IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eecrev/v43y1999i9p1747-1773.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Firm size, rivalry and the extent of the market in endogenous technological change

Author

Listed:
  • Peretto, Pietro F.

Abstract

Evidence shows that firms build their market position by accumulating knowledge protected by secrecy, patents and other appropriation devices. I explore the implications of this fact in a model economy where oligopolistic firms establish in-house R&D programs. In symmetric equilibrium, the number of firms determines concentration and firm size. These determine the scale and the efficiency of R&D operations and the rate of innovation. The number of firms, moreover, is endogenous and determined jointly with the rate of growth by the zero-profit condition. This property yields new results. For example, the scale effect of population size may be negative. The market allocation of resources is not Pareto optimal. I discuss the nature of this distortion.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Peretto, Pietro F., 1999. "Firm size, rivalry and the extent of the market in endogenous technological change," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1747-1773, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:43:y:1999:i:9:p:1747-1773
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014-2921(98)00038-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    2. Novshek, William & Sonnenschein, Hugo, 1987. "General Equilibrium with Free Entry: A Synthetic Approach to the Theory of Perfect Competition," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 25(3), pages 1281-1306, September.
    3. Backus, David K. & Kehoe, Patrick J. & Kehoe, Timothy J., 1992. "In search of scale effects in trade and growth," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 377-409, December.
    4. Cohen, Wesley M. & Levin, Richard C., 1989. "Empirical studies of innovation and market structure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 18, pages 1059-1107, Elsevier.
    5. Dasgupta, Partha & Stiglitz, Joseph, 1980. "Industrial Structure and the Nature of Innovative Activity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(358), pages 266-293, June.
    6. Klevorick, Alvin K. & Levin, Richard C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1995. "On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 185-205, March.
    7. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, December.
    8. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1991. "Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061414, December.
    9. Dosi, Giovanni, 1988. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 1120-1171, September.
    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. Kamien,Morton I. & Schwartz,Nancy L., 1982. "Market Structure and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521293853, December.
    12. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 63-114, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Segerstrom, Paul S & Anant, T C A & Dinopoulos, Elias, 1990. "A Schumpeterian Model of the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1077-1091, December.
    14. Spence, Michael, 1984. "Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(1), pages 101-121, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Peretto, Pietro F., 1999. "Cost reduction, entry, and the interdependence of market structure and economic growth," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 173-195, February.
    2. Lee, Chang-Yang, 2009. "Competition favors the prepared firm: Firms' R&D responses to competitive market pressure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 861-870, June.
    3. Harabi, Najib, 1994. "Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz: Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht [Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz:Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht]," MPRA Paper 6725, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi & Peretto, Pietro, 1997. "Persistence of innovative activities, sectoral patterns of innovation and international technological specialization," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 801-826, October.
    5. Lee, Chang-Yang & Sung, Taeyoon, 2005. "Schumpeter's legacy: A new perspective on the relationship between firm size and R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 914-931, August.
    6. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," 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 129-213, Elsevier.
    7. Chang-Yang Lee & Ji-Hwan Lee & Ajai S. Gaur, 2017. "Are large business groups conducive to industry innovation? The moderating role of technological appropriability," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 313-337, June.
    8. Fulvio Castellacci, 2007. "Technological regimes and sectoral differences in productivity growth ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(6), pages 1105-1145, December.
    9. Harhoff, Dietmar, 1991. "R&D incentives and spillovers in a two-industry model," ZEW Discussion Papers 91-06, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Flaig, Gebhard & Stadler, Manfred, 1996. "On the dynamics of product and process innovations: A bivariate random effects probit model," Tübinger Diskussionsbeiträge 64, University of Tübingen, School of Business and Economics.
    11. Bastian Rake, 2017. "Determinants of pharmaceutical innovation: the role of technological opportunities revisited," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 691-727, September.
    12. Chang-Yang Lee, 2003. "Firm Density and Industry R & D Intensity: Theory and Evidence," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 22(2), pages 139-158, March.
    13. Ghosh, Arghya & Kato, Takao & Morita, Hodaka, 2007. "Discrete Innovation, Continuous Improvement, and Competitive Pressure," IZA Discussion Papers 3132, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Bettina Becker & Stephen Hall, 2013. "Do R&D strategies in high-tech sectors differ from those in low-tech sectors? An alternative approach to testing the pooling assumption," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 183-202, May.
    15. Harabi, Najib, 1991. "Einflussfaktoren von Forschung und Entwicklung in der Schweizer Industrie: Ergebnisse einer schriftlichen Expertenbefragung [Factors Affecting Research and Development - Results of a Survey in Swis," MPRA Paper 5257, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Spyros Arvanitis & Florian Seliger & Martin Woerter, 2020. "Knowledge Spillovers, Competition and Innovation Success," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 82(5), pages 1017-1041, October.
    17. Smolny, Wernerr, 1996. "Innovations, prices, and employment: A theoretical model and an empirical application for West-German manufacturing firms," Discussion Papers 37, University of Konstanz, Center for International Labor Economics (CILE).
    18. Vega-Jurado, Jaider & Gutiérrez-Gracia, Antonio & Fernández-de-Lucio, Ignacio & Manjarrés-Henri­quez, Liney, 2008. "The effect of external and internal factors on firms' product innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 616-632, May.
    19. Chang-Yang Lee, 2012. "Learning-by-doing in R&D, knowledge threshold, and technological divide," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 109-132, January.
    20. Dennys Eduardo Rossetto & Roberto Carlos Bernardes & Felipe Mendes Borini & Cristiane Chaves Gattaz, 2018. "Structure and evolution of innovation research in the last 60 years: review and future trends in the field of business through the citations and co-citations analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1329-1363, June.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • E10 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - General
    • L16 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Industrial Organization and Macroeconomics; Macroeconomic Industrial Structure
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - General

    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:eecrev:v:43:y:1999:i:9:p:1747-1773. 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/eer .

    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.