, we can become a regional hub for real-world evidence in areas like oncology, metabolic diseases, and rare conditions.” He also adds a complementary perspective on clinical research: “On clinical trials, the shift to CTIS as the single EU system creates both pressure and opportunity. If we can move fast and prove reliable quality – with transparent KPIs and faster site activation – Greece can truly position itself as a preferred European destination, especially in oncology studies and advanced therapies. Model contracts, consistent ethical review timelines, and early scientific advice will help us move there quicker. If sponsors see predictability, they will choose us more often.”

Government engagement is becoming increasingly central to the evolution of Greece’s health-innovation landscape. As Mylonaki explains: “Over the past decade, generalist VCs operating in Greece have built a strong and growing venture ecosystem, with €555 million invested in more than 90 Greek startups in 2024 – reflecting a robust 15% year-on-year growth. These generalist funds have also shown a growing focus on health ventures: In 2025, 20.4% of Greek startups were health-related, and VCs estimate that around 40% of the startup pipeline interested in establishing a presence in Greece is health-oriented.” Against this backdrop, it would be surprising for the government to remain uninvolved. As an emerging healthcare and life science startup landscape begins to take shape – driven by bottom-up dynamism and supported by top-down policy efforts – Kimonides notes that “biotechnology has been identified as a strategic pillar for the economy together with AI and healthtech,” and that these sectors have been “the most funded sectors for startups over the past few years.” This signals a growing need for coordinated national strategy. Additional government reforms should aim to reinforce this momentum: Harmonized IP rules, standardized contracts, and a national translational support office would significantly accelerate the rate at which academic discoveries evolve into viable ventures. Simultaneously, Sapounas urges administrative vigilance and alignment with EU standards: “We have to prepare for the new European HTA system, which has already started for oncology and ATMPs. Our timelines and processes in Greece must align tightly with the Joint Clinical Assessments at EU level to avoid delays for patients here. Offering parallel scientific advice and clear methods for integrating EU assessments into national decisions will be critical.” He continues: “this is a moment where Europe is changing – CTR, EHDS, HTA reform – and Greece can either be reactive or choose to move decisively. If we coordinate better, publish our performance openly, streamline approvals, invest in data and skills, and build true partnerships between research, hospitals, industry, and the state, then we can translate our scientific strengths into growth, jobs, and, above all, better care for Greek patients.” Additionally, embedding programs that combine medical know-how with entrepreneurship within healthcare structures – such as the NHS Clinical Entrepreneur model – would support the integration of innovation for the benefit of the public healthcare system.

Beyond capital and infrastructure, talent dynamics continue to shape the ecosystem. Brain drain persists despite return incentives. Kimonides stresses that attracting back top talent requires “positions with growth potential from a skilling and learning perspective” rather than simple job offers. She advocates for cross-disciplinary bio-entrepreneurship training that bridges “science, business and policy, ideally co-designed with the sector and in collaboration with other markets that have been through a similar journey.” Kimonides adds: “Biotech and life-sciences specialized funds supported by EIF and the HDBI supported Technology Transfer funds is something that will definitely help address the funding challenge. Programs like Elevate Greece and bilateral programs between different countries facilitate the cross-border collaboration and engagement. Also, BioInnovation Greece with the BioSTART program with the competition for academic teams tackles the culture and mindset challenge and with the upcoming fellowship program the early stage productization that is critical for a commercial trajectory.” Interdisciplinarity is key, right from the very early educational stages. Developing a joint program across diverse academic institutions and disciplines – from engineering to law and finance – would be crucial for shaping a cluster of highly skilled individuals instilled with an entrepreneurial mindset, igniting synergies and inspiring potential career paths. Considering the low maturity of the Greek audience and the limited adaptability of the university system to introduce full degree-level programs (with the exception of one currently operating), this could initially take the form of an elective course open to students from multiple departments at the undergraduate level. Students would be asked to form teams to develop solutions and mock ventures tackling real-world problems, guided and mentored by guest industry experts, following models like those in the relevant flagship programs abroad. 

Greece stands at a critical juncture. It has long excelled in producing scientific talent but struggled to harness that talent within its own borders. Today, the convergence of return migration, rising investor interest, maturing policy initiatives, and active diaspora engagement suggests that the country may be entering a transformative phase. Whether Greece becomes a rising hub for health innovation will depend not on its scientific capability – which is unquestioned – but on its ability to build the enabling mechanisms that turn research into impact: effective technology transfer, supportive regulation, entrepreneurial culture, translational infrastructure, and sustained investment. There is much for Greece to learn from established ecosystems and its distinct identity. But there is also much it can teach: how small, scientifically rich nations can leverage agility, global networks, and strategic focus to create innovation ecosystems that punch far above their weight. 

Emmanouil Chousakos, MD, PhD, MPhil (MBE) is a doctor, medical adviser, entrepreneur and European ambassador for Global Biotech Revolution. Non-quoted sections reflect the author’s personal views.