IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/3450.html

Market and Technical Risk in R&D

Author

Listed:
  • Stahl, Konrad
  • Gerlach, Heiko A.
  • Rønde, Thomas

Abstract

We endogenize the market risk (at given technical risk) in firms? R&D decisions by introducing stochastic R&D in the Hotelling model. It is shown that if the technical risk is sufficiently high, the market risk remains low even if firms pursue similar projects. This leads firms to focus on the most valuable market segment. We then also endogenize technical risk by allowing firms to choose their R&D technology. In equilibrium, firms either pursue similar (different) R&D projects with risky (safe) technologies or they choose the same project but apply different R&D technologies. We show that R&D spillovers lead to more differentiated R&D efforts and patent protection to less. Project coordination within a RJV implies more differentiation, and may, or may not be welfare-improving.

Suggested Citation

  • Stahl, Konrad & Gerlach, Heiko A. & Rønde, Thomas, 2002. "Market and Technical Risk in R&D," CEPR Discussion Papers 3450, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:3450
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP3450
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Cardon & Dan Sasaki, 1998. "Preemptive Search and R&D Clustering," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 324-338, Summer.
    2. Dasgupta, Partha & Maskin, Eric, 1987. "The Simple Economics of Research Portfolios," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(387), pages 581-595, September.
    3. Irmen, Andreas & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1998. "Competition in Multi-characteristics Spaces: Hotelling Was Almost Right," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 76-102, January.
    4. d'Aspremont, C & Gabszewicz, Jean Jaskold & Thisse, J-F, 1979. "On Hotelling's "Stability in Competition"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1145-1150, September.
    5. Mansfield, Edwin, 1985. "How Rapidly Does New Industrial Technology Leak Out?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(2), pages 217-223, December.
    6. Vettas, Nikolaos, 1999. "Location as a Signal of Quality," CEPR Discussion Papers 2165, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Helmut Bester, 1998. "Quality Uncertainty Mitigates Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(4), pages 828-844, Winter.
    8. repec:bla:jindec:v:48:y:2000:i:2:p:205-13 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1986. "Product Compatibility Choice in a Market with Technological Progress," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(0), pages 146-165, Suppl. No.
    10. Gilles Duranton, 2000. "Cumulative Investment and Spillovers in the Formation of Technological Landscapes," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(2), pages 205-213, June.
    11. Sudipto Bhattacharya & Dilip Mookherjee, 1986. "Portfolio Choice in Research and Development," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(4), pages 594-605, Winter.
    12. Kamien, Morton I & Muller, Eitan & Zang, Israel, 1992. "Research Joint Ventures and R&D Cartels," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1293-1306, December.
    13. Neven, D. & Thisse, J-F., 1989. "On Quality And Variety Competition," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1989020, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    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. Heiko A. Gerlach & Thomas Rønde & Konrad Stahl, 2005. "Project Choice And Risk In R&D," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 53-81, March.
    2. Nisvan Erkal & Deborah Minehart, 2007. "Optimal Sharing Strategies in Dynamic Games of Research and Development," EAG Discussions Papers 200707, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.
    3. Andrea Mangani & Paolo Patelli, 2002. "The Max-Min Principle of Product Differentiation: An Experimental Analysis," LEM Papers Series 2002/05, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    4. Jay Pil Choi & Heiko Gerlach, 2014. "Selection Biases in Complementary R&D Projects," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(4), pages 899-924, December.
    5. Bonein, Aurélie & Turolla, Stéphane, 2009. "Sequential location under one-sided demand uncertainty," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 145-159, September.
    6. Christou, Charalambos & Vettas, Nikolaos, 2005. "Location choices under quality uncertainty," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 268-278, November.
    7. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2005:i:17:p:1-8 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Raphael Thomadsen, 2007. "Product Positioning and Competition: The Role of Location in the Fast Food Industry," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 792-804, 11-12.
    9. Mitsuru Igami, 2011. "Does Big Drive Out Small?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(1), pages 1-21, January.
    10. Jianhu Zhang & Changying Li, 2013. "Endogenous R&D spillover and location choice in a mixed oligopoly," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 51(2), pages 459-477, October.
    11. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107069978, January.
    12. Patrick Herbst & Eric Jahn, 2017. "IP-for-IP or Cash-for-IP? R&D Competition and the Market for Technology," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 51(1), pages 75-101, August.
    13. Henkel, Joachim & Rønde, Thomas, 2025. "Being the best or being the only one – Dichotomous R&D strategy choices by startups aiming for acquisition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    14. Isabelle M. Nilsson & Oleg A. Smirnov, 2017. "Clustering vs. relative location: Measuring spatial interaction between retail outlets," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96(4), pages 721-741, November.
    15. Reme Bjørn-Atle, 2019. "Competition in Markets with Quality Uncertainty and Network Effects," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 18(4), pages 205-242, December.
    16. Fujita, Masahisa & Thisse, Jacques-François, 2009. "New Economic Geography: An appraisal on the occasion of Paul Krugman's 2008 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 109-119, March.
    17. Marcella Scrimitore, 2003. "Symmetric and Asymmetric Equilibria in a Spatial Duopoly," ERSA conference papers ersa03p194, European Regional Science Association.
    18. Yi Deng & Gabriel Picone, 2013. "Strategic Clustering and Competition by Alcohol Retailers: An Emperical Anlysis of Entry and Location Decisions," Working Papers 1013, University of South Florida, Department of Economics.
    19. Femminis Gianluca & Martini Gianmaria, 2010. "First-Mover Advantage in a Dynamic Duopoly with Spillover," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-46, November.
    20. Toshihiro Matsumura & Noriaki Matsushima, 2007. "On patent licensing in spatial competition with endogenous location choice," Discussion Papers 2007-35, Kobe University, Graduate School of Business Administration.
    21. Lambertini, Luca & Mantovani, Andrea, 2009. "Process and product innovation by a multiproduct monopolist: A dynamic approach," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 508-518, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:cpr:ceprdp:3450. 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.cepr.org .

    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.