Strategic R&D with Knowledge Spillovers and Endogenous Time to Complete
AbstractIt is shown that asymmetry in R&D efficiency between firms is an important factor determining feasibility of the preemption and attrition scenarios in competitive R&D with time to build. Scenarios of attrition and preemption games are most likely to occur when competitors have similar R&D efficiencies. In case of largely asymmetric firms the games of attrition and preemption are very unlikely, thus the R&D duration choices of firms are determined by the actual trade-off between the benefits of earlier innovation and the costs of faster R&D project completion.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research in its series Discussion Paper with number 2007-38.
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://center.uvt.nl
R&D Investment; Competition; Preemption; Attrition;
Other versions of this item:
- Peter M. Kort & Ruslan Lukach & Joseph Plasmans, 2007. "Strategic R&D with Knowledge Spillovers and Endogenous Time to Complete," CESifo Working Paper Series 2027, CESifo Group Munich.
- C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
- D21 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Theory
- O31 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Technological Change; Research and Development; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2007-09-02 (All new papers)
- NEP-COM-2007-09-02 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-CSE-2007-09-02 (Economics of Strategic Management)
- NEP-INO-2007-09-02 (Innovation)
- NEP-IPR-2007-09-02 (Intellectual Property Rights)
- NEP-KNM-2007-09-02 (Knowledge Management & Knowledge Economy)
- NEP-MIC-2007-09-02 (Microeconomics)
- NEP-PPM-2007-09-02 (Project, Program & Portfolio Management)
- NEP-TID-2007-09-02 (Technology & Industrial Dynamics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2003.
"Productivity Dynamics with Technology Choice: An Application to Automobile Assembly,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(1), pages 167-198, January.
- Johannes van Biesebroeck, 2003. "Productivity Dynamics with Technology Choice: An Application to Automobile Assembly," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 70(1), pages 167-198.
- Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2000. "Measuring Productivity Dynamics with Endogenous Choice of Technology and Capacity Utilization: An Application to Automobile Assembly," Working Papers 00-16, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
- Fudenberg, Drew & Tirole, Jean, 1985. "Preemption and Rent Equilization in the Adoption of New Technology," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 383-401, July.
- Hoppe, Heidrun C., 2000. "Second-mover advantages in the strategic adoption of new technology under uncertainty," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 315-338, February.
- Suzumura, Kotaro, 1992. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in an Oligopoly with Spillovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1307-20, December.
- Prajit K. Dutta & Saul Lach & Aldo Rustichini, 1993.
"Better Late Than Early: Vertical Differentiation in the Adoption of a New Technology,"
NBER Working Papers
4473, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Dutta, Prajit K & Lach, Saul & Rustichini, Aldo, 1995. "Better Late Than Early: Vertical Differentiation in the Adoption of a New Technology," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(4), pages 563-89, Winter.
- Reinganum, Jennifer F., 1981.
"Dynamic games of innovation,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 21-41, August.
- Gene M. Grossman & Carl Shapiro, 1985.
"Optimal Dynamic R&D Programs,"
NBER Working Papers
1658, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1987. "R&D Rivalry with Licensing or Imitation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 402-20, June.
- Pacheco-de-Almeida, Goncalo & Zemsky, Peter, 2003. " The Effect of Time-to-Build on Strategic Investment under Uncertainty," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(1), pages 166-82, Spring.
- Heidrun C. Hoppe & Ulrich Lehmann-Grube, 2001. "Second-Mover Advantages in Dynamic Quality Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(3), pages 419-433, 09.
- Dutta, Prajit K., 1997. "Optimal management of an R&D budget," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 21(2-3), pages 575-602.
- Petit, Maria Luisa & Tolwinski, Boleslaw, 1999. "R&D cooperation or competition?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 185-208, January.
- Hoppe, Heidrun C. & Lehmann-Grube, Ulrich, 2005. "Innovation timing games: a general framework with applications," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 30-50, March.
- Bas, Maria & Ledezma, Ivan, 2007.
"Market Access and the Evolution of within Plant Productivity in Chile,"
Economics Papers from University Paris Dauphine
123456789/6913, Paris Dauphine University.
- Maria Bas & Ivan Ledezma, 2007. "Market Access and the Evolution of within Plant Productivity in Chile," CESifo Working Paper Series 2077, CESifo Group Munich.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Richard Broekman).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.