Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2018 | 11 | nr 3 | 44--56
Tytuł artykułu

R&D Spillovers and Cartelization of Industries with Differentiated Products

Treść / Zawartość
Warianty tytułu
Języki publikacji
The objective of this article is to investigate the impact of research and development (R&D) spillovers on cartelization of industries characterized by differentiated products. For simplicity, we focus on the duopoly market in which firms compete according to the Stackelberg leadership model. Numerical analysis shows that as long as products offered on the market are at least slightly differentiated, it is beneficial for firms to cooperate at the R&D stage, and form a cartel at the final product market. The threat of cartelizing industry is not present only under fully homogenous goods' competition. But, since the vast majority of product markets trade in differentiated goods, tightening cooperation in R&D generates a serious threat of industry cartelization. Thus, significant antitrust issues emerge.(original abstract)
Opis fizyczny
  • Warsaw School of Economics, Poland
  • Warsaw School of Economics, Poland
  • Adams, J. (1990). Fundamental stocks of knowledge and productivity growth. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 673-702.
  • Adams, J., Chiang, E.P., Starkey, K. (2001). Industry university cooperative research centers. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 73-86.
  • Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1998). Endogenous Growth Theory. MIT Press.
  • Andersen, E. (2011). Joseph A. Schumpeter. A Theory of Social and Economic Evolution. Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Baumol, W.J. (2002). The Free-Market Innovation Machine: Analyzing the Growth Miracle of Capitalism. Princeton University Press.
  • Belleflamme, P., & Peitz, M. (2010). Industrial Organization. Markets and Strategies. Cambridge University Press.
  • Boase, J., Wellman, B., & Chen, W. (2003). The networked nature of community. IT and Society, 1, 164-211.
  • Callon, M., Laredo, P., Rabeharisoa, V., Gonard, T., & Leray, T. (1992). The management and evaluation of technological programs and the dynamics of techno-economic networks: the case of the A.F.M.E. Research Policy, 21, 215-236.
  • Cefis, E., Rosenkranz, S., & Weitzel, U. (2009). Effects of coordinated strategies on product and process R&D. Journal of Economics, 96, 193-222.
  • Dixit, A. (1979). A model of duopoly suggesting a theory of entry barriers. Bell Journal of Economics, 10, 20-32.
  • Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The sources of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27, 823-835.
  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109-123.
  • Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Research groups as "quasi firms": the invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32, 109-121.
  • Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in innovation: the Triple Helix of university-industry government relations. Social Science Information, 42, 293-337.
  • Freeman, C. (1987). Technology Policy and Economic Performance. Pinter.
  • Freeman, C. (1991). Networks of innovators: a synthesis of research issues. Research Policy, 20, 215-239.
  • Geiger, R. (2004). Knowledge & money: research universities and the paradox of the marketplace. Stanford University Press.
  • Geroski, P. (1995). Do spillovers undermine the incentive to innovate? in Dowrick, S. (ed.) Economic approaches to innovation. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
  • Geuna, A., & Martin, B. (2003). University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison. Minerva, 41, 227-304.
  • Gibbons, M., Camille, E., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., Martin, T. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge. Sage Publication.
  • Gilsing, V., Bekkers, R., Freitas, I., & Van der Steen, M. (2011). Differences in technology transfer between science-based and development-based industries: Transfer mechanisms and barriers. Technovation, 31, 638-647.
  • Gottinger, H. (2013). Innovation, Technology and Hypercompetition. Review and synthesis. London and New York: Routledge.
  • Granovetter, M.S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360-1380.
  • Grossman, G., & Helpman, E. (1991). Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy. The MIT Press.
  • Gulbrandsen, M., & Smeby, J. C. (2005). Industry funding and research professors research performance. Research Policy, 34, 932-950.
  • Harryson, S. (2006). Know-Who Based Entrepreneurship: From Knowledge Creation to Business Implementation. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Harryson, S., Kliknaite, S., & Dudkowski, R. (2007). Making innovative use of academic knowledge to enhance corporate technology innovation impact. International Journal of Technology Management, 39, 131-157.
  • Harter, J. (1993). Differentiated Products and R&D. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 41, 19-28.
  • Hendrikse, G. (2003). Economics and Management of Organizations: Co - ordination, Motivation and Strategy. McGraw - Hill.
  • Howells, J., Nedeva, M., & Georghiou, L. (1998). Industry-academic links in the UK, Report to the Higher Education Funding Councils for England, Scotland and Wales. PREST, University of Manchester.
  • Joskow, P. (2008). Introduction to New Institutional Economics: A Report Card in Brousseau, E., Glachant, J. (eds) New Institutional Economics: A Guidebook. Cambridge University Press.
  • Kaiser, U. (2002). An empirical test of models explaining research expenditures and research cooperation: evidence for the German service sector. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 20, 747 - 774.
  • Kamien, M., Muller, E., & Zang, I. (1992). Research Joint Ventures and R&D Cartels. American Economic Review, 82, 1293-1306.
  • Karbowski, A. (2015). Kartele w trzech perspektywach: neoklasycznej, behawioralnej oraz etycznej. Gospodarka Narodowa, 277, 5-26.
  • Kruecken, G. (2003). Mission impossible? Institutional barriers to the diffusion of the "Third Academic Mission" at German Universities. International Journal of Technology Management, 25, 18-33.
  • Lee, J., & Win, H.N. (2004). Technology transfer between university research centers and industry in Singapore. Technovation, 24, 433-442.
  • Lee, Y.S. (2000). The sustainability of university-industry research collaboration: an empirical assessment. Journal of Technology Transfer, 25, 111-133.
  • Leydesdorff, L., & Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The Triple Helix as a Model for Innovation Studies. Science and Public Policy, 25, 195-203.
  • Lin, P., & Saggi, K. (2002). Product differentiation, process R&D, and the nature of market competition. European Economic Review, 46, 201-211.
  • Lundvall, B.A. (1992). National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. Pinter.
  • Maassen, P., & Stensaker, B. (2011). The knowledge triangle, European higher education policy logics and policy implications. Higher Education, 61, 757-769.
  • Marksman, G.D., Gianodis, P.T., Phan, P.H., & Balkin, D.B. (2004). Entrepreneurship from the ivory tower: Do incentive systems matter?. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, 353-364.
  • Martin, S. (2006). Competition policy, collusion, and tacit collusion. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 24, 159-76.
  • Miyagiwa, K. (2009). Collusion and Research Joint Ventures. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 57, 768-84.
  • Mowery, D.C., & Nelson, R.R. (1999). Sources of Industrial Leadership. Cambridge University Press.
  • Nelson, R.R. (1993). National Innovation Systems. Oxford University Press.
  • Okubo, Y., & Sjoberg, C. (2000). The changing pattern of industrial scientific research collaboration in Sweden. Research Policy, 29, 81-98.
  • Paha, J. (2010). Endogenous cartel formation with heterogeneous firms and differentiated products, mimeo.
  • Pittaway, L., Robertson, M., Munir, K., Denyer, D., & Neely, A. (2004). Networking and Innovation: a systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews, 5/6, 137-168.
  • Poyago-Theotoky, J., Beath, J., & Siegel, D.S. (2002). Universities and fundamental research: reflections on the growth of university-industry partnerships. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18, 10-21.
  • Prokop, J., & Karbowski, A. (2013). R&D Cooperation and Industry Cartelization. The Economics Discussion Paper Series, 2013-41, The Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
  • Rogers, E.M., Carayannis, E.G., Kurihara, K., & Allbritton, M.M. (1998). Cooperative research and development agreements (CRADAs) as technology transfer mechanisms. R&D Management, 28, 79-88.
  • Romer, P. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, XCVIII, 71-102.
  • Schumpeter, J. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Harvard University Press.
  • Singh, N., & Vives, X. (1984). Price and quantity competition in a differentiated duopoly. RAND Journal of Economics, 15, 546-554.
  • Soriano, F., & Mulatero, F. (2010). Knowledge Policy in the EU: From the Lisbon Strategy to Europe 2020. Journal of Knowledge Economy, 1, 289-302.
  • Symeonidis, G. (2003). Comparing Cournot and Bertrand equilibria in a differentiated duopoly with product R&D. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 39-55.
  • Veugelers, R., & Del Rey, E. (2014). The contribution of universities to innovation, (regional) growth and employment. EENEE Analytical Report No. 18, EC.
  • Van Wijk, R., Van Den Bosch, F.A.J., & Volberda, H.W. (2004). Knowledge and Networks in Earsthby-Smith, M., Lyles, M. (eds) Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management. Blackwell Publishing.
  • Williamson, O.E. (2000). The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead. Journal of Economic Literature, 38, 595-613.
  • Wils, G. (2007). Commission fines Dutch brewers over €273 million for a beer cartel. Competition Policy Newsletter, number 3.
Typ dokumentu
Identyfikator YADDA

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.