Breaking Up a Research Consortium
AbstractInter-firm R&D collaborations through contractual arrangements have become increasingly popular, but in many cases they are broken up without any joint discovery. We provide a rationale for the breakup date in R&D collaboration agreements. More specifically, we consider a research consortium initiated by a firm A with a firm B. B has private information about whether it is committed to the project or a free-rider. We show that under fairly general conditions, a breakup date in the contract is a (secondbest) optimal screening device for firm A to screen out free-riders. With the additional constraint of renegotiation proofness, A can only partially screen out free-riders: entry by some free-riders makes sure that A does not have an incentive to renegotiate the contract ex post. We also propose empirical strategies for identifying the three likely causes of a breakup date: adverse selection, moral hazard, and project non-viability.
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 Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich in its series Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems with number 433.
Date of creation: 14 May 2013
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Web page: http://www.sfbtr15.de/
More information through EDIRC
Optimal R&D contracts; adverse selection; breakup date; R&D collaboration;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
- D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
- L20 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2013-11-02 (All new papers)
- NEP-CTA-2013-11-02 (Contract Theory & Applications)
- NEP-GTH-2013-11-02 (Game Theory)
- NEP-INO-2013-11-02 (Innovation)
- NEP-MIC-2013-11-02 (Microeconomics)
- NEP-PPM-2013-11-02 (Project, Program & Portfolio Management)
- NEP-TID-2013-11-02 (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.:
- d'ASPREMONT, Claude & JACQUEMIN, Alexis, .
"Cooperative and noncooperative R&D in duopoly with spillovers,"
CORE Discussion Papers RP
-823, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- d'Aspremont, Claude & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1988. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1133-37, December.
- Ulrike Malmendier & Geoffrey Tate, 2009.
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 124(4), pages 1593-1638, November.
- Patricia M. Danzon & Sean Nicholson & Nuno Sousa Pereira, 2003.
"Productivity in Pharmaceutical Biotechnology R&D: The Role of Experience and Alliances,"
NBER Working Papers
9615, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Danzon, Patricia M. & Nicholson, Sean & Pereira, Nuno Sousa, 2005. "Productivity in pharmaceutical-biotechnology R&D: the role of experience and alliances," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 317-339, March.
- Michael L. Katz, 1986. "An Analysis of Cooperative Research and Development," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(4), pages 527-543, Winter.
- Kogut, Bruce, 1989. "The Stability of Joint Ventures: Reciprocity and Competitive Rivalry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 183-98, December.
- Karlan, Dean S. & Zinman, Jonathan, 2007.
"Observing Unobservables: Identifying Information Asymmetries with a Consumer Credit Field Experiment,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
6182, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Dean Karlan & Jonathan Zinman, 2009. "Observing Unobservables: Identifying Information Asymmetries With a Consumer Credit Field Experiment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(6), pages 1993-2008, November.
- Dean S. Karlan & Jonathan Zinman, 2005. "Observing Unobservables: Identifying Information Asymmetries with a Consumer Credit Field Experiment," Working Papers 911, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
- Dean Karlan & Jonathan Zinman, 2005. "Observing unobservables: identifying information asymmetries with a consumer-credit field experiment," Proceedings 961, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
- Dean Karlan & Jonathan Zinman, 2004. "Observing unobservables: Identifying information asymmetries with a consumer credit field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00283, The Field Experiments Website.
- Mathias Dewatripont & Patrick Bolton, 2005.
ULB Institutional Repository
2013/9543, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
- Pastor, Maite & Sandonis, Joel, 2002. "Research joint ventures vs. cross licensing agreements: an agency approach," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 215-249, February.
- Michael D. Ryall & Rachelle C. Sampson, 2009. "Formal Contracts in the Presence of Relational Enforcement Mechanisms: Evidence from Technology Development Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(6), pages 906-925, June.
- Bester, Helmut & Strausz, Roland, 2001. "Contracting with Imperfect Commitment and the Revelation Principle: The Single Agent Case," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(4), pages 1077-98, July.
- Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
- Lee G. Branstetter & Mariko Sakakibara, 2002. "When Do Research Consortia Work Well and Why? Evidence from Japanese Panel Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 143-159, March.
- John Hagedoorn & Geerte Hesen, 2007. "Contract Law and the Governance of Inter-Firm Technology Partnerships - An Analysis of Different Modes of Partnering and Their Contractual Implications," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 342-366, 05.
- Morasch, Karl, 1995. "Moral hazard and optimal contract form for R&D cooperation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 63-78, September.
- Josh Lerner & Ulrike Malmendier, 2010.
"Contractibility and the Design of Research Agreements,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 214-46, March.
- Josh Lerner & Ulrike Malmendier, 2005. "Contractibility and the Design of Research Agreements," NBER Working Papers 11292, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1991. "Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061414, December.
- Choi, Jay Pil, 1992. "Cooperative R&D with moral hazard," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 485-491, August.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Alexandra Frank).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.