IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jindec/v53y2005i1p83-100.html

Firm Heterogeneity, Imitation, And The Incentives For Cost Reducing R&D Effort

Author

Listed:
  • Marco Ceccagnoli

Abstract

I develop and test a model of strategic R&D investments where innovating and non‐innovating firms compete on the basis of their ability to reduce costs and imitate rivals. I find that a larger proportion of non‐innovating rivals stimulates cost‐reducing investments and attenuates the disincentive effect of imitation by innovators on firm level R&D. Key model properties are verified by estimating the first order condition for the optimal choice of R&D, using the 1994 Carnegie Mellon survey of U.S. industrial R&D. Results also suggest that R&D and size are simultaneously determined, with R&D being proportional to size, as predicted by the theoretical model.

Suggested Citation

  • Marco Ceccagnoli, 2005. "Firm Heterogeneity, Imitation, And The Incentives For Cost Reducing R&D Effort," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 83-100, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jindec:v:53:y:2005:i:1:p:83-100
    DOI: 10.1111/j.0022-1821.2005.00246.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-1821.2005.00246.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.0022-1821.2005.00246.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arora, Ashish & Ceccagnoli, Marco & Cohen, Wesley M., 2008. "R&D and the patent premium," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 1153-1179, September.
    2. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Samano, Mario & Santugini, Marc & Zaccour, Georges, 2017. "Dynamics in research joint ventures and R&D collaborations," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 70-92.
    2. Foros, Øystein & Kind, Hans Jarle & Sand, Jan Yngve, 2009. "Entry may increase network providers' profit," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 486-494, October.
    3. Naudé, Wim & Gries, Thomas & Bilkic, Natasa, 2013. "Firm-Level Heterogeneity and the Decision to Export: A Real Option Approach," IZA Discussion Papers 7346, IZA Network @ LISER.
    4. Lehner, Maria & Schnitzer, Monika, 2008. "Entry of foreign banks and their impact on host countries," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 430-452, September.
    5. Naudé, Wim & Gries, Thomas & Bilkic, Natasa, 2015. "Playing the lottery or dressing up? A model of firm-level heterogeneity and the decision to export," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 1-17.
    6. Keisuke Hattori & Keisaku Higashida, 2023. "Who should be regulated: Genuine producers or third parties?," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 249-286, April.
    7. Xavier Vives, 2008. "Innovation And Competitive Pressure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 419-469, December.
    8. Hommes, Cars & Zeppini, Paolo, 2014. "Innovate or Imitate? Behavioural technological change," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 308-324.
    9. Robert Schmidt, 2013. "Price competition and innovation in markets with brand loyalty," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 109(2), pages 147-173, June.
    10. Appio, Francesco Paolo & Baglieri, Daniela & Cesaroni, Fabrizio & Spicuzza, Lucia & Donato, Alessia, 2022. "Patent design strategies: Empirical evidence from European patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    11. David H. Erkens, 2011. "Do Firms Use Time‐Vested Stock‐Based Pay to Keep Research and Development Investments Secret?," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 49(4), pages 861-894, September.
    12. Arora, Ashish & Ceccagnoli, Marco & Cohen, Wesley M., 2008. "R&D and the patent premium," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 1153-1179, September.
    13. Stéphane Lhuillery, 2011. "Absorptive capacity, efficiency effect and competitors’ spillovers," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 649-663, October.
    14. Ashish Arora & Marco Ceccagnoli, 2006. "Patent Protection, Complementary Assets, and Firms' Incentives for Technology Licensing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 293-308, February.
    15. Ruble, Richard & Versaevel, Bruno, 2014. "Market shares, R&D agreements, and the EU block exemption," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 15-25.
    16. Keisuke Hattori & Keisaku Higashida, 2015. "Should non-genuine products be expelled from markets?," Discussion Paper Series 126, School of Economics, Kwansei Gakuin University, revised Mar 2015.

    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. Crass, Dirk & Garcia Valero, Francisco & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2016. "Protecting innovation through patents and trade secrets: Determinants and performance impacts for firms with a single innovation," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Tammy L. Madsen & Michael J. Leiblein, 2015. "What Factors Affect the Persistence of an Innovation Advantage?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(8), pages 1097-1127, December.
    3. Bernhard Ganglmair & Imke Reimers, 2019. "Visibility of Technology and Cumulative Innovation: Evidence from Trade Secrets Laws," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2019_119v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    4. Ceccagnoli, Marco & Lee, You-Na & Walsh, John P., 2024. "Reaching beyond low-hanging fruit: Basic research and innovativeness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).
    5. James Bessen & Robert M. Hunt, 2004. "The software patent experiment," Business Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, issue Q3, pages 22-32.
    6. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2022. "Assessing the Impact of Patent Attributes on the Value of Discrete and Complex Innovations," Papers 2208.07222, arXiv.org.
    7. Insu Cho & Heejun Park & Joseph Kim, 2012. "The moderating effect of innovation protection mechanisms on the competitiveness of service firms," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 6(3), pages 369-386, September.
    8. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2021. "Identification of “Valuable” Technologies via Patent Statistics in India: An Analysis Based on Renewal Information," BASE University Working Papers 13/2021, BASE University, Bengaluru, India.
    9. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2009. "Business And Financial Method Patents, Innovation, And Policy," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 56(4), pages 443-473, September.
    10. Stacy Sneeringer & Matt Clancy, 2020. "Incentivizing New Veterinary Pharmaceutical Products to Combat Antibiotic Resistance," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(4), pages 653-673, December.
    11. Charlotta Grönqvist, 2009. "The private value of patents by patent characteristics: evidence from Finland," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 159-168, April.
    12. Clancy, Matthew S. & Sneeringer, Stacy E., "undated". "How Much Does it Cost to Induce R&D in Animal Health?," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 273865, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Ling Zhou, 2025. "Patents and Supra-competitive Prices: Evidence from Consumer Products," Working Papers 29, Chair of Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy.
    14. Andrew Eckert & Corinne Langinier & Long Zhao, 2022. "Determinants of locational patenting behavior of Canadian firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 268-291, May.
    15. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    16. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 315-380, Elsevier.
    17. H. Kevin Steensma & Mukund Chari & Ralph Heidl, 2016. "A Comparative Analysis of Patent Assertion Entities in Markets for Intellectual Property Rights," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 2-17, February.
    18. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia & Yang, Jialei, 2022. "Distinguishing between appropriability and appropriation: A systematic review and a renewed conceptual framing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    19. Pierre Mohnen & Jacques Mairesse & Marcel Dagenais, 2006. "Innovativity: A comparison across seven European countries," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 391-413.
    20. Simeth, Markus & Raffo, Julio D., 2013. "What makes companies pursue an Open Science strategy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1531-1543.

    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:bla:jindec:v:53:y:2005:i:1:p:83-100. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-1821 .

    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.