IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v99y2008i2p268-271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How risky should an R&D program be?

Author

Listed:
  • Tishler, Asher

Abstract

This paper presents a two-stage model describing the optimal choice of R&D risk among R&D programs with the same expected outcome. It demonstrates that the choice of the highest-risk R&D program is a dominant strategy under Bertrand or Cournot competition.

Suggested Citation

  • Tishler, Asher, 2008. "How risky should an R&D program be?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 268-271, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:99:y:2008:i:2:p:268-271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-1765(07)00266-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sudipto Bhattacharya & Dilip Mookherjee, 1986. "Portfolio Choice in Research and Development," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(4), pages 594-605, Winter.
    2. Partha Dasgupta & Joseph Stiglitz, 1980. "Uncertainty, Industrial Structure, and the Speed of R&D," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(1), pages 1-28, Spring.
    3. Dasgupta, Partha & Maskin, Eric, 1987. "The Simple Economics of Research Portfolios," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(387), pages 581-595, September.
    4. Dasgupta, Partha & Stiglitz, Joseph, 1980. "Industrial Structure and the Nature of Innovative Activity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(358), pages 266-293, June.
    5. Qiu, Larry D., 1997. "On the Dynamic Efficiency of Bertrand and Cournot Equilibria," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 213-229, July.
    6. Luís M. B. Cabral, 2003. "R&D Competition when firms Choose Variance," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(1), pages 139-150, March.
    7. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
    8. Choi, Jay Pil, 1993. "Cooperative R&D with product market competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 553-571.
    9. Tor Klette & David de Meza, 1986. "Is the Market Biased Against Risky R&D?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 133-139, Spring.
    10. Boone, Jan, 2001. "Intensity of competition and the incentive to innovate," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 705-726, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xing, Mingqing, 2014. "On the optimal choices of R&D risk in a market with network externalities," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 71-74.
    2. Milstein, Irena & Tishler, Asher, 2015. "Can price volatility enhance market power? The case of renewable technologies in competitive electricity markets," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 70-90.
    3. Tishler, Asher & Milstein, Irena, 2009. "R&D wars and the effects of innovation on the success and survivability of firms in oligopoly markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 519-531, July.
    4. Richard Carson & Joshua S. Graff Zivin & Jordan Louviere & Sally Sadoff & Jeffrey G. Shrader Jr, 2020. "The Risk of Caution: Evidence from an R&D Experiment," NBER Working Papers 26847, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Zhang, Yanfang, 2020. "When should firms choose a risky new technology? An oligopolistic analysis," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 687-693.
    6. Xing, Mingqing & Tan, Tingting & Wang, Xia, 2021. "Emission taxes and environmental R&D risk choices in a duopoly market," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nisvan Erkal & Deborah Minehart, 2007. "Optimal Sharing Strategies in Dynamic Games of Research and Development," EAG Discussions Papers 200707, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.
    2. Tishler, Asher & Milstein, Irena, 2009. "R&D wars and the effects of innovation on the success and survivability of firms in oligopoly markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 519-531, July.
    3. Spulber, Daniel F., 2012. "Tacit knowledge with innovative entrepreneurship," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 641-653.
    4. Isabelle Brocas, 2003. "Les enjeux de la réglementation de la recherche et développement," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 113(1), pages 125-148.
    5. Jay Pil Choi & Heiko Gerlach, 2014. "Selection Biases in Complementary R&D Projects," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(4), pages 899-924, December.
    6. Haufler, Andreas & Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars, 2014. "Entrepreneurial innovations and taxation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 13-31.
    7. Lambertini, Luca & Mantovani, Andrea, 2009. "Process and product innovation by a multiproduct monopolist: A dynamic approach," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 508-518, July.
    8. Hamid Beladi & Arijit Mukherjee, 2022. "R&D competition and the persistence of technology leadership," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 18(3), pages 272-284, September.
    9. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1990. "Risky R&D in Oligopolistic Product Markets," Discussion Papers 872, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    10. Leibowicz, Benjamin D., 2018. "Welfare improvement windows for innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 390-398.
    11. Yongmin Chen & Shiyuan Pan & Tianle Zhang, 2018. "Patentability, R&D Direction, And Cumulative Innovation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(4), pages 1969-1993, November.
    12. L. Lambertini & R. Orsini, 2014. "Process Innovation and Product Quality Improvement in a Dynamic Monopoly," Working Papers wp926, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    13. Henkel, Joachim & Rønde, Thomas & Wagner, Marcus, 2015. "And the winner is—Acquired. Entrepreneurship as a contest yielding radical innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 295-310.
    14. Anzhou Zhang, 2022. "Competition and the negative expected social value of cost‐reducing innovation," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 90(1), pages 59-76, January.
    15. Mark Whitmeyer, 2021. "Submission Fees in Risk-Taking Contests," Papers 2108.13506, arXiv.org.
    16. Gilbert Richard J, 2006. "Competition and Innovation," Journal of Industrial Organization Education, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-23, December.
    17. Xavier Vives, 2008. "Innovation And Competitive Pressure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 419-469, December.
    18. Heiko A. Gerlach & Thomas Rønde & Konrad Stahl, 2005. "Project Choice And Risk In R&D," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 53-81, March.
    19. Chia-Hung Sun & Fu-Chuan Lai, 2014. "Spatial price discrimination in a symmetric barbell model: Bertrand vs. Cournot," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 93(1), pages 141-158, March.
    20. de Laat, Eric A. A., 1997. "Patents or prizes: Monopolistic R&D and asymmetric information," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 369-390, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:99:y:2008:i:2:p:268-271. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.