IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Incentive Compatible Collusion and Investment

  • Hongbin Cai

    ()

    (Department of Economics, UCLA)

  • Uday Rajan

    ()

    (Business School, University of Michigan)

We consider a two-stage model in which two firms first invest in R&D to reduce their marginal production costs, and then either compete or collude in the output market. When they collude, they bargain over a cartel agreement to divide the collusive profit. If bargaining breaks down, they revert to duopolistic competition. For both a location model and a linear demand model, we show that firms invest more in R&D in the first stage under collusion than under competition. We demonstrate via example that social welfare may be greater under collusion than under competition in the location model.

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.aeconf.net/Articles/May2005/aef060103.pdf
Download Restriction: no

File URL: http://down.aefweb.net/AefArticles/aef060103.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by Society for AEF in its journal Annals of Economics and Finance.

Volume (Year): 6 (2005)
Issue (Month): 1 (May)
Pages: 37-52

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:cuf:journl:y:2005:v:6:i:1:p:37-52
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.aeconf.net/

More information through EDIRC

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. Fershtman, C. & Pakes, A., 1999. "A Dynamic Oligopoly with Collusion and Price Wars," Discussion Paper 1999-48, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  2. Osborne, Martin J & Pitchik, Carolyn, 1987. "Cartels, Profits and Excess Capacity," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 28(2), pages 413-28, June.
  3. FRIEDMAN, James W. & THISSE, Jacques-François, . "Partial collusion fosters minimum product differentiation," CORE Discussion Papers RP 1070, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  4. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2002. "When Does Start-Up Innovation Spur the Gale of Creative Destruction?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(4), pages 571-586, Winter.
  5. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
  6. Joshua S. Cans & Scott Stern, 2000. "Incumbency and R&D Incentives: Licensing the Gale of Creative Destruction," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 485-511, December.
  7. Schmalensee, Richard, 1987. "Competitive advantage and collusive optima," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 351-367.
  8. Akihiko Matsui, 1987. "Consumer-Benefited Cartels Under Strategic Capital Investment Competition," Discussion Papers 798, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  9. Fershtman, C. & Gandal, N., 1991. "Disadvantageous Semicollusion," Papers 37-91, Tel Aviv.
  10. Carl Davidson & Raymond Deneckere, 1984. "Excess Capacity and Collusion," Discussion Papers 675, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  11. THISSE, Jacques-François & VIVES, Xavier, . "Basing point pricing: Competition versus collusion," CORE Discussion Papers RP 1003, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  12. Suzumura, Kotaro, 1992. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in an Oligopoly with Spillovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1307-20, December.
  13. Matusui, Akihiko, 1989. "Consumer-benefited cartels under strategic capital investment competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 451-470, December.
  14. Ariel Rubinstein, 2010. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Levine's Working Paper Archive 252, David K. Levine.
  15. David M. Kreps & Jose A. Scheinkman, 1983. "Quantity Precommitment and Bertrand Competition Yield Cournot Outcomes," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(2), pages 326-337, Autumn.
  16. Jean-Pierre Benoit & Vijay Krishna, 1987. "Dynamic Duopoly: Prices and Quantities," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 54(1), pages 23-35.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cuf:journl:y:2005:v:6:i:1:p:37-52. 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: (Qiang Gao)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.