Modelling imperfectly appropriable R&D via spillovers
We provide an extensive comparison of the R&D models of d'Aspremont-Jacquemin (1988) and Kamien-Muller-Zang (1992), exposing full or partial conflict in key conclusions and policy prescriptions. Using three separate formal and/or intuitive criteria, we argue that the first model is invalid for large spillover values. This conclusion is corroborated by an additional argument leading to equivalence between the two R&D processes, but not to agreement on some key conclusions. Hence, the models emerge as fundamentally different, although a unilateral shift in the cost function of the first leads to agreement in all equilibrium outcomes.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:indorg:v:18:y:2000:i:7:p:1013-1032. 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: (Shamier, Wendy)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.