IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jpbect/v22y2020i4p1017-1040.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

University‐firm competition in basic research and university funding policy

Author

Listed:
  • Rune Stenbacka
  • Mihkel Tombak

Abstract

We characterize equilibrium investments in basic research by the commercial and university sectors contingent on public funding of the university. We find that firms invest in basic research despite the opportunities for free riding and we present conditions under which firms even have incentives to augment the public funding to the university. We characterize the socially optimal volume of public funding for the university sector. Finally, we compare total investments in a mixed duopoly with those of duopolies composed of two universities as well as two profit‐maximizing firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Rune Stenbacka & Mihkel Tombak, 2020. "University‐firm competition in basic research and university funding policy," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(4), pages 1017-1040, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jpbect:v:22:y:2020:i:4:p:1017-1040
    DOI: 10.1111/jpet.12434
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jpet.12434
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jpet.12434?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. Marie-Laure Cabon-Dhersin & Rim Lahmandi-Ayed, 2011. "R&D Organization: Cooperation or Cross-Licensing?," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 77(1), pages 31-52.
    2. Sandmo, Agnar, 1998. "Redistribution and the marginal cost of public funds," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 365-382, December.
    3. Hejer Lasram & Didier Laussel, 2019. "The determination of public tuition fees in a mixed education system: A majority voting model," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 21(6), pages 1056-1073, December.
    4. Nicola Lacetera, 2009. "Different Missions and Commitment Power in R&D Organizations: Theory and Evidence on Industry-University Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 565-582, June.
    5. Salter, Ammon J. & Martin, Ben R., 2001. "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 509-532, March.
    6. Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2002. "Who Is Selling the Ivory Tower? Sources of Growth in University Licensing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 90-104, January.
    7. Sam Allgood & Arthur Snow, 1998. "The Marginal Cost of Raising Tax Revenue and Redistributing Income," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(6), pages 1246-1273, December.
    8. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity, R&D, and Basic Research at the Firm Level in the 1970s," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 82-99, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Grossman, Gene M & Shapiro, Carl, 1987. "Dynamic R&D Competition," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(386), pages 372-387, June.
    10. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    11. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Gersbach, Hans & Schneider, Maik & Schneller, Olivier, 2010. "Optimal Mix of Applied and Basic Research, Distance to Frontier, and Openness," CEPR Discussion Papers 7795, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Tilman Klumpp & Xuejuan Su, 2019. "Price–quality competition in a mixed duopoly," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 21(3), pages 400-432, June.
    14. Christopher Harris & John Vickers, 1987. "Racing with Uncertainty," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 54(1), pages 1-21.
    15. Nathan ROSENBERG, 2009. "Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 11, pages 225-234, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    16. Hans Gersbach & Maik Schneider & Olivier Schneller, 2013. "Basic research, openness, and convergence," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 33-68, March.
    17. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," 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 217-273, Elsevier.
    18. Galasso, Alberto & Mitchell, Matthew & Virag, Gabor, 2018. "A theory of grand innovation prizes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 343-362.
    19. Christopher Harris & John Vickers, 1985. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Model of a Race," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 52(2), pages 193-209.
    20. Marie Thursby & Richard Jensen, 2001. "Proofs and Prototypes for Sale: The Licensing of University Inventions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 240-259, March.
    21. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Andrea Patacconi, 2018. "The decline of science in corporate R&D," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 3-32, January.
    22. Gianni Fraja, 2016. "Optimal public funding for research: a theoretical analysis," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(3), pages 498-528, August.
    23. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67, pages 297-297.
    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. Rim Lahmandi-Ayed & Hejer Lasram & Didier Laussel, 2020. "Is partial privatization of universities a solution for higher education? A successive monopolies model," Working Papers hal-02988323, HAL.
    2. Rabah Amir & Helmuth Cremer & Rim Lahmandi‐Ayed, 2020. "Introduction to the thematic issue on government‐provided services," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(4), pages 839-844, August.
    3. Rabah Amir & Evangelia Chalioti & Christine Halmenschlager, 2021. "University–firm competition in basic research: Simultaneous versus sequential moves," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(6), pages 1199-1219, December.
    4. Rim Lahmandi‐Ayed & Hejer Lasram & Didier Laussel, 2021. "Is partial privatization of universities a solution for higher education?," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(6), pages 1174-1198, December.
    5. Limor Hatsor & Itzhak Zilcha, 2021. "Subsidizing heterogeneous higher education systems," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(2), pages 318-344, April.

    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. Gersbach, Hans & Schneider, Maik & Schetter, Ulrich, 2015. "How Much Science? The 5 Ws (and 1 H) of Investing in Basic Research," CEPR Discussion Papers 10482, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Alex Coad & Agustí Segarra-Blasco & Mercedes Teruel, 2021. "A bit of basic, a bit of applied? R&D strategies and firm performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1758-1783, December.
    3. Leten, Bart & Kelchtermans, Stijn & Belderbos, Ren, 2010. "Internal Basic Research, External Basic Research and the Technological Performance of Pharmaceutical Firms," Working Papers 2010/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    4. Lim, Kwanghui, 2004. "The relationship between research and innovation in the semiconductor and pharmaceutical industries (1981-1997)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 287-321, March.
    5. Hans Gersbach & Ulrich Schetter & Maik T Schneider, 2019. "Taxation, Innovation and Entrepreneurship," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(620), pages 1731-1781.
    6. Simeth, Markus & Raffo, Julio D., 2013. "What makes companies pursue an Open Science strategy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1531-1543.
    7. Tijssen, Robert J. W., 2004. "Is the commercialisation of scientific research affecting the production of public knowledge?: Global trends in the output of corporate research articles," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 709-733, July.
    8. Beatriz Pereira Almeida & Eduardo Gonçalves & André Suriane Silva & Raquel Coelho Reis, 2021. "Internalization of knowledge spillovers by regions: a measure based on self-citation patents," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 66(2), pages 309-330, April.
    9. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Arts, Sam, 2018. "Mind the gap: Capturing value from basic research through combining mobile inventors and partnerships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1811-1824.
    10. Kealey, Terence & Ricketts, Martin, 2014. "Modelling science as a contribution good," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 1014-1024.
    11. Nicola Lacetera, 2003. "Incentives and spillovers in R&D activities: an agency-theoretic analysis of industry-university relations," Microeconomics 0312004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Tsang, Eric W.K. & Yip, Paul S.L. & Toh, Mun Heng, 2008. "The impact of R&D on value added for domestic and foreign firms in a newly industrialized economy," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 423-441, August.
    13. Simeth, Markus & Lhuillery, Stephane, 2015. "How do firms develop capabilities for scientific disclosure?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1283-1295.
    14. Damrich, Sebastian & Kealey, Terence & Ricketts, Martin, 2022. "Crowding in and crowding out within a contribution good model of research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    15. Larsen, Maria Theresa, 2011. "The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 6-19, February.
    16. Sheer, Lia, 2022. "Sitting on the Fence: Integrating the two worlds of scientific discovery and invention within the firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    17. Choi, Jin-Uk & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2022. "The differential effects of basic research on firm R&D productivity: The conditioning role of technological diversification," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    18. Heidrun C. Hoppe & Wilhelm Pfähler, 2001. "Ökonomie der Grundlagenforschung und Wissenschaftspolitik," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 2(2), pages 125-144, May.
    19. Leten, Bart & Landoni, Paolo & Van Looy, Bart, 2014. "Science or graduates: How do firms benefit from the proximity of universities?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1398-1412.
    20. Scott Stern, 1999. "Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?," NBER Working Papers 7410, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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:jpbect:v:22:y:2020:i:4:p:1017-1040. 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: https://edirc.repec.org/data/apettea.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.