IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bol/bodewp/wp1126.html

Niche vs. central firms: Technology choice and cost-price dynamics in a differentiated oligopoly

Author

Listed:
  • E. Bacchiega
  • P. G. Garella

Abstract

This paper is about technology choices in a differentiated oligopoly. The main questions are: whether the position in the product space affects the choice of technology, how changes in fixed costs affect price outcomes, the strategic responses to policy interventions. The industry is an oligopoly where a central firm is competing with two peripheral (or marginal) ones. The former is shown to be more ready than the latter to adopt a technology with low marginal costs and high fixed costs (Increasing Returns to Scale) rather than one with the opposite pattern (Constant Returns to Scale). The fixed cost in the IRS affects the technology configuration and hence output prices. For instance, a lower fixed cost may trigger lower prices and it is neutral only for given technologies. A price-cap may forestall a change in technologies; nondiscriminatory ad-valorem tax and taxes on variable input, or discriminatory unit taxes can also affect the technology pattern and deliver important effects on prices.

Suggested Citation

  • E. Bacchiega & P. G. Garella, 2018. "Niche vs. central firms: Technology choice and cost-price dynamics in a differentiated oligopoly," Working Papers wp1126, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    • Handle: RePEc:bol:bodewp:wp1126
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://amsacta.unibo.it/6036/1/WP1126.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krysiak, Frank C., 2008. "Prices vs. quantities: The effects on technology choice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1275-1287, June.
    2. Long, Ngo Van & Soubeyran, Antoine, 2001. "Cost Manipulation Games in Oligopoly, with Costs of Manipulating," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 42(2), pages 505-533, May.
    3. Fevrier, Philippe & Linnemer, Laurent, 2004. "Idiosyncratic shocks in an asymmetric Cournot oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 835-848, June.
    4. Morten Hviid & Matthew Olczak, 2016. "Raising Rivals’ Fixed Costs," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 19-36, February.
    5. Manu Goyal & Serguei Netessine, 2007. "Strategic Technology Choice and Capacity Investment Under Demand Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 192-207, February.
    6. Paula Bustos, 2011. "Trade Liberalization, Exports, and Technology Upgrading: Evidence on the Impact of MERCOSUR on Argentinian Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 304-340, February.
    7. Mills, David E. & Smith, William, 1996. "It pays to be different: Endogenous heterogeneity of firms in an oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 317-329, May.
    8. Norman,George & Thisse,Jacques-François (ed.), 2000. "Market Structure and Competition Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521783330, June.
    9. Timothy Dunne, 1994. "Plant Age and Technology Use in US. Manufacturing Industries," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(3), pages 488-499, Autumn.
    10. Junichiro Ishida & Toshihiro Matsumura & Noriaki Matsushima, 2011. "Market Competition, R&D And Firm Profits In Asymmetric Oligopoly," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 484-505, September.
    11. Elberfeld, Walter, 2003. "A note on technology choice, firm heterogeneity and welfare," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 593-605, April.
    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. Amir, Rabah & Halmenschlager, Christine & Jin, Jim, 2011. "R&D-induced industry polarization and shake-outs," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 386-398, July.
    2. Yang, L. & Ng, C.T. & Cheng, T.C.E., 2011. "Optimal production strategy under demand fluctuations: Technology versus capacity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(2), pages 393-402, October.
    3. Lapan, Harvey E. & Hennessy, David A., 2004. "Cost arrangement and welfare in a multi-product Cournot oligopoly," ISU General Staff Papers 200410230700001202, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Rabah Amir & Filomena Garcia & Malgorzata Knauff, 2006. "Endogenous Heterogeneity in Strategic Models: Symmetry-breaking via Strategic Substitutes and Nonconcavities," Working Papers Department of Economics 2006/29, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    5. Lapan, Harvey E. & Hennessy, David A., 2008. "Statistical moments analysis of production and welfare in multi-product Cournot oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 598-606, March.
    6. Yanfang Zhang & Shue Mei & Weijun Zhong, 2014. "New technology adoption in a Cournot oligopoly with spillovers," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 112(2), pages 115-136, June.
    7. Amir, Rabah & Garcia, Filomena & Knauff, Malgorzata, 2010. "Symmetry-breaking in two-player games via strategic substitutes and diagonal nonconcavity: A synthesis," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(5), pages 1968-1986, September.
    8. Krysiak, Frank C., 2011. "Environmental regulation, technological diversity, and the dynamics of technological change," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 528-544, April.
    9. Wang, X. Henry & Zhao, Jingang, 2007. "Welfare reductions from small cost reductions in differentiated oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 173-185, February.
    10. Kyung Hwan Baik & Sang-Kee Kim, 2020. "Observable versus unobservable R&D investments in duopolies," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 37-66, June.
    11. X. Henry Wang & Chenhang Zeng, 2014. "A Note on Endogenous Heterogeneity in a Duopoly," SDU Working Papers 2015-02, School of Economics, Shandong University.
    12. Jurgan, Jens, 2009. "Conjectural cost variations in a differentiated good oligopoly," W.E.P. - Würzburg Economic Papers 80, University of Würzburg, Department of Economics.
    13. Gokan, Toshitaka & Kichko, Sergey & Thisse, Jacques-François, 2019. "How do trade and communication costs shape the spatial organization of firms?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    14. Paul Belleflamme & Valeria Forlin, 2020. "Endogenous vertical segmentation in a Cournot oligopoly," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 181-195, October.
    15. Lapan, Harvey E. & Hennessy, David A., 2006. "A note on cost arrangement and market performance in a multi-product Cournot oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 583-591, May.
    16. Jens Jurgan, 2009. "Cost Variations in a Differentiated Good Oligopoly," Working Papers 069, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    17. Friedel Bolle, 2011. "Over- and under-investment according to different benchmarks," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 219-238, November.
    18. Hennessy, David A. & Lapan, Harvey E., 2009. "Harmonic symmetries of imperfect competition on circular city," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1-2), pages 124-146, January.
    19. Fındık, Derya & Tansel, Aysit, 2013. "Resources on the stage: a firm level analysis of the ict adoption in Turkey," MPRA Paper 65956, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 05 Aug 2014.
    20. Joachim Wagner, 2012. "Exports, R&D and productivity: a test of the Bustos-model with German enterprise data," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(3), pages 1942-1948.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • 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:bol:bodewp:wp1126. 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: Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sebolit.html .

    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.