IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Asymmetric firms, technology sharing and R&D investment

Listed author(s):
  • Matthew R. Roelofs

    ()

    (Western Washington University)

  • Stein E. Østbye

    (UiT The Arctic University of Norway)

  • Eirik E. Heen

    (UiT The Arctic University of Norway)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract We use a combination of theory and experiment to study the incentives for firms to share knowledge when they engage in research and development (R&D) in an uncertain environment. We consider both symmetric and asymmetric starting points with regards to the amount of initial knowledge firms have before conducting R&D and look at how differences in starting positions affect the willingness of firms to share knowledge. We investigate when and if firms find R&D cooperation beneficial and how investment in R&D is affected by the outcome of the sharing decisions. The experimental evidence shows that overall subjects tend to behave consistently with theoretical predictions for the sharing of knowledge, although leaders who are not compensated by a side payment from laggards are more willing to share than predicted by the theory, and leaders who are compensated are less willing. The data on investment suggests less investment with sharing than without, consistent with theory. Compared to exact numerical predictions, there is overinvestment or underinvestment except for symmetric firms under no sharing. All cases of overinvestment and underinvestment, regardless of sharing or not and regardless of starting positions, are well explained by smoothed-out best (quantal) responses.

    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.

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10683-016-9500-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    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.

    Article provided by Springer & Economic Science Association in its journal Experimental Economics.

    Volume (Year): 20 (2017)
    Issue (Month): 3 (September)
    Pages: 574-600

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:kap:expeco:v:20:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10683-016-9500-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10683-016-9500-5
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.springer.com

    Web page: https://www.economicscience.org/index.html;jsessionid=3F1701A870A8B0D3BDB91479792ADFA5
    Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    Order Information: Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/economic+theory/journal/10683/PS2

    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.:

    as
    in new window


    1. Nejat Anbarci & Nick Feltovich, 2013. "How sensitive are bargaining outcomes to changes in disagreement payoffs?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(4), pages 560-596, December.
    2. Jan Potters & Sigrid Suetens, 2009. "Cooperation in Experimental Games of Strategic Complements and Substitutes," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 76(3), pages 1125-1147.
    3. Konrad, Kai A., 2009. "Strategy and Dynamics in Contests," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199549603.
    4. Raymond De Bondt & Irene Henriques, 1995. "Strategic Investment with Asymmetric Spillovers," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 28(3), pages 656-674, August.
    5. Halbheer, Daniel & Fehr, Ernst & Goette, Lorenz & Schmutzler, Armin, 2009. "Self-reinforcing market dominance," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 481-502, November.
    6. Donja Darai & Dario Sacco & Armin Schmutzler, 2010. "Competition and innovation: an experimental investigation," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 13(4), pages 439-460, December.
    7. Iris Bohnet & Steffen Huck, 2004. "Repetition and Reputation: Implications for Trust and Trustworthiness When Institutions Change," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(2), pages 362-366, May.
    8. De Bondt, Raymond, 1997. "Spillovers and innovative activities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 1-28, February.
    9. Baumol, William J, 1992. "Horizontal Collusion and Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(410), pages 129-137, January.
    10. Cary Deck & Nisvan Erkal, 2013. "An Experimental Analysis Of Dynamic Incentives To Share Knowledge," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(2), pages 1622-1639, 04.
    11. 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.
    12. Glenn Harrison, 2007. "House money effects in public good experiments: Comment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(4), pages 429-437, December.
    13. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2015. "A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 609-669, December.
    14. Richard Mckelvey & Thomas Palfrey, 1998. "Quantal Response Equilibria for Extensive Form Games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(1), pages 9-41, June.
    15. Richard McKelvey & Thomas Palfrey, 2015. "Erratum to: Quantal response equilibria for extensive form games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 762-763, December.
    16. McKelvey Richard D. & Palfrey Thomas R., 1995. "Quantal Response Equilibria for Normal Form Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 6-38, July.
    17. Seade, Jesus K, 1980. "On the Effects of Entry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(2), pages 479-489, March.
    18. Özgür Gürerk & Reinhard Selten, 2012. "The effect of payoff tables on experimental oligopoly behavior," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 15(3), pages 499-509, September.
    19. Vania Sena, 2004. "The Return of the Prince of Denmark: A Survey on Recent Developments in the Economics of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(496), pages 312-332, June.
    20. Beath, John & Katsoulacos, Yannis & Ulph, David, 1989. "The Game-Theoretic Analysis of Innovation: A Survey," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 163-184, July.
    21. Jacob Goeree & Charles Holt & Thomas Palfrey, 2005. "Regular Quantal Response Equilibrium," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(4), pages 347-367, December.
    22. Damiano Silipo, 2005. "The Evolution of Cooperation in Patent Races:Theory and Experimental Evidence," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 85(1), pages 1-38, July.
    23. Combs, K. L., 1993. "The role of information sharing in cooperative research and development," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 535-551.
    24. Timothy N. Cason & Lata Gangadharan, 2013. "Cooperation Spillovers And Price Competition In Experimental Markets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(3), pages 1715-1730, July.
    25. Silipo, Damiano B., 2008. "Incentives and forms of cooperation in research and development," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 101-119, June.
    26. Wiethaus, Lars, 2005. "Absorptive capacity and connectedness: Why competing firms also adopt identical R&D approaches," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(5-6), pages 467-481, June.
    27. Sacco, Dario & Schmutzler, Armin, 2011. "Is there a U-shaped relation between competition and investment?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 65-73, January.
    28. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:expeco:v:20:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10683-016-9500-5. 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: (Sonal Shukla)

    or (Rebekah McClure)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.