IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecmode/v36y2014icp79-87.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Open Innovation in a dynamic Cournot duopoly

Author

Listed:
  • Hasnas, Irina
  • Lambertini, Luca
  • Palestini, Arsen

Abstract

In recent years Open Innovation (OI) processes have been receiving growing attention from the empirical and theoretical economic literature, where a debate is taking place on the aspects of complementarity or substitutability between internal R&D and OI spillover. By means of a differential game approach, we analyze the case of substitutability in an OI setup in a Cournot duopoly where knowledge spillovers are endogenously determined via the R&D process. The game produces multiple steady states, allowing for an asymmetric solution where a firm may trade off the R&D investment against information absorption from the rival. The technical analysis and the numerical simulations point out that the firm which commits to a higher level of OI absorption produces a smaller output and enjoys higher profits than its rival.

Suggested Citation

  • Hasnas, Irina & Lambertini, Luca & Palestini, Arsen, 2014. "Open Innovation in a dynamic Cournot duopoly," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 79-87.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecmode:v:36:y:2014:i:c:p:79-87
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econmod.2013.09.020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264999313003805
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econmod.2013.09.020?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. André Spithoven & Peter Teirlinck & Dirk Frantzen, 2012. "Managing Open Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14723.
    2. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2002. "Some Simple Economics of Open Source," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 197-234, June.
    3. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    4. R. Cellini & L. Lambertini, 2005. "R&D Incentives and Market Structure: Dynamic Analysis," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 85-96, July.
    5. Suzanne Scotchmer, 2010. "Openness, Open Source, and the Veil of Ignorance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(2), pages 165-171, May.
    6. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    7. Li, Changying & Ji, Xiaoming, 2010. "Innovation, licensing, and price vs. quantity competition," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 746-754, May.
    8. Dirk Czarnitzki & Kornelius Kraft, 2012. "Spillovers of innovation activities and their profitability," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 64(2), pages 302-322, April.
    9. Cellini, Roberto & Lambertini, Luca, 2009. "Dynamic R&D with spillovers: Competition vs cooperation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 568-582, March.
    10. 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.
    11. Piercarlo Zanchettin, 2006. "Differentiated Duopoly with Asymmetric Costs," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(4), pages 999-1015, December.
    12. Boris Lokshin & René Belderbos & Martin Carree, 2008. "The Productivity Effects of Internal and External R&D: Evidence from a Dynamic Panel Data Model," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 70(3), pages 399-413, June.
    13. A. Spithoven & B. Clarysse & M. Knockaert, 2009. "Building Absorptive Capacity to Organise Inbound Open Innovation in Low Tech Industries," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 09/606, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    14. Salvatore Modica, 2012. "Open Source without Free-Riding," Economia politica, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 2, pages 247-260.
    15. Audretsch, D-B & Menkveld, A-J & Thurik, A-R, 1996. "The Decision Between Internal and External R&D," Papers 9603/e, NEUHUYS - RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR SMALL AND MEDIUM.
    16. Llanes, Gastón & de Elejalde, Ramiro, 2013. "Industry equilibrium with open-source and proprietary firms," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 36-49.
    17. Caulkins, Jonathan P. & Feichtinger, Gustav & Grass, Dieter & Hartl, Richard F. & Kort, Peter M. & Seidl, Andrea, 2013. "When to make proprietary software open source," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1182-1194.
    18. Fu, Xiaolan, 2012. "How does openness affect the importance of incentives for innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 512-523.
    19. Cellini, Roberto & Lambertini, Luca, 1998. "A Dynamic Model of Differentiated Oligopoly with Capital Accumulation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 145-155, November.
    20. Drechsler, Wenzel & Natter, Martin, 2012. "Understanding a firm's openness decisions in innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 438-445.
    21. Cellini, Roberto & Lambertini, Luca, 2002. "A differential game approach to investment in product differentiation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 51-62, November.
    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. Xin, Baogui & Sun, Minghe, 2018. "A differential oligopoly game for optimal production planning and water savings," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(1), pages 206-217.
    2. Luigi Balletta & Antonio Tesoriere, 2020. "Cumulative innovation, open source, and distance to frontier," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(6), pages 1875-1920, December.
    3. Murat Yılmaz, 2022. "Coexistence of proprietary and open‐source firms under product differentiation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(8), pages 4153-4166, December.
    4. Qiuxiang Li & Xingli Chen & Yimin Huang & Huangbao Gui & Shengyang Liu, 2019. "The Impacts of Green Innovation Input and Channel Service in a Dual-Channel Value Chain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-26, November.
    5. Tesoriere, Antonio & Balletta, Luigi, 2017. "A dynamic model of open source vs proprietary R&D," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 221-239.
    6. Maria Caterina Bramati & Arsen Palestini & Mauro Rota, 2016. "Effects of Law-Enforcement Efficiency and Duration of Trials in an Oligopolistic Competition Among Fair and Unfair Firms," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 170(2), pages 650-669, August.
    7. M. Y. Jumba & Y. S. Haruna & U. O. Aliyu & A. L. Amao, 2024. "Application of Games Theory in Modelling of Nigerian Electricity Market," International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI), vol. 11(5), pages 1129-1140, May.

    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. Roberto Cellini & Luca Lambertini, 2011. "R&D Incentives Under Bertrand Competition: A Differential Game," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 62(3), pages 387-400, September.
    2. Wenjing Wang, 2014. "Do specialists exit the firm outsourcing its R&D?," Economics Working Papers 2014-21, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    3. Cellini, Roberto & Siciliani, Luigi & Straume, Odd Rune, 2018. "A dynamic model of quality competition with endogenous prices," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 190-206.
    4. Luca Lambertini & Andrea Mantovani, 2010. "Process and product innovation: A differential game approach to product life cycle," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 6(2), pages 227-252, June.
    5. Jeroen Hinloopen & Grega Smrkolj & Florian Wagener, 2016. "R&D Cooperatives and Market Collusion: A Global Dynamic Approach," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-048/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    6. R. Cellini & L. Lambertini, 2005. "R&D Incentives and Market Structure: Dynamic Analysis," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 85-96, July.
    7. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    8. Reisinger, Markus & Ressner, Ludwig & Schmidtke, Richard & Thomes, Tim Paul, 2014. "Crowding-in of complementary contributions to public goods: Firm investment into open source software," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 78-94.
    9. Murat Yılmaz, 2022. "Coexistence of proprietary and open‐source firms under product differentiation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(8), pages 4153-4166, December.
    10. Feichtinger, Gustav & Lambertini, Luca & Leitmann, George & Wrzaczek, Stefan, 2016. "R&D for green technologies in a dynamic oligopoly: Schumpeter, arrow and inverted-U’s," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1131-1138.
    11. Roberto Cellini & Luca Lambertini, 2004. "Private And Social Incentives Towards Investment In Product Differentiation," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(04), pages 493-508.
    12. Dongdong Li, 2022. "Dynamic optimal control of firms' green innovation investment and pricing strategies with environmental awareness and emission tax," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(4), pages 920-932, June.
    13. Vassilis Kanellopoulos & Kostas Tsekouras, 2023. "Innovation efficiency and firm performance in a benchmarking context," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(1), pages 137-151, January.
    14. R. Cellini & L. Lambertini, 2000. "Differential Games and Oligopoly Theory: An Overview," Working Papers 369, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    15. Jeroen Hinloopen & Grega Smrkolj & Florian Wagener, 2017. "Research and Development Cooperatives and Market Collusion: A Global Dynamic Approach," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 174(2), pages 567-612, August.
    16. Ishikawa, Nana & Shibata, Takashi, 2021. "R&D competition and cooperation with asymmetric spillovers in an oligopoly market," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 624-642.
    17. Jeongmeen Suh & Murat Yılmaz, 2019. "Economics of Open Source Technology: A Dynamic Approach," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 254-280, March.
    18. Roper, Stephen & Vahter, Priit & Love, James H., 2013. "Externalities of openness in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1544-1554.
    19. Shinji Kobayashi, 2015. "On a Dynamic Model of Cooperative and Noncooperative R and D in Oligopoly with Spillovers," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 599-619, December.
    20. Boudreau, Kevin J. & Lakhani, Karim R., 2015. "“Open” disclosure of innovations, incentives and follow-on reuse: Theory on processes of cumulative innovation and a field experiment in computational biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 4-19.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    R&D; Spillovers; Dynamic games;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    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:eee:ecmode:v:36:y:2014:i:c:p:79-87. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30411 .

    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.