Alex Tabarrok says today that pharmaceutical companies are undervalued because "pharmaceutical innovations earn only a fraction of the value that they create." For this reason, he opposes the Medicare price controls in the Inflation Reduction Act.
Trying to quantify innovation is hard. Instead, let's just look at profitability:
Pharma is the most profitable major industry group in the world, earning nearly double the amount of most other industries. The only one that's close is software, which has even more enviable production costs (zero) than pharma.
My view is that it's hopeless to try to quantify things like innovation or value to humanity. Penicillin and birth control didn't earn their inventors a penny. Instead, simply look at financial returns when there's true competition. This tells you that the average competitive large company has earnings that are about 8% of revenue. In the pharma industry it's 14%.
Real competition instead of artificial (and unpredictable) patent rights would be the best thing for the pharmaceutical market. Failing that, price controls seem pretty reasonable for an industry that takes very profitable advantage of its favored status.