IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeborg/v54y2004i2p153-173.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An empirical test of the asymmetric models on innovative activity: who invests more into R&D, the incumbent or the challenger?

Author

Listed:
  • Czarnitzki, Dirk
  • Kraft, Kornelius

Abstract

The theoretical discussion concerning the question whether the incumbent or the (potential) entrant invests more into R&D has attracted considerable interest. This paper reports the results of an empirical study on this question using data of about 3500 German firms over the years 1992 to 1995. The survey explicitly asks the firms for their motives to undertake innovative activity. It is thus possible to take account of intended, not just completed, market entry. It turns out that the challenger invests more into R&D in order to enter a new market than the incumbent. Thus, the patent racing model by Reinganum and others seems to characterize innovative activity more accurately than the competing auction model of Gilbert and Newbery. We use a heteroscedastic tobit as well as a tobit model with selectivity in order to deal with the econometric problems of double censoring.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius, 2004. "An empirical test of the asymmetric models on innovative activity: who invests more into R&D, the incumbent or the challenger?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 153-173, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:54:y:2004:i:2:p:153-173
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-2681(03)00175-6
    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. John C. Ham, 1982. "Estimation of a Labour Supply Model with Censoring Due to Unemployment and Underemployment," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 49(3), pages 335-354.
    2. Bagwell, Kyle & Staiger, Robert W, 1992. "The Sensitivity of Strategic and Corrective R&D Policy in Battles for Monopoly," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 33(4), pages 795-816, November.
    3. Chaim Fershtman & Ariel Pakes, 2000. "A Dynamic Oligopoly with Collusion and Price Wars," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(2), pages 207-236, Summer.
    4. Honore, Bo E, 1992. "Trimmed LAD and Least Squares Estimation of Truncated and Censored Regression Models with Fixed Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(3), pages 533-565, May.
    5. Jensen, Richard & Thursby, Marie, 1996. "Patent Races, Product Standards, and International Competition," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(1), pages 21-49, February.
    6. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1991. "Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(1), pages 43-61.
    7. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    8. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-748, September.
    9. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, December.
    10. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1984. "Practical Implications of Game Theoretic Models of R&D," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(2), pages 61-66, May.
    11. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1987. "R&D Rivalry with Licensing or Imitation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 402-420, June.
    12. Steve A. Lippman & Kevin F. McCardle, 1987. "Dropout Behavior in R&D Races with Learning," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(2), pages 287-295, Summer.
    13. Kraft, Kornelius, 1989. "Market Structure, Firm Characteristics and Innovative Activity," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 329-336, March.
    14. Grossman, Gene M & Shapiro, Carl, 1987. "Dynamic R&D Competition," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(386), pages 372-387, June.
    15. Reinganum, Jennifer F., 1989. "The timing of innovation: Research, development, and diffusion," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 14, pages 849-908, Elsevier.
    16. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    17. Jennifer F. Reinganum, 1985. "Innovation and Industry Evolution," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 100(1), pages 81-99.
    18. Salant, Stephen W, 1984. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(1), pages 247-250, March.
    19. Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B, 1988. "Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(4), pages 678-690, September.
    20. Partha Dasgupta & Joseph Stiglitz, 1980. "Uncertainty, Industrial Structure, and the Speed of R&D," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(1), pages 1-28, Spring.
    21. 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.
    22. Tom Lee & Louis L. Wilde, 1980. "Market Structure and Innovation: A Reformulation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 94(2), pages 429-436.
    23. Harris, Christopher J & Vickers, John S, 1985. "Patent Races and the Persistence of Monopoly," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 461-481, June.
    24. Avinash Dixit, 1988. "A General Model of R&D Competition and Policy," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(3), pages 317-326, Autumn.
    25. Christopher Harris & John Vickers, 1985. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Model of a Race," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 52(2), pages 193-209.
    26. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-526, June.
    27. Chen, Yongmin, 2000. "Strategic Bidding by Potential Competitors: Will Monopoly Persist?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(2), pages 161-175, June.
    28. Yi, Sang-Seung, 1995. "Uncertain innovation and persistence of monopoly revisited," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 319-322, September.
    29. Zoltan Acs & David Audretsch, 1990. "Innovation and Small Firms," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011131, December.
    30. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 2.
    31. Pavitt, Keith & Robson, Michael & Townsend, Joe, 1987. "The Size Distribution of Innovating Firms in the UK: 1945-1983," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(3), pages 297-316, March.
    32. Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & John van Reenen, 1999. "Market Share, Market Value and Innovation in a Panel of British Manufacturing Firms," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(3), pages 529-554.
    33. Yongmin Chen, 2000. "Strategic Bidding By Potential Competitors: Will Monopoly Persist?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(2), pages 161-175, June.
    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. Levin, Mark (Левин, Марк) & Matrosova, Kseniya (Матросова, Ксения), 2017. "Development and Analysis of Economic Models of Innovation Incentives [Разработка И Исследование Экономических Моделей Стимулирования Инновационных Процессов]," Working Papers 061713, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    2. Richard Gilbert, 2006. "Looking for Mr. Schumpeter: Where Are We in the Competition-Innovation Debate?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 6, pages 159-215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Ping Lin & Tianle Zhang & Wen Zhou, 2020. "Vertical integration and disruptive cross‐market R&D," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 51-73, January.
    4. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius, 2005. "License Expenditures of Incumbents and Potential Entrants: An Empirical Analysis of Firm Behavior," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-35, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. 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.
    6. Iritié, B. G. Jean-Jacques, 2014. "Enjeux des politiques industrielles basées sur les clusters d'innovation: cas des pôles de compétitivité [Issues of Innovative Clusters-based Industrial Policy: Case of Pole of Competitiveness]," MPRA Paper 54429, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Mahdiyeh Entezarkheir & Saeed Moshiri, 2021. "Innovation spillover and merger decisions," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(5), pages 2419-2448, November.
    8. Aldieri, Luigi & Aprile, Maria Carmela & Vinci, Concetto Paolo, 2015. "R&D Spillovers Effects on strategic behaviour of Large International Firms," MPRA Paper 63402, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Gilbert Richard J, 2006. "Competition and Innovation," Journal of Industrial Organization Education, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-23, December.
    10. Michael Peneder & Martin Woerter, 2014. "Competition, R&D and innovation: testing the inverted-U in a simultaneous system," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 653-687, July.
    11. Isabelle Brocas, 2003. "Les enjeux de la réglementation de la recherche et développement," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 113(1), pages 125-148.
    12. 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.
    13. Steven Bond‐Smith, 2022. "Discretely innovating: The effect of limited market contestability on innovation and growth," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 69(3), pages 301-327, July.
    14. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563, Elsevier.
    15. Gilbert, Richard J. & Katz, Michael L., 2011. "Efficient division of profits from complementary innovations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 443-454, July.
    16. Claude D'Aspremont & Rodolphe Dos Santos Ferreira & Louis‐André Gérard‐Varet, 2010. "Strategic R&D investment, competitive toughness and growth," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 6(3), pages 273-295, September.
    17. Leibowicz, Benjamin D., 2018. "Welfare improvement windows for innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 390-398.
    18. Saul Lach & Rafael Rob, 1996. "R&D, Investment, and Industry Dynamics," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 217-249, June.
    19. Daniela Grieco, 2007. "Degree of Innovativeness and Market Structure: A Model," The IUP Journal of Managerial Economics, IUP Publications, vol. 0(2), pages 7-27, May.
    20. Klette, Tor Jakob & Griliches, Zvi, 2000. "Empirical Patterns of Firm Growth and R&D Investment: A Quality Ladder Model Interpretation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 363-387, April.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies

    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:jeborg:v:54:y:2004:i:2:p:153-173. 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/jebo .

    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.