IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bbk/bbkefp/0504.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Competing or Colluding in a Stochastic Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Adriana Breccia
  • Hector Salgado-Banda

Abstract

This paper addresses the issue of anticompetitive and collusive practices in a continuous-time real option framework. We extend the symmetrical duopoly under uncertainty model by Dixit and Pindyck (1994), by granting a patent to the first innovator that files an application. The patent-investment race model is used to focus on long-term collusive agreements signed under a cooperative bargaining structure. The contributions are as follows. First, we show that, in a stochastic framework, competition always leads to different forms of inefficiency. Second, it is proved that, when entrepreneurs can sign long-term contracts via cooperative bargaining, collusion is always beneficial ex-ante since inefficiency disappears. Third, we show that whilst collusion always delays innovation, it does not necessarily delay competition. Depending on a number of economic, as well as firm-specific factors, collusion can actually accelerate competition.

Suggested Citation

  • Adriana Breccia & Hector Salgado-Banda, 2005. "Competing or Colluding in a Stochastic Framework," Birkbeck Working Papers in Economics and Finance 0504, Birkbeck, Department of Economics, Mathematics & Statistics.
  • Handle: RePEc:bbk:bbkefp:0504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/27052
    File Function: First version, 2005
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gilbert, Richard & Tom, Willard K, 2001. "Is Innovation King at the Antitrust Agencies? The Intellectual Property Guidelines Five Years Later," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt4mf5t2bm, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    2. Robert C. Marshall & Michael J. Meurer & Jean-Francois Richard, 1994. "Litigation Settlement and Collusion," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 109(1), pages 211-239.
    3. Thijssen, Jacco J.J. & Huisman, Kuno J.M. & Kort, Peter M., 2012. "Symmetric equilibrium strategies in game theoretic real option models," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 219-225.
    4. Suzanne Scotchmer & Jerry Green, 1990. "Novelty and Disclosure in Patent Law," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 131-146, Spring.
    5. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    6. F. M. Scherer & Jayashree Watal, 2002. "Post-TRIPS Options for Access to Patented Medicines in Developing Nations," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(4), pages 913-939, December.
    7. Helen Weeds, 2002. "Strategic Delay in a Real Options Model of R&D Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(3), pages 729-747.
    8. Jean Lanjouw & Josh Lerner, 1998. "The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: A Survey of the Empirical Literature," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 49-50, pages 223-246.
    9. Lambrecht, Bart & Perraudin, William, 2003. "Real options and preemption under incomplete information," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 619-643, February.
    10. Aoki, Reiko & Hu, Jin, 1999. "A Cooperative Game Approach to Patent Litigation, Settlement, and Allocation of Legal Costs," Working Papers 216, Department of Economics, The University of Auckland.
    11. Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, 1994. "Investment under Uncertainty," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 5474.
    12. Katharine E. Rockett, 1990. "Choosing the Competition and Patent Licensing," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 161-171, Spring.
    13. Keith Leffler, "undated". "Probabilistic Patent Rights," Working Papers UWEC-2003-14, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
    14. Eduardo S. Schwartz, 2003. "Patents and R&D as Real Options," NBER Working Papers 10114, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Cooter, Robert D & Rubinfeld, Daniel L, 1989. "Economic Analysis of Legal Disputes and Their Resolution," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 27(3), pages 1067-1097, September.
    16. William E. Kovacic & Carl Shapiro, 2000. "Antitrust Policy: A Century of Economic and Legal Thinking," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 43-60, Winter.
    17. Michael J. Meurer, 1989. "The Settlement of Patent Litigation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(1), pages 77-91, Spring.
    18. Grenadier, Steven R, 1996. "The Strategic Exercise of Options: Development Cascades and Overbuilding in Real Estate Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 51(5), pages 1653-1679, December.
    19. Reiko Aoki & Jin-Li Hu, 1996. "Allocation of Legal Costs and Patent Litigation: A Cooperative Game Approach," Industrial Organization 9612001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Claude Crampes & Corinne Langinier, 2002. "Litigation and Settlement in Patent Infringement Cases," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 258-274, Summer.
    21. Reiss, Ariane, 1998. "Investment in Innovations and Competition: An Option Pricing Approach," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 38(3, Part 2), pages 635-650.
    22. Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen, 2002. "Patents, Real Options and Firm Performance," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(478), pages 97-116, March.
    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. Di Corato, Luca, 2013. "Profit sharing under the threat of nationalization," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 295-315.

    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. Adriana Breccia & Hector Salgado-Banda, 2006. "Competing or Colluding in a Stochastic Environment," Computing in Economics and Finance 2006 423, Society for Computational Economics.
    2. Salgado Banda Héctor & Breccia Adriana, 2005. "Competing or Colluding in a Stochastic Environment," Working Papers 2005-04, Banco de México.
    3. Azevedo, Alcino & Paxson, Dean, 2014. "Developing real option game models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(3), pages 909-920.
    4. Marco, Alan C., 2005. "The option value of patent litigation: Theory and evidence," Review of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3-4), pages 323-351.
    5. Jeon, Haejun, 2015. "Patent infringement, litigation, and settlement," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 99-111.
    6. Philipp N. Baecker, 2007. "Real Options and Intellectual Property," Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Springer, number 978-3-540-48264-2, December.
    7. Chevalier-Roignant, Benoît & Flath, Christoph M. & Huchzermeier, Arnd & Trigeorgis, Lenos, 2011. "Strategic investment under uncertainty: A synthesis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 215(3), pages 639-650, December.
    8. Arasteh, Abdollah, 2017. "Considering the investment decisions with real options games approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 1282-1294.
    9. Billette de Villemeur, Etienne & Ruble, Richard & Versaevel, Bruno, 2014. "Investment timing and vertical relationships," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 110-123.
    10. Billette de Villemeur, Etienne & Ruble, Richard & Versaevel, Bruno, 2014. "Innovation and imitation incentives in dynamic duopoly," MPRA Paper 59453, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Thijssen, J.J.J., 2003. "Investment under uncertainty, market evolution and coalition spillovers in a game theoretic perspective," Other publications TiSEM 672073a6-492e-4621-8d4a-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. Huisman, K.J.M. & Kort, P.M. & Pawlina, G. & Thijssen, J.J.J., 2003. "Strategic Investment Under Uncertainty : Merging Real Options with Game Theory," Discussion Paper 2003-6, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    13. Femminis, Gianluca & Martini, Gianmaria, 2011. "Irreversible investment and R&D spillovers in a dynamic duopoly," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 1061-1090, July.
    14. Gorno, Leandro & Iachan, Felipe S., 2020. "Competitive real options under private information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    15. Boyer, Marcel & Lasserre, Pierre & Moreaux, Michel, 2010. "A Dynamic Duopoly Investment Game under Uncertain Market Growth," TSE Working Papers 10-171, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    16. Graham, Jeffrey, 2011. "Strategic real options under asymmetric information," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 922-934, June.
    17. Bruno Versaevel, 2015. "Alertness, Leadership, and Nascent Market Dynamics," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 440-466, December.
    18. Boyarchenko, Svetlana & Levendorskiĭ, Sergei, 2014. "Preemption games under Lévy uncertainty," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 354-380.
    19. Reiko Aoki & Jin‐Li Hu, 1999. "Licensing vs. Litigation: The Effect of the Legal System on Incentives to Innovate," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(1), pages 133-160, March.
    20. Adriana Breccia, 2019. "R&D appropriability and market structure in a preemption model," Birkbeck Working Papers in Economics and Finance 1902, Birkbeck, Department of Economics, Mathematics & Statistics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bargaining; Collusion; Competition; Geometric Brownian Motion; Nash Demand Game; Stackelberg Game;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • K4 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:bbk:bbkefp:0504. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.bbk.ac.uk/departments/ems/ .

    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.