Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Competing Technologies, International Diffusion and the Rate of Convergence to a Stable Market Structure

Contents:

Author Info

  • A. Bassanini
  • G. Dosi

Abstract

This paper is motivated by two 'stylized facts' concerning the dynamics of diffusion of different technologies competing for the same market niche. a) A stable pattern of market sharing with no overwhelming dominant position is rarely observed in markets with network esternalities. Unbounded increasing returns to adoption are often called for an explanation of this fact. However the argument is generally based on an incorrect interpretation of the Brian Arthur (1990) model. As we show with a simple counterexample unbounded increasing returns are either necessary nor sufficient to lead to technological monopolies even in a stable external environment. b) International diffusion may lead sometimes to different standards in different countries ( the archetypal case is the diffusion of typewriter-computer keyboards - AZERTY vs. QWERTY) or to the diffusion of the same standard in every country (the archetypical example being VCRs - Beta vs. VHS), even without intervention of any regulatory agency. Intuitively when convergence to the same standard is not an accident of history, it is an outcome of the relative weight of international spillovers as compared to nationwide esternalities. The crucial question is: can a model that account for the former fact accommodate also the latter? In this paper, by establishing some mathematical properties of generalized urn schemes, we build on a class of competing technology dynamics models to develop an explanation for the former "fact" and to provide sufficient conditions for convergence to the same or to different technological monopolies in different countries. Our explanation for the empirical tendency to converge to technological monopoly relies on convergence rate differentials to limit market shares: We show that a market can approach a monopoly with a higher speed than it approaches any feasible limit market share where both technologies coexist. Convergence to market sharing, we conclude, is in general so slow that the environment changes before the market share trajectory becomes stable in a neighborhood of its limit. The empirical implication is that among markets with high rate of technological change and increasing returns to to adoption, a prevalence of stable monopolies over stable market sharing should be expected.

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents/IR-98-012.pdf
Download Restriction: no

File URL: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents/IR-98-012.ps
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in its series Working Papers with number ir98012.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: Mar 1998
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wop:iasawp:ir98012

Contact details of provider:
Postal: A-2361 Laxenburg
Phone: +43-2236-807-0
Fax: +43-2236-71313
Email:
Web page: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Catalog/PUB_ONLINE.html
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

References

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
as in new window
  1. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1986. "Installed Base and Compatibility, With Implications for Product Preannouncements," Working papers 411, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  2. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-37, May.
  3. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1984. "Standardization, Compatibility and Innovation," Working papers 345, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  4. Church, J. & Gandal, N., 1991. "Complementary Network Externalities and Technological Adoption," Papers 5-91, Tel Aviv.
  5. Cowan, Robin, 1991. "Tortoises and Hares: Choice among Technologies of Unknown Merit," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(407), pages 801-14, July.
  6. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1986. "Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 822-41, August.
  7. William A. Brock & Steven N. Durlauf, 1995. "Discrete Choice with Social Interactions I: Theory," Working Papers 95-10-084, Santa Fe Institute.
  8. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1992. "Product Introduction with Network Externalities," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 55-83, March.
  9. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-40, June.
  10. Dosi, Giovanni, 1997. "Opportunities, Incentives and the Collective Patterns of Technological Change," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(444), pages 1530-47, September.
  11. Nicholas Economides, 1997. "The Economics of Networks," Industrial Organization 9701002, EconWPA.
  12. Kaniovski Yuri M. & Young H. Peyton, 1995. "Learning Dynamics in Games with Stochastic Perturbations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 330-363, November.
  13. Banerjee, Abhijit V, 1992. "A Simple Model of Herd Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 107(3), pages 797-817, August.
  14. Heli Koski, 1999. "The Installed Base Effect: Some Empirical Evidence From The Microcomputer Market," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(4), pages 273-310.
  15. Dosi, Giovanni & Ermoliev, Yuri & Kaniovski, Yuri, 1994. "Generalized urn schemes and technological dynamics," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 1-19, January.
  16. Erik Brynjolfsson & Chris F. Kemerer, 1993. "Network Externalities in Microcomputer Software: An Econometric Analysis of the Spreadsheet Market," Working Paper Series 158, MIT Center for Coordination Science.
  17. S. J. Liebowitz & Stephen E. Margolis, 1994. "Network Externality: An Uncommon Tragedy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 133-150, Spring.
  18. Bernheim, B Douglas, 1994. "A Theory of Conformity," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(5), pages 841-77, October.
  19. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
  20. A. Bassanini, 1997. "Localized Technological Change and Path-Dependent Growth," Working Papers ir97086, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Kretschmer, Tobias, 2004. "Upgrading and niche usage of PC operating systems," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(8-9), pages 1155-1182, November.
  2. Heli Koski & Tobias Kretschmer, 2004. "Survey on Competing in Network Industries: Firm Strategies, Market Outcomes, and Policy Implications," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-31, 03.
  3. Sydney Winter & Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Interpreting Economic Change: Evolution, Structures and Games," LEM Papers Series 2000/08, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
  4. Andreas Pyka & Paul Windrum, 2003. "The self-organisation of strategic alliances," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 245-268.
  5. Robalino, David & Lempert, Robert, 2000. "Carrots and sticks for new technology: Abating greenhouse gas emissions in a heterogeneous and uncertain world," MPRA Paper 12002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  6. John Whalley & Weimin Zhou & Xiaopeng An, 2009. "Chinese Experience with Global G3 Standard-Setting," CESifo Working Paper Series 2537, CESifo Group Munich.
  7. A. Bassanini, 1997. "Localized Technological Change and Path-Dependent Growth," Working Papers ir97086, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
  8. Bulat Sanditov, 2005. "Patent Citations, the Value of Innovations and Path-Dependency," KITeS Working Papers 177, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Nov 2005.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wop:iasawp:ir98012. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Thomas Krichel).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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