IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dpr/wpaper/0935.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Multiproduct competition in vertically related industries

Author

Listed:
  • Shohei Yoshida

Abstract

The paper investigates how competition between two multiproduct downstream firms in vertical relationships affects horizontal relationships: competitor collaboration and performance difference. When the upstream market consists of exclusive suppliers, the efficient firm may have incentive for technology transfer without any payment to its less efficient rival, which can be a credible device of the efficient firm to enlarge its more profitable product. Moreover, such technology transfer enhances both consumer surplus and social welfare. The inefficient downstream firm may earn more than the efficient firm under upstream markets with exclusive suppliers and with discriminatory monopolist.

Suggested Citation

  • Shohei Yoshida, 2015. "Multiproduct competition in vertically related industries," ISER Discussion Paper 0935, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    • Handle: RePEc:dpr:wpaper:0935
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iser.osaka-u.ac.jp/library/dp/2015/DP0935.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sen, Debapriya & Stamatopoulos, Giorgos, 2010. "When an inefficient firm makes higher profit than its efficient rival," MPRA Paper 23324, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Schrader, Stephan, 1991. "Informal technology transfer between firms: Cooperation through information trading," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 153-170, April.
    3. Brander, James A & Eaton, Jonathan, 1984. "Product Line Rivalry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(3), pages 323-334, June.
    4. Mukherjee, Arijit & Pennings, Enrico, 2011. "Unionization structure, licensing and innovation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 232-241, March.
    5. Michael A. Cusumano & Akira Takeishi, 1991. "Supplier relations and management: A survey of Japanese, Japanese‐transplant, and U.S. auto plants," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(8), pages 563-588, November.
    6. Arghya Ghosh & Hodaka Morita, 2017. "Knowledge transfer and partial equity ownership," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 48(4), pages 1044-1067, December.
    7. Carsten Eckel & J. Peter Neary, 2010. "Multi-Product Firms and Flexible Manufacturing in the Global Economy," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(1), pages 188-217.
    8. Christina L. Ahmadjian & Joanne E. Oxley, 2013. "Vertical Relationships, Hostages, and Supplier Performance: Evidence from the Japanese Automotive Industry," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 485-512, June.
    9. Noriaki Matsushima & Laixun Zhao, 2015. "Strategic dual sourcing as a driver for free revealing of innovation," ISER Discussion Paper 0936, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    10. Lahiri, Sajal & Ono, Yoshiyasu, 1988. "Helping Minor Firms Reduces Welfare," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(393), pages 1199-1202, December.
    11. Andrew B. Bernard & Stephen J. Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2010. "Multiple-Product Firms and Product Switching," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 70-97, March.
    12. Suzuki, Kazuyuki, 1993. "R&D spillovers and technology transfer among and within vertical keiretsu groups : Evidence from the Japanese electrical machinery industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 573-591.
    13. Milliou, Chrysovalantou & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2012. "Vertical integration, knowledge disclosure and decreasing rival's cost," UC3M Working papers. Economics we1213, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    14. Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2006. "Multiproduct Cournot oligopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 583-601, September.
    15. Jota Ishikawa & Eiji Horiuchi, 2012. "Strategic Foreign Direct Investment in Vertically Related Markets," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 88(281), pages 229-242, June.
    16. Andrew B. Bernard & Stephen J. Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2011. "Multiproduct Firms and Trade Liberalization," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(3), pages 1271-1318.
    17. Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2003. "Multiproduct Quality Competition: Fighting Brands and Product Line Pruning," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 748-774, June.
    18. DeGraba, Patrick, 1990. "Input Market Price Discrimination and the Choice of Technology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1246-1253, December.
    19. Bruce Kogut, 1988. "Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 319-332, July.
    20. Bailey, Elizabeth E & Friedlaender, Ann F, 1982. "Market Structure and Multiproduct Industries," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(3), pages 1024-1048, September.
    21. Noriaki Matsushima & Susumu Ogawa, 2012. "Profit-Enhancing Know-How Disclosure: A Strategic View," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 80(5), pages 560-579, September.
    22. Anil Arya & Brian Mittendorf, 2010. "Input Price Discrimination When Buyers Operate In Multiple Markets," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 846-867, December.
    23. Hodaka Morita, 2001. "Partial Ownership Induces Customised Investments Under Repeated Interaction: An Explanation of Japanese Manufacturer‐Suppliers Relationships," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 48(3), pages 345-359, August.
    24. Morita, Hodaka, 2001. "Partial Ownership Induces Customised Investments under Repeated Interaction: An Explanation of Japanese Manufacturer-Suppliers Relationships," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 48(3), pages 345-359, August.
    25. Mowery, David C., 1983. "The relationship between intrafirm and contractual forms of industrial research in American manufacturing, 1900-1940," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 351-374, October.
    26. Ping Lin & Kamal Saggi, 1999. "Incentives for Foreign Direct Investment under Imitation," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 32(5), pages 1275-1298, November.
    27. Creane, Anthony & Konishi, Hideo, 2009. "The unilateral incentives for technology transfers: Predation (and deterrence) by proxy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 379-389, May.
    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. You, Jing & Imai, Katsushi S. & Gaiha, Raghav, 2016. "Declining Nutrient Intake in a Growing China: Does Household Heterogeneity Matter?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 171-191.
    2. Noriaki Matsushima & Laixun Zhao, 2015. "Strategic dual sourcing as a driver for free revealing of innovation," ISER Discussion Paper 0936, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    3. Noriaki Matsushima & Laixun Zhao, 2018. "Technology spillovers and outside options in a bilateral duopoly," ISER Discussion Paper 1039, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    4. Shohei Yoshida & Cong Pan, 2015. "Technology Transfer in the Market with Heterogeneous Consumers," ISER Discussion Paper 0953, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.

    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. Shohei Yoshida & Cong Pan, 2015. "Technology Transfer in the Market with Heterogeneous Consumers," ISER Discussion Paper 0953, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    2. Kopel, Michael & Löffler, Clemens & Pfeiffer, Thomas, 2016. "Sourcing strategies of a multi-input-multi-product firm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 30-45.
    3. Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2018. "The determinants of product lines," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 49(3), pages 541-573, September.
    4. Eckel, Carsten & Iacovone, Leonardo & Javorcik, Beata & Neary, J. Peter, 2015. "Multi-product firms at home and away: Cost- versus quality-based competence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 216-232.
    5. Ushchev, Philip, 2017. "Multi-product firms in monopolistic competition: The role of scale-scope spillovers," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(4), pages 675-689.
    6. Sanne Hiller, 2013. "Does immigrant employment matter for export sales? Evidence from Denmark," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 149(2), pages 369-394, June.
    7. Robert Elliott & Supreeya Virakul, 2010. "Multi-product firms and exporting: a developing country perspective," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 146(4), pages 635-656, December.
    8. Carsten Eckel & J. Peter Neary, 2010. "Multi-Product Firms and Flexible Manufacturing in the Global Economy," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(1), pages 188-217.
    9. Volker Nocke & Stephen Yeaple, 2006. "Globalization and Endogenous Firm Scope," NBER Working Papers 12322, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Andrew B. Bernard & Stephen J. Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2011. "Multiproduct Firms and Trade Liberalization," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(3), pages 1271-1318.
    11. Qiu, Larry D. & Yu, Miaojie, 2020. "Export scope, managerial efficiency, and trade liberalization: Evidence from Chinese firms," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 71-90.
    12. Volker Nocke & Nicolas Schutz, 2018. "Multiproduct‐Firm Oligopoly: An Aggregative Games Approach," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(2), pages 523-557, March.
    13. Lin, Yen-Ju, 2022. "Consumer welfare, licensing, and exclusive dealing with vertically- and horizontally-differentiated products," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 147-158.
    14. Minniti, Antonio & Turino, Francesco, 2013. "Multi-product firms and business cycle dynamics," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 75-97.
    15. Catherine Fuss & Linke Zhu, 2012. "Comparative advantage, multi-product firms and trade liberalisation : An empirical test," Working Paper Research 219, National Bank of Belgium.
    16. Macedoni, Luca, 2022. "Large multiproduct exporters across rich and poor countries: Theory and evidence," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    17. Yi‐Ling Cheng & Takatoshi Tabuchi, 2018. "Multiproduct oligopoly and trade between asymmetric countries," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 524-538, August.
    18. Johannes Boehm & Swati Dhingra & John Morrow, 2022. "The Comparative Advantage of Firms," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(12), pages 3025-3100.
    19. Stole, Lars A., 2007. "Price Discrimination and Competition," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 2221-2299, Elsevier.
    20. Ma, Yue & Tang, Heiwai & Zhang, Yifan, 2014. "Factor Intensity, product switching, and productivity: Evidence from Chinese exporters," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(2), pages 349-362.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:dpr:wpaper:0935. 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: Librarian (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isosujp.html .

    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.