IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joevec/v5y1995i1p71-89.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Damoclean Tax and Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Scott, John T

Abstract

The paper presents a novel tax that is designed to improve the performance of research and development (R&D) investments. Ideally, the tax allows the technical efficiencies of monopoly while bringing about the desirable effects of the competitive pressure of R&D rivalry. Thus, with the tax, the state can sanction a monopoly of R&D investment in order to attain technical efficiencies and yet avoid the underinvestment in R&D that would result without competitive pressures. A critique of the tax emphasizes the problems of implementing it and offers a more practical alternative that would achieve the same desirable effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott, John T, 1995. "The Damoclean Tax and Innovation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 71-89, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joevec:v:5:y:1995:i:1:p:71-89
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erev, Ido & Roth, Alvin E, 1998. "Predicting How People Play Games: Reinforcement Learning in Experimental Games with Unique, Mixed Strategy Equilibria," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 848-881.
    2. Sundali, James A. & Rapoport, Amnon & Seale, Darryl A., 1995. "Coordination in Market Entry Games with Symmetric Players," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 203-218, November.
    3. Duffy, John & Hopkins, Ed, 2005. "Learning, information, and sorting in market entry games: theory and evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 31-62, April.
    4. Arthur, W Brian, 1994. "Inductive Reasoning and Bounded Rationality," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 406-411.
    5. Reinhard Selten & Michael Schreckenberg & Thomas Pitz & Thorsten Chmura & Sebastian Kube, 2002. "Experiments and Simulations on Day-to-Day Route Choice-Behaviour," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers bgse35_2002, University of Bonn, Germany.
    6. Challet, D. & Zhang, Y.-C., 1997. "Emergence of cooperation and organization in an evolutionary game," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 246(3), pages 407-418.
    7. Amnon Rapoport & Darryl A. Seale & Ido Erev & James A. Sundali, 1998. "Equilibrium Play in Large Group Market Entry Games," Management Science, INFORMS, pages 119-141.
    8. Mehta, Judith & Starmer, Chris & Sugden, Robert, 1994. "The Nature of Salience: An Experimental Investigation of Pure Coordination Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 658-673.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. John Scott, 2000. "The Directions for Technological Change: Alternative Economic Majorities and Opportunity Costs," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 17(1), pages 1-16, August.
    2. Maria Parisi & Alessandro Sembenelli, 2003. "Is Private R & D Spending Sensitive to Its Price? Empirical Evidence on Panel Data for Italy," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 30(4), pages 357-377, December.
    3. Scott, John T., 2005. "Corporate social responsibility and environmental research and development," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 313-331, September.

    More about this item

    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:spr:joevec:v:5:y:1995:i:1:p:71-89. 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). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.