Minimum quality standards and novelty requirements in a one-short development race
We examine the timing and quality of product introduction in an R&D stopping game, where we allow for horizontal and vertical differentiation in the product market. We observe that discontinuous changes in introduction dates can occur as firms' abilities as researchers change. Further, when the research abilities of the firms differ, either the high ability firm or the low ability firm may be the first mover. The underlying research abilities of the firms determine the social optimality of the entry patterns we observe. Minimum quality standards and novelty requirements can play a role in correcting these suboptimal patterns of entry. While minimum quality standards increase welfare for a large range of research abilities, we find that increasing the novelty requirement does not necessarily increase either the profits or, consequently, the research investment incentives of the initial innovator, contrary to much of the cumulative innovation literature. Indeed, as the effect of policy interventions differs significantly across industries where quality improvement is steep and those where it is flat, targeted policies towards specific industries as are often observed in minimum quality standards are generally preferable to more broad-based policies.
Volume (Year): 4 (2010)
Issue (Month): ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Kiellinie 66, D-24105 Kiel|
Phone: +49 431 8814-1
Fax: +49 431 8814528
Web page: http://www.economics-ejournal.org/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Scarpa, Carlo, 1998. "Minimum quality standards with more than two firms1," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 665-676, September.
- Glenn C. Loury, 1979.
"Market Structure and Innovation,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
Oxford University Press, vol. 93(3), pages 395-410.
- Hugo Hopenhayn & Gerard Llobet & Matthew Mitchell, 2006.
"Rewarding Sequential Innovators: Prizes, Patents, and Buyouts,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(6), pages 1041-1068, December.
- Gerard Llobet & Hugo A. Hopenhayn & Matthew F. Mitchell, 2000. "Rewarding sequential innovators: prizes, patents and buyouts," Staff Report 273, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Llobet, G. & Hopenhayn, H. & Mitchell, M., 2000. "Rewarding Sequential Innovators: Prizes, Patents and Buyouts," Papers 0012, Centro de Estudios Monetarios Y Financieros-.
- Gerard Llobet & Hugo Hopenhayn & Matthew Mitchell, 2003. "Rewarding Sequential Innovators: Prizes, Patents and Buyouts," Levine's Working Paper Archive 618897000000000682, David K. Levine.
- 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.
- Dutta, Prajit K & Lach, Saul & Rustichini, Aldo, 1995.
"Better Late Than Early: Vertical Differentiation in the Adoption of a New Technology,"
Journal of Economics & Management Strategy,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(4), pages 563-589, Winter.
- Prajit K. Dutta & Saul Lach & Aldo Rustichini, 1993. "Better Late Than Early: Vertical Differentiation in the Adoption of a New Technology," NBER Working Papers 4473, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Choi, Jay Pil, 1993. "Dynamic R&D Competition, Research Line Diversity, and Intellectual Property Rights," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(2), pages 277-297, Summer.
- Crampes, C. & Hollander, A., 1991.
"Duopoly and Quality Standards,"
Cahiers de recherche
9128, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
- O'DONOGHUE, Ted & SCOTCHMER, Suzanne & THISSE, Jacques-François, "undated".
"Patent breadth, patent life, and the pace of technological progress,"
CORE Discussion Papers RP
1314, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Ted O'Donoghue & Suzanne Scotchmer & Jacques-François Thisse, 1998. "Patent Breadth, Patent Life, and the Pace of Technological Progress," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(1), pages 1-32, 03.
- Uri Ronnen, 1991. "Minimum Quality Standards, Fixed Costs, and Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(4), pages 490-504, Winter.
- Beath, John & Katsoulacos, Yannis & Ulph, David, 1987. "Sequential Product Innovation and Industry Evolution," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(388a), pages 32-43, Supplemen.
- Boom, Anette, 1995. "Asymmetric International Minimum Quality Standards and Vertical Differentiation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(1), pages 101-119, March.
- Leland, Hayne E, 1979. "Quacks, Lemons, and Licensing: A Theory of Minimum Quality Standards," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(6), pages 1328-1346, December.
- Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
- James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2006. "Sequential Innovation, Patents, and Innovation," NajEcon Working Paper Reviews 321307000000000021, www.najecon.org.
- Klemperer, Paul, 1990.
"How Broad Should the Scope of Patent Protection Be?,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
392, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Paul Klemperer, 1990. "How Broad Should the Scope of Patent Protection Be?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 113-130, Spring.
- Hopenhayn, Hugo A & Mitchell, Matthew F, 2001. "Innovation Variety and Patent Breadth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 152-166, Spring.
- Kuhn, Michael, 2007. "Minimum quality standards and market dominance in vertically differentiated duopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 275-290, April.
- Ted O'Donoghue, 1997.
"A Patentability Requirement For Sequential Innovation,"
1185, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Ted O'Donoghue, 1998. "A Patentability Requirement for Sequential Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(4), pages 654-679, Winter.
- Nancy T. Gallini, 1992. "Patent Policy and Costly Imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(1), pages 52-63, Spring.
- Christopher Harris & John Vickers, 1987. "Racing with Uncertainty," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 54(1), pages 1-21.
- 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.
- Quint, Daniel & Einav, Liran, 2005. "Efficient entry," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 278-283, August.
- Manski Charles F, 2009. "Adaptive Partial Drug Approval: A Health Policy Proposal," The Economists' Voice, De Gruyter, vol. 6(4), pages 1-5, March.
- 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.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:ifweej:201015. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.