The concept of “friendshoring” has moved from political lexicon to boardroom imperative, particularly for the global pharmaceutical industry. In an era marked by pandemic-driven disruptions, trade tensions, and a re-evaluation of strategic dependencies, the practice of aligning supply chains with geopolitically aligned nations has gained significant traction. For an industry where reliability can equate to patient lives, the balance between cost, resilience, and regulatory compliance has never been more critical. This strategic pivot is not merely about geographical diversification but involves a complex calculus of regulatory harmony, manufacturing redundancy, and patient-centric logistics.

To explore the real-world implications of friendshoring within pharmaceutical manufacturing and supply chain strategy, Drug and Device World spoke with J.D. Mowery, President of the CDMO (Contract Development and Manufacturing Organization) business at Bora Pharmaceuticals. With over 25 years of experience spanning both the innovator and CDMO sides of the industry, Mowery offers a unique dual perspective on how companies are navigating this new landscape. Bora Pharmaceuticals, with its operational footprints in Taiwan, Canada, and the United States, embodies the modern, geographically diversified CDMO model that is increasingly in demand. In the following interview, Mowery decodes the buzzword, discusses the enduring lessons from Covid-19, weighs cost against reliability, and highlights the non-technical challenges—like artificial intelligence—that will define the sector’s future.

This interview has been edited for clarity, consistency, and length.

Phalguni Deswal [PD]: The term “friendshoring” is everywhere now. From your perspective, what does it truly encompass? Is it just geographical diversification, or is there more to it?

J.D. Mowery: It’s interesting. Supply chain has been a hot topic since Covid, which exposed fractures that were probably already developing. When I think about friendshoring, a couple of things come to mind. There’s obviously the influence of politics and government, driving conversations about trade benefits. But there’s also the practical lesson from the pandemic: the intent to keep supply chains intact within a region for efficiency and control. We see a similar reaction now, with everyone trying to manage supply chains within Asia, the US, or Europe.

The collaboration between countries within these blocs is crucial. The ultimate intent must be to ensure patients receive their medicine on time. That has to remain the focal point for us, our partners, and hopefully governments. We cannot let tariffs, borders, or supply chain failures prevent a patient from getting their therapy.

Another key enabler is the growing reciprocity between regulatory agencies, like the FDA and EMA. Their mutual recognition allows us to operate more seamlessly within aligned regions. So, friendshoring involves favorable terms from both regulatory and government perspectives. For a CDMO like us, it also means building redundancy. For example, our facilities in Mississauga [Canada], Maple Grove [Minnesota], and Taiwan have similar offerings for oral solid dose (OSD) manufacturing. If a customer is concerned about geopolitical risk, we can qualify their product in both a North American and an APAC facility, giving them supply chain optionality.

PD: You mentioned Covid. We saw similar demand surges with drugs like GLP-1 agonists. How does friendshoring help navigate sudden demand increases or the transition from clinical to commercial supply?

J.D. Mowery: It’s a good question. The clinical phase matters a lot. Often, customers want to manufacture in the same region where they run clinical trials or plan to file for approval. A company based in Asia wanting to launch in the US will often want manufacturing there. A diverse geographical footprint lets us align with [our customers’] regulatory strategy.

Friendshoring supports this based on the target market. Some therapies are for specific populations—a gene therapy for a gene prevalent in the APAC region, for instance. A US company working to develop this therapy needs help navigating regulations and supply chains within that region. So, while friendshoring is a buzzword influenced by politics, it’s really about what we should do daily: help customers operate and meet demand in their region of interest to provide the best possible care for patients.

PD: The issue of cost always comes up. How do you make the case for potentially higher costs associated with reliable, friendshored supply chains?

J.D. Mowery: In my experience, most customers won’t pay an exorbitant premium, but they will accept some higher cost for reliability and speed to market, especially in early phases—with quality being paramount, of course. Knowing they will get their product when promised, so they can plan their own supply chain, is worth that premium.

We have flexibility. Our operational costs in Taiwan are lower than in North America, rooted in a manufacturing excellence culture with national origins from the semiconductor industry. For cost-conscious customers, we can offer extremely high reliability from Taiwan and still distribute to the US. For those who absolutely need to operate in the US or Canada to access certain markets, we have those facilities too. It’s about finding the right balance for their pricing and strategic goals.

PD:A CDMO partnership goes beyond manufacturing. How does friendshoring integrate with offering more upstream services like development, and helping manage the entire pipeline?

J.D. Mowery: Not all customers are the same. Some have massive R&D departments and just need us to execute a tech transfer. Others have a molecule but don’t know how to develop it or scale it. We can use our team and strategic alliances to speed up development, especially for customers who don’t yet understand commercial-scale needs.

Having replicated operations in Canada, the US, and Taiwan allows us to help them based on where they want to operate. A facility like our massive site in Maple Grove, MN, USA, can accommodate a customer from molecule inception through development, all clinical phases, and onto commercial scale—even for a blockbuster drug. This “one-stop-shop” lifecycle management minimizes risk. Tech transfer is one of the toughest things in our industry; every change has a butterfly effect. Minimizing those changes by keeping a product in one facility from start to finish is hugely attractive and aligns with friendshoring goals for the US market.

PD: Beyond manufacturing hurdles, what are the key non-technical challenges for 2026, like diplomatic or regulatory alignment, that impact building robust supply chains?

J.D. Mowery: The one that comes to mind immediately is the speed of AI evolution. We’re still figuring out what it needs to look like. There are two sides: business processes (non-GMP, like finance, sales) where AI can drive efficiency, and then the regulated world—manufacturing, supply chain, QC labs. Crossing into that requires validation, like computer systems validation, which is more complex.

Regulatory bodies are scrambling. The EMA just released some best practices, and the FDA has a draft guidance coming. It’s happening faster than the adoption of electricity or the internet. It’s exciting, but the pace can be scary. We have to be cautious, implementing it in the right ways to amplify our employees’ skills for patient benefit. It’s a major balancing act outside the traditional technical challenges.

PD: Pharma timelines are famously long. How do you balance the rapid pace of AI with 5-10 year development cycles?

J.D. Mowery: AI presents an opportunity to improve those 5-10 year timelines. If AI modeling for drug discovery and development becomes robust enough—perhaps even modeling patient responses to reduce lengthy clinical trial enrollment phases—we could see significant acceleration. Drug discovery will benefit first. Instead of 100 lab-based “shots on goal” to find one molecule, AI-driven digital modeling could yield multiple viable candidates from that same 100, dramatically increasing efficiency and odds of success.

PD: What is your advice to CEOs formulating a manufacturing and supply chain strategy for 2025-2026?

J.D. Mowery: Our industry is still antiquated in its outsourcing compared to automotive or tech. There’s a trust issue, historically. When I see billions in capital being spent by innovators on building their own capacity, I believe that capital is better spent on drug development. Let the CDMOs spend the capital on manufacturing excellence.

The analogy I use is Starbucks: you go there because they’re better at making coffee than you are. Pharma innovators should think, “I need to go to Bora because they’re better at this than I am.” Why spend your capital and resources when you can focus on your expertise—drug discovery and patient care—and let a CDMO handle the development and manufacturing? Especially with friendshoring pressures, don’t feel compelled to use constrained capital to build in-house; use it to keep clinical trials alive and let partners handle regional manufacturing needs.

It is especially important to highlight, with all the noise—politics, tariffs, supply chain buzzwords—it’s easy to lose sight of the patient. That must be our center. Whether you’re an innovator or a CDMO, at the end of the day, it’s about that person waiting for therapy and the ripple effect on their family and community. If we stay centered on that mission, a lot of the opposing viewpoints and challenges become less relevant. It’s on all of us not to lose sight of that.