IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/4784.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

R&D Policies, Trade and Process Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Haaland, Jan I.
  • Kind, Hans Jarle

Abstract

We set up a simple trade model with two countries hosting one firm each. The firms invest in cost-reducing R&D, and each government may grant R&D subsidies to the domestic firm. We show that it is optimal for a government to provide higher R&D subsidies the lower the level of trade costs, even if the firms are independent monopolies. If firms produce imperfect substitutes, policy competition may become so fierce that only one of the firms survives. International policy harmonization eliminates policy competition and ensures a symmetric outcome. However, it is shown that harmonization is not necessarily welfare-maximizing. The optimal coordinated policies may imply an asymmetric outcome with R&D subsidies to only one of the firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Haaland, Jan I. & Kind, Hans Jarle, 2004. "R&D Policies, Trade and Process Innovation," CEPR Discussion Papers 4784, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:4784
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=4784
    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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Neary, J Peter & Leahy, Dermot, 2000. "Strategic Trade and Industrial Policy towards Dynamic Oligopolies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 484-508, April.
    2. Philippe Aghion & Nick Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2005. "Competition and Innovation: an Inverted-U Relationship," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 120(2), pages 701-728.
    3. Leahy, Dermot & Neary, J Peter, 1997. "Public Policy towards R&D in Oligopolistic Industries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 642-662, September.
    4. Leahy, Dermot & Neary, J Peter, 2001. "Robust Rules for Industrial Policy in Open Economies," CEPR Discussion Papers 2731, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Jan Haaland & Hans Jarle Kind, 2006. "Cooperative and Non-Cooperative R&D Policy in an Economic Union," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(4), pages 720-745, December.
    6. Bagwell, Kyle & Staiger, Robert W., 1994. "The sensitivity of strategic and corrective R&D policy in oligopolistic industries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-2), pages 133-150, February.
    7. Dermot Leahy & J. Peter Neary, 2001. "Robust rules for industrial policy open economies," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 393-409.
    8. W. Salant, Stephen & Shaffer, Greg, 1998. "Optimal asymmetric strategies in research joint ventures," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 195-208, March.
    9. Leahy, Dermot & Neary, J. Peter, 2005. "Symmetric research joint ventures: Cooperative substitutes and complements," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(5-6), pages 381-397, June.
    10. Barbara J. Spencer & James A. Brander, 1983. "International R & D Rivalry and Industrial Strategy," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(4), pages 707-722.
    11. Neary, J Peter & O'Sullivan, Paul, 1999. " Beat 'Em or Join 'Em? Export Subsidies versus International Research Joint Ventures in Oligopolistic Markets," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 101(4), pages 577-596, December.
    12. Howitt, Peter & Aghion, Philippe, 2006. "Appropriate Growth Policy: A Unifying Framework," Scholarly Articles 4554121, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    13. Philippe Aghion & Peter Howitt, 2006. "Joseph Schumpeter Lecture Appropriate Growth Policy: A Unifying Framework," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(2-3), pages 269-314, 04-05.
    14. Brander, James A., 1995. "Strategic trade policy," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 27, pages 1395-1455, Elsevier.
    15. Greg Shaffer & Stephen W. Salant, 1999. "Unequal Treatment of Identical Agents in Cournot Equilibrium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 585-604, June.
    16. Collie, David R., 2000. "State aid in the European Union: The prohibition of subsidies in an integrated market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 867-884, August.
    17. David Collie, 2002. "Prohibiting State Aid in an Integrated Market: Cournot and Bertrand Oligopolies with Differentiated Products," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 215-231, September.
    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. Dermot Leahy & J. Neary, 2009. "Multilateral subsidy games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 41(1), pages 41-66, October.
    2. Thanh Le & Cuong Le Van, 2014. "Trade Liberalization and Optimal R&D Policies with Process Innovation," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-01130413, HAL.
    3. Jan Haaland & Hans Jarle Kind, 2006. "Cooperative and Non-Cooperative R&D Policy in an Economic Union," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(4), pages 720-745, December.
    4. Thanh Le & Cuong Le Van, 2016. "Trade Liberalisation and Optimal R&D Policies in a Model of Exporting Firms Conducting Process Innovation," Post-Print halshs-01314650, HAL.
    5. Dermot Leahy & J. Peter Neary, 2013. "Oligopoly and Trade," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Daniel Bernhofen & Rod Falvey & David Greenaway & Udo Kreickemeier (ed.), Palgrave Handbook of International Trade, chapter 7, pages 197-235, Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. Hoefele, Andreas, 2016. "Endogenous product differentiation and international R&D policy," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 335-346.
    7. Praveen Kujal & Juan Ruiz, 2003. "Cost Effectiveness of R&D and the Robustness of Strategic Trade Policy," International Trade 0302001, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 04 Feb 2003.
    8. Giammario Impullitti, 2007. "International Schumpeterian Competition and Optimal R&D subsidies," Economics Working Papers ECO2007/55, European University Institute.
    9. Delia Ionascu & Kresimir zigic, 2005. "Free trade versus strategic trade as a choice between two 'second best' policies: A symmetric versus asymmetric information analysis," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 417-446.
    10. Kresimir Zigic, 2011. "Strategic Interactions in Markets with Innovative Activity: The Cases of Strategic Trade Policy and Market Leadership," CERGE-EI Books, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague, edition 1, number b06, November.
    11. Yoon, Jeong & Choi, Kangsik, 2018. "Why do export subsidies still exist? R&D and output subsidies," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 30-38.
    12. Stephen Jui-Hsien Chou, 2013. "R&D Policy Competition with Process Innovation in a Multi-Product Duopoly," Review of Economics & Finance, Better Advances Press, Canada, vol. 3, pages 53-76, November.
    13. Dewit, Gerda & Leahy, Dermot, 2004. "Rivalry in uncertain export markets: commitment versus flexibility," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 195-209, October.
    14. Žigić, Krešimir, 2011. "Does a ‘non-committed’ government always generate lower social welfare than its ‘committed’ counterpart? Strategic trade policy when consumer surplus matters," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 533-556.
    15. Leahy, Dermot & Neary, J Peter, 2001. "Robust Rules for Industrial Policy in Open Economies," CEPR Discussion Papers 2731, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Delia Ionascu & Kresimir Zigic, 2001. "Strategic Trade Policy and Mode of Competition: Symmetric versus Asymmetric Information," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp174, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    17. Desai, Mihir A. & Hines Jr., James R., 2008. "Market reactions to export subsidies," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 459-474, March.
    18. Neary, J Peter & Leahy, Dermot, 2000. "Strategic Trade and Industrial Policy towards Dynamic Oligopolies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 484-508, April.
    19. Kresimir Zigic, 2001. "Strategic Trade Policy, the "Committed" versus "Non-Committed" Government, and R&D Spillovers," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp177, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    20. Pedro P. Barros & Tore Nilssen, 1999. "Industrial Policy and Firm Heterogeneity," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 101(4), pages 597-616, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    process innovation; R&D; subsidies; trade;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F12 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies; Fragmentation
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration

    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:cpr:ceprdp:4784. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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: (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 hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.