Strategic R&D with Knowledge Spillovers and Endogenous Time to Complete
We present a model where firms make competitive decisions about the optimal duration (or time to build) of their R&D projects. Choosing its project’s duration, the firm can choose to become a leader or a follower, based on its R&D efficiency, the size of the R&D to be carried out and the degree of innovation, which this research will produce. It is shown that asymmetry in R&D efficiency between firms is an important factor determining feasibility of the preemption and attrition scenarios in competitive R&D with time to build. Scenarios of attrition and preemption games are most likely to occur when competitors have similar R&D efficiencies. In case of largely asymmetric firms the games of attrition and preemption are very unlikely, thus the R&D duration choices of firms are determined by the actual trade-off between the benefits of earlier innovation and the costs of faster R&D project completion.
|Date of creation:||2007|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +49 (89) 9224-0
Fax: +49 (89) 985369
Web page: http://www.cesifo.de
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Reinganum, Jennifer F., 1981.
"Dynamic games of innovation,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 21-41, August.
- Hoppe, Heidrun C. & Lehmann-Grube, Ulrich, 2005. "Innovation timing games: a general framework with applications," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 30-50, March.
- Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2003.
"Productivity Dynamics with Technology Choice: An Application to Automobile Assembly,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(1), pages 167-198, January.
- Johannes van Biesebroeck, 2003. "Productivity Dynamics with Technology Choice: An Application to Automobile Assembly," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 70(1), pages 167-198.
- Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2000. "Measuring Productivity Dynamics with Endogenous Choice of Technology and Capacity Utilization: An Application to Automobile Assembly," Working Papers 00-16, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
- Pacheco-de-Almeida, Goncalo & Zemsky, Peter, 2003. " The Effect of Time-to-Build on Strategic Investment under Uncertainty," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(1), pages 166-82, Spring.
- Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1987. "R&D Rivalry with Licensing or Imitation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 402-20, June.
- d'Aspremont, Claude & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1988.
"Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1133-37, December.
- d'ASPREMONT, Claude & JACQUEMIN, Alexis, . "Cooperative and noncooperative R&D in duopoly with spillovers," CORE Discussion Papers RP -823, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- 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.
- 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 563-89, Winter.
- Dutta, Prajit K., 1997. "Optimal management of an R&D budget," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 21(2-3), pages 575-602.
- Hoppe, Heidrun C., 2000. "Second-mover advantages in the strategic adoption of new technology under uncertainty," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 315-338, February.
- Petit, Maria Luisa & Tolwinski, Boleslaw, 1999. "R&D cooperation or competition?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 185-208, January.
- Gene M. Grossman & Carl Shapiro, 1986.
"Optimal Dynamic R&D Programs,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(4), pages 581-593, Winter.
- Teece, David J., 1996. "Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 193-224, November.
- Suzumura, Kotaro, 1992. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in an Oligopoly with Spillovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1307-20, December.
- Heidrun C. Hoppe & Ulrich Lehmann-Grube, 2001. "Second-Mover Advantages in Dynamic Quality Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(3), pages 419-433, 09.
- Fudenberg, Drew & Tirole, Jean, 1985. "Preemption and Rent Equilization in the Adoption of New Technology," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 383-401, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_2027. 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: (Julio Saavedra)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.