Subsidies, entry and the distribution of R&D investment
We analyze the link between entry and R&D spending distribution. We consider a monopolistic competitive market with free entry in which firms can invest in cost-cutting R&D by paying a fixed cost first. For an intermediate level of fixed cost, there is a unique equilibrium in which the market segments into investing and non-investing firms. We show that the measure of R&D investing firms decreases as entry occurs. Using this result, we show how alternative government policies affect the R&D spending distribution. In particular, we characterize the cases in which incentives to promote R&D spending can result in exit. We show that while subsidy to entry may be welfare neutral from the consumers' point of view, R&D subsidies, despite promoting exit sometimes, are always welfare improving. Data motivating these results are drawn from the Taiwanese and Korean semiconductor industries.
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
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.:
- Jennifer F. Reinganum, 1985.
"Innovation and Industry Evolution,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
Oxford University Press, vol. 100(1), pages 81-99.
- Reinganum, Jennifer R., "undated". "Innovation and Industry Evolution," Working Papers 426, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Ariel Pakes & Paul McGuire, 1994. "Computing Markov-Perfect Nash Equilibria: Numerical Implications of a Dynamic Differentiated Product Model," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(4), pages 555-589, Winter.
- Ariel Pakes & Paul McGuire, 1992. "Computing Markov Perfect Nash Equilibria: Numerical Implications of a Dynamic Differentiated Product Model," NBER Technical Working Papers 0119, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Ariel Pakes & Paul McGuire, 1992. "Computing Markov perfect Nash equilibria: numerical implications of a dynamic differentiated product model," Discussion Paper / Institute for Empirical Macroeconomics 58, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Fishman, Arthur & Rob, Rafael, 1999. "The Size of Firms and R&D Investment," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 40(4), pages 915-931, November.
- Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
- Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1975. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 64, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
- 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.
- John Sutton, 2001. "Technology and Market Structure: Theory and History," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262692643, January.
- Richard Ericson & Ariel Pakes, 1995. "Markov-Perfect Industry Dynamics: A Framework for Empirical Work," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 62(1), pages 53-82.
- Tom Lee & Louis L. Wilde, 1980. "Market Structure and Innovation: A Reformulation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 94(2), pages 429-436.
- Glenn C. Loury, 1979. "Market Structure and Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 93(3), pages 395-410.