5,012 research outputs found

    Partner Selection in R&D Cooperation

    Get PDF
    In this paper we extend the R&D cooperation model to asymmetric firms, focusing on the incentives for cooperating with firms characterized by different levels of efficiency. Three firms differentiated by their cost levels invest in cost-reducing R&D before competing in output. Firms may cooperate in R&D, which implies both R&D coordination and perfect information sharing. It is found that firms’ preferences over whom to cooperate with depend on spillovers and on cost differences between firms. With low (high) spillovers, a firm prefers to cooperate with the most (least) efficient among the remaining firms. As the cost differential between firms increases, efficient (inefficient) firms prefer to cooperate with the most (least) efficient firm more often. For very high spillovers, a firm prefers to be excluded from R&D cooperation. The equilibrium configuration is that the most efficient firms cooperate for low spillovers, while all firms cooperate for intermediate spillovers. For high spillovers, the equilibrium is for all firms to cooperate when the cost differential is sufficiently low, but depends on the bargaining mechanism when the cost differential is high. The model constitutes a generalization of the standard R&D model with symmetric firms. Ce papier analyse les incitations Ă  la coopĂ©ration technologique entre des firmes diffĂ©renciĂ©es par leur niveau d’efficacitĂ©. Trois firmes dotĂ©es de coĂ»ts de production diffĂ©rents investissent dans la R&D visant Ă  rĂ©duire leurs coĂ»ts de production, avant de se concurrencer en quantitĂ©s. Les firmes peuvent coopĂ©rer en R&D, ce qui implique la coordination des investissements en R&D et le partage d’information. Il est dĂ©montrĂ© que les prĂ©fĂ©rences quant au choix du partenaire dĂ©pendent des externalitĂ©s de recherche et du diffĂ©rentiel de coĂ»ts. Lorsque les externalitĂ©s de recherche sont faibles (Ă©levĂ©es), une firme prĂ©fĂšre coopĂ©rer avec le partenaire le plus (moins) efficace qui est disponible. À mesure que le diffĂ©rentiel de coĂ»ts augmente, les firmes efficaces (inefficaces) prĂ©fĂšrent coopĂ©rer avec les partenaires les plus (moins) efficaces plus souvent. Pour des niveaux d’externalitĂ©s trĂšs Ă©levĂ©s, une firme prĂ©fĂšre ĂȘtre exclue de la coopĂ©ration en R&D. La configuration d’équilibre est que les firmes les plus efficaces coopĂšrent lorsque les externalitĂ©s sont faibles, alors que toutes les firmes coopĂšrent pour des niveaux intermĂ©diaires des externalitĂ©s. Lorsque les externalitĂ©s sont Ă©levĂ©es, l’équilibre est que toutes les firmes coopĂšrent lorsque le diffĂ©rentiel de coĂ»ts est suffisamment faible, mais dĂ©pend de la structure de nĂ©gociation lorsque ce diffĂ©rentiel est Ă©levĂ©. Le modĂšle constitue une gĂ©nĂ©ralisation du modĂšle de concurrence en R&D avec des firmes symĂ©triques.asymmetric firms, R&D cooperation, R&D spillovers, research joint ventures, coopĂ©ration en R&D, consortiums de recherche, firmes asymĂ©triques, externalitĂ©s de recherche

    Research Joint Ventures Cartelization with Asymmetric R&D Spillovers

    Get PDF
    The paper analyzes the profitability of R&D cooperation under asymmetric spillovers. It is shown that a firm prefers R&D competition to RJV cartelization when its own spillover rate is low and the spillover rate of its competitor is high. While it prefers R&D cartelization to RJV cartelization when the spillover rate of its competitor is sufficiently high. The equilibrium configuration is RJV cartelization for low spillover asymmetries, R&D competition for intermediate asymmetries, and R&D cartelization for high asymmetries.Asymmetric Spillovers

    Economic Foundation of Dictatorship in Resource Exporting Economies

    Get PDF
    This paper explains the lack of democratization in resource exporting countries using a two period resource extraction model. There are two classes of agents: elite who own capital and natural resources and citizens who own labor. The elite announce, in the rst period, their plans for resource extraction and investment in the economy. Citizens, in the second period, decide whether to conduct a revolution against elite to capture their share of rents from un-extracted resources. Government policies are designed to ensure that the elite remain in power and that citizens do not have the incentive to revolt. These policies subsidize extraction and investment during the rst period. The extraction subsidy reduces the benet of revolution while the investment subsidy increases its cost. On the other hand, policies in the democracy case are not constrained by the revolution threat and represent the median voter preferences. The resource is over extracted in the non-democratic case compared to the democratic case. Also, investment in the non-resource sector is lower. The important nding of the model is that extraction path goes against price signals; rst period extraction increases with the increase of the resource price in the second period. Non-Democratic institution is the rational choice of the elite even with the costly policies to prevent a revolution.resource curse; political transition; institutions

    The Protection of Innovations

    Get PDF
    This paper proposes a model where firms invest in secrecy to limit technological spillovers accruing to their competitors, in addition to investing in cost-reducing R&D. The main result of the paper is that increases in spillovers increase secrecy, suggesting that legal and strategic protection are substitutes. Higher product differentiation is associated with higher levels of innovation and lower levels of secrecy. An increase in the size of the market, a reduction in the cost of secrecy, or a reduction in the cost of R&D, all lead to an increase in secrecy. As for the effect of spillovers on effective cost reduction, it is positive when products are sufficiently differentiated, and has an inverted-U shape with low product differentiation. Compared to price competition, quantity competition yields higher levels of R&D, secrecy and effective cost reduction. Le papier propose un modĂšle oĂč les firmes investissent dans la protection de leurs innovations afin de rĂ©duire les externalitĂ©s de recherche reçues par leurs concurrents, en plus d'investir dans la R&D permettant de rĂ©duire leurs coĂ»ts de production. Le rĂ©sultat principal est qu'une augmentation des externalitĂ©s technologiques augmente l'investissement en protection, ce qui implique que la protection lĂ©gale et stratĂ©gique sont des substituts. Un niveau plus Ă©levĂ© de diffĂ©renciation des produits est associĂ© avec davantage d'innovation et moins de protection. Une augmentation dans la taille du marchĂ©, une rĂ©duction des coĂ»ts de la protection, ou une rĂ©duction des coĂ»ts de la recherche, induisent une augmentation de la protection. Les externalitĂ©s de recherche augmentent la rĂ©duction des coĂ»ts lorsque le niveau de diffĂ©renciation des produits est Ă©levĂ©, et ont un effet en forme de U inversĂ© lorsque le niveau de diffĂ©rentiation est faible. La concurrence en quantitĂ©s gĂ©nĂšre des niveaux plus Ă©levĂ©s de R&D, de protection et de rĂ©duction des coĂ»ts.secrecy, protection, innovation, technology, spillovers, R&D, appropriability, protection des innovations, innovation, technologie, externalitĂ©s de recherche, R&D, appropriation des innovations

    Information sharing and the stability of cooperation in research joint ventures

    Get PDF
    The model studies information sharing and the stability of cooperation in cost reducing Research Joint Ventures (RJVs). In a three-stage game- theoretic framework, firms decide on participation in a RJV, information sharing along with R&D expenditures, and output. An important feature of the model is that voluntary information sharing between cooperating firms increases information leakage from the RJV to outsiders. It is found that RJVs representing a larger portion of firms in the industry are more likely to share information. It is also found that when sharing information is costless, firms generally don?t choose intermediate levels of information sharing: they share all the information or none at all. The size of the RJV is found to depend on three effects: a coordination effect, an information sharing effect, and a competition effect. Depending on the relative magnitudes of these effects, the size of the RJV may increase or decrease with spillovers. In response to an increase in leakages, RJV members reduce their R&D spending. In addition, they either increase the RJV size while maintaining information sharing unchanged (when leakages are low), or they reduce both information sharing and RJV size (when leakages are high). The effect of information sharing on the profitability of firms as well as on welfare is studied.Endogenous R&D spillovers, Information sharing, R&D cooperation, Research Joint Ventures

    Vertical R&D Spillovers, Cooperation, Market Structure, and Innovation

    Get PDF
    This paper studies vertical R&D spillovers between upstream and downstream firms. The model incorporates two vertically related industries, with horizontal spillovers within each industry and vertical spillovers between the two industries. Four types of R&D cooperation are studied: no cooperation, horizontal cooperation, vertical cooperation, and simultaneous horizontal and vertical cooperation. Vertical spillovers always increase R&D and welfare, while horizontal spillovers may increase or decrease them. The comparison of cooperative settings in terms of R&D shows that no setting uniformly dominates the others. Which type of cooperation yields more R&D depends on horizontal and vertical spillovers, and market structure. The ranking of cooperative structures hinges on the signs and magnitudes of three competitive externalities (vertical, horizontal, and diagonal) which capture the effect of the R&D of a firm on the profits of other firms. One of the basic results of the strategic investment literature is that cooperation between competitors increases (decreases) R&D when horizontal spillovers are high (low); the model shows that this result does not necessarily hold when vertical spillovers and vertical cooperation are taken into account. The paper proposes a theory of innovation and market structure, showing that the relation between innovation and competition depends on horizontal spillovers, vertical spillovers, and cooperative settings. The private incentives for R&D cooperation are addressed. It is found that buyers and sellers have divergent interests regarding the choice of cooperative settings and that spillovers increase the likelihood of the emergence of cooperation in a decentralized equilibrium. Cet article Ă©tudie les externalitĂ©s de recherche verticales entre des firmes en amont et des firmes en aval. Il y a deux industries verticalement reliĂ©es, avec des externalitĂ©s horizontales au sein de chaque industrie et des externalitĂ©s verticales entre les deux industries. Quatre structures de coopĂ©ration en R&D sont considĂ©rĂ©es: pas de coopĂ©ration, coopĂ©ration horizontale, coopĂ©ration verticale, et coopĂ©ration horizontale et verticale simultanĂ©ment. Les externalitĂ©s verticales augmentent la R&D et le bien-ĂȘtre, alors que les externalitĂ©s horizontales peuvent les augmenter ou les diminuer. La comparaison des structures de coopĂ©ration en terme de R&D rĂ©vĂšle qu'aucune structure ne domine uniformĂ©ment les autres. Le classement des structures de coopĂ©ration dĂ©pend des externalitĂ©s horizontales et verticales, et de la concurrence. Le classement dĂ©pend des signes et magnitudes de trois externalitĂ©s concurrentielles (verticale, horizontale et diagonale) qui captent l'effet de la R&D d'une firme sur les profits des autres firmes. Un des rĂ©sultats de base de la littĂ©rature sur l'investissement stratĂ©gique est que la coopĂ©ration entre concurrents augmente (diminue) la R&D lorsque les externalitĂ©s horizontales sont Ă©levĂ©es (faibles); le modĂšle montre que ce rĂ©sultat n'est pas toujours vĂ©rifiĂ© en prĂ©sence des externalitĂ©s verticales et/ou de la coopĂ©ration verticale. Le papier propose une thĂ©orie reliant le degrĂ© d'innovation Ă  la structure du marchĂ©: la relation entre la concurrence et l'innovation dĂ©pend des externalitĂ©s horizontales, des externalitĂ©s verticales et de la structure de coopĂ©ration. Les incitations privĂ©es Ă  la coopĂ©ration en R&D sont examinĂ©es; on montre que les vendeurs et les acheteurs ont des prĂ©fĂ©rences diffĂ©rentes quant au choix de structure de coopĂ©ration et que les externalitĂ©s augmentent la vraisemblance de l'Ă©mergence dĂ©centralisĂ©e de la coopĂ©ration.Vertical R&D spillovers, market structure, innovation, vertical R&D cooperation, R&D policy, ExternalitĂ©s de recherche verticales, structure de marchĂ©, innovation, coopĂ©ration verticale en R&D, politique de R&D

    Opportunity Costs, Competition, and Firm Selection

    Get PDF
    The paper questions the standard economic assumptions that competing economic agents have identical reservation utility levels, and that when differences in opportunity costs exit, they can be conveniently represented by fixed costs. Opportunity costs are endogenized by linking them to current efficiency. The effect of this interchangeability of skills is studied in the context of the effect of entry on firm selection in a Cournot setting. It is found that inefficient firms are more likely to crowd out efficient ones when the relationship between current efficiency and opportunity costs is strong, and when the fixed costs of changing markets are high. Moreover, in the long run firms with intermediate cost levels are likely to induce the exit of low and high cost firms. CoĂ»ts d'opportunitĂ©, concurrence et survie des entreprises. La prĂ©sente Ă©tude remet en question l'hypothĂšse Ă©conomique courante voulant que les agents Ă©conomiques en situation de concurrence aient des niveaux d'utilitĂ© de rĂ©serve identiques, et que lorsque des diffĂ©rences dans les coĂ»ts d'opportunitĂ© existent, elles puissent ĂȘtre incorporĂ©es dans les coĂ»ts fixes. Les coĂ»ts d'opportunitĂ© sont endogĂ©nisĂ©s en les reliant au niveau d'efficacitĂ© dans l'activitĂ© courante. On examine l'effet de cette interchangeabilitĂ© des qualifications dans une industrie en concurrence Ă  la Cournot avec entrĂ©e potentielle. On montre que les firmes inefficaces ont tendance Ă  remplacer les firmes efficaces lorsque la corrĂ©lation entre l'efficacitĂ© courante et les coĂ»ts d'opportunitĂ© est Ă©levĂ©e, et lorsque les coĂ»ts fixes de changer d'industrie sont Ă©levĂ©s. De plus, Ă  long terme les firmes ayant des coĂ»ts intermĂ©diaires induisent la sortie des firmes ayant des coĂ»ts trĂšs bas ou trĂšs Ă©levĂ©s.Entry, Exit, Efficiency, Firm selection, EntrĂ©e, Sortie, EfficacitĂ©, Survie des entreprises

    VERTICAL R&D SPILLOVERS, COOPERATION, MARKET STRUCTURE, AND INNOVATION

    Get PDF
    This paper studies vertical R&D spillovers between upstream and downstream firms. The model incorporates two vertically related industries, with horizontal spillovers within each industry and vertical spillovers between the two industries. Four types of R&D cooperation are studied: no cooperation, horizontal cooperation, vertical cooperation, and simultaneous horizontal and vertical cooperation. Vertical spillovers always increase R&D and welfare, while horizontal spillovers may increase or decrease them. The comparison of cooperative settings in terms of R&D shows that no setting uniformly dominates the others. Which type of cooperation yields more R&D depends on horizontal and vertical spillovers, and market structure. The ranking of cooperative structures hinges on the signs and magnitudes of three competitive externalities (vertical, horizontal, and diagonal) which capture the effect of the R&D of a firm on the profits of other firms. One of the basic results of the strategic investment literature is that cooperation between competitors increases (decreases) R&D when horizontal spillovers are high (low); the model shows that this result does not necessarily hold when vertical spillovers and vertical cooperation are taken into account. The paper proposes a theory of innovation and market structure, showing that the relation between innovation and competition depends on horizontal spillovers, vertical spillovers, and cooperative settings. The private incentives for R&D cooperation are addressed. It is found that buyers and sellers have divergent interests regarding the choice of cooperative settings and that spillovers increase the likelihood of the emergence of cooperation in a decentralized equilibrium.Vertical R&D spillovers, Market structure, Innovation, Vertical R&D cooperation, R&D policy

    Production Technology, Information Technology, and Vertical Integration under Asymmetric Information

    Get PDF
    The paper addresses the effect of technological progress on the frontiers of the firm, building on transaction cost theory and agency theory. The model incorporates four types of costs: production, coordination, management, and transaction costs. The market has lower production costs, but higher coordination costs, than the firm. A principal-two agents framework with adverse selection and moral hazard is adopted. It is found that technological progress in production and information technologies tend to have diametrically opposite effects on procurement. In general, progress in production technology leads to more vertical integration, whereas progress in information technology leads to more subcontracting. When technological change concerns the level of costs, its effect on procurement depends on the cost differential between the firm and the market, and on the relative importance of production and coordination costs; whereas, when technological change affects the effect or disutility of effort, its impact on procurement is unambiguous. The paper provides an explanation for the changing effect of technological progress on procurement throughout the twentieth century: why it favoured vertical integration historically, and why it favours subcontracting (or has a mixed effect) today. This explanation relies on the implication of the evolution of the relative importance of production and coordination activities for the relationship between technological progress and vertical integration. The paper constitutes a bridge between contractual explanations and technological explanations of the existence and frontiers of the firm. Cet article analyse l'effet du changement technologique sur les frontiÚres de la firme en se basant sur la théorie des coûts de transaction et la théorie de l'agence. Le modÚle incorpore quatre types de coûts: coûts de production, de coordination, de management et de transaction. Le marché a des coûts de production plus faibles, mais des coûts de coordination plus élevés, que la firme. L'analyse est effectuée dans un cadre principal-deux agents, avec antisélection et risque moral. Les changement technologiques concernant la technologie de production et les technologies de l'information entraßnent des effets diamétralement opposés sur l'intégration verticale. En général, le changement technique concernant la technologie de production se traduit par davantage d'intégration verticale, alors que le changement technique concernant les technologies de l'information se traduit par davantage d'impartition. Lorsque le changement technologique concerne le niveau des coûts, son effet sur l'impartition dépend du différentiel de coûts entre la firme et le marché, et de l'importance relative des coûts de production et de coordination; tandis que, lorsque le changement technologique concerne les efforts de réduction des coûts, son effet est sans ambiguïté. Le papier propose une explication du changement dans l'effet du progrÚs technique sur l'impartition durant le vingtiÚme siÚcle: pourquoi il a favorisé l'intégration verticale historiquement, et favorise l'impartition (ou du moins a un effet ambigu) aujourd'hui. L'explication repose sur l'impact de l'évolution de l'importance relative des activités de production et de coordination sur la relation entre le progrÚs technique et l'intégration verticale. Cet article constitue un mariage entre les explications contractuelles et les explications technologiques de l'existence et des frontiÚres de la firme.Transaction costs, Asymmetric and private information, Markets vs. hierarchies, Vertical integration, Technological change, Information technology, Coûts de transaction, Information privée et asymétrique, Marchés vs. hiérarchies, Intégration verticale, Changement Technologique, Technologies de l'information

    Information Sharing and the Stability of Cooperation in Research Joint Ventures

    Get PDF
    The model studies information sharing and the stability of cooperation in cost reducing Research Joint Ventures (RJVs). In a three-stage game-theoretic framework, firms decide on participation in a RJV, information sharing along with R&D expenditures, and output. An important feature of the model is that voluntary information sharing between cooperating firms increases information leakage from the RJV to outsiders. It is found that RJVs representing a larger portion of firms in the industry are more likely to share information. It is also found that when sharing information is costless, firms generally don't choose intermediate levels of information sharing: they share all the information or none at all. The size of the RJV is found to depend on three effects: a coordination effect, an information sharing effect, and a competition effect. Depending on the relative magnitudes of these effects, the size of the RJV may increase or decrease with spillovers. In response to an increase in leakages, RJV members reduce their R&D spending. In addition, they either increase the RJV size while maintaining information sharing unchanged (when leakages are low), or they reduce both information sharing and RJV size (when leakages are high). The effect of information sharing on the profitability of firms as well as on welfare is studied. Le partage d'information et la stabilitĂ© de la coopĂ©ration dans les consortiums de recherche. Cet article examine le partage de technologie et la stabilitĂ© de la coopĂ©ration dans les consortiums de recherche (RJVs) dont le but est la rĂ©duction des coĂ»ts de production. Dans un jeu Ă  trois Ă©tapes, les firmes prennent des dĂ©cisions quant Ă  leur participation Ă  la RJV, au partage d'information et aux dĂ©penses en R&D, et Ă  leur output. Une caractĂ©ristique importante du modĂšle est que le partage volontaire d'information au sein de la RJV augmente les fuites d'information vers les non-membres. On montre que les RJVs reprĂ©sentant une plus grande proportion des firmes dans l'industrie ont davantage tendance Ă  partager l'information. Lorsqu'il n'en coĂ»te rien de partager l'information, les firmes ne choisissent pas des niveaux intermĂ©diaires de partage d'information: l'information est partagĂ©e au complet ou pas du tout. La taille de la RJV dĂ©pend de trois effets: un effet de coordination, un effet d'information et un effet de concurrence. DĂ©pendamment de l'importance relative de ces trois effets, la taille de la RJV peut augmenter ou diminuer avec les externalitĂ©s. Lorsque les fuites d'information vers les non-membres augmentent, les membres de la RJV rĂ©duisent leurs dĂ©penses en R&D. De plus, soit qu'ils augmentent la taille de la RJV en maintenant le partage d'information (lorsque les externalitĂ©s sont faibles), soit qu'ils rĂ©duisent la taille de la RJV et le partage d'information (lorsque les externalitĂ©s sont Ă©levĂ©es). L'effet du partage d'information sur la profitabilitĂ© des firmes ainsi que sur le bien-ĂȘtre est examinĂ©.Endogenous R&D spillovers, information sharing, R&D cooperation, research joint ventures, ExternalitĂ©s de recherche endogĂšnes, partage d'information, coopĂ©ration en R&D, consortiums de recherche
    • 

    corecore