IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Item Pricing Laws, Supplier Behavior, and the Diffusion of Time-Saving Technology Innovations

  • James G. Mulligan

    ()

    (Department of Economics,University of Delaware)

  • Nilotpal Das

In this paper we provide non-parametric and parametric estimations of the initial diffusion process of point-of-sale optical scanners that illustrate the importance of controlling for supplier behavior and government regulations. In particular, we show that discrete changes in the early development of the technology followed predictably different diffusion paths depending on each vintage’s relative effect on service speed and costs of production. We also provide evidence that item-pricing laws passed in six states as consumer protection initiatives slowed down the initial diffusion of the technology at the same time as consumer acceptance of scanners was growing nation-wide.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://graduate.lerner.udel.edu/sites/default/files/ECON/PDFs/RePEc/dlw/WorkingPapers/2006/UDWP2006-11.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Delaware, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 06-11.

as
in new window

Length: 46 pages
Date of creation: 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:dlw:wpaper:06-11
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Purnell Hall, Newark, Delaware 19716

Phone: (302) 831-2565
Fax: (302) 831-6968
Web page: http://lerner.udel.edu/departments/economics/department-economics/

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

as in new window
  1. Caselli, Francesco & Coleman II, Wilbur John, 2001. "Cross-Country Technology Diffusion: The Case of Computers," CEPR Discussion Papers 2744, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  2. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2004. "Innovation and Diffusion," NBER Working Papers 10212, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Khan, Beethika, 2003. "Adoption of New Technology," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt3wg4p528, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
  4. Mark Bergen & Daniel Levy & Sourav Ray & Paul H. Rubin & Benjamin Zeliger, 2004. "When Little Things Mean a Lot: On the Inefficiency of Item Pricing Laws," Working Papers 2004-06, Bar-Ilan University, Department of Economics.
  5. Reinganum, Jennifer F., . "Market Structure and the Diffusion of New Technology," Working Papers 360, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  6. Athey, Susan & Schmutzler, Armin, 2001. "Investment and Market Dominance," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 1-26, Spring.
  7. Goolsbee, Austan & Klenow, Peter J, 2002. "Evidence on Learning and Network Externalities in the Diffusion of Home Computers," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(2), pages 317-43, October.
  8. Jennifer F. Reinganum, 1983. "Technology Adoption Under Imperfect Information," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(1), pages 57-69, Spring.
  9. Liikanen, Jukka & Stoneman, Paul & Toivanen, Otto, 2004. "Intergenerational effects in the diffusion of new technology: the case of mobile phones," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(8-9), pages 1137-1154, November.
  10. Georg GÖTZ, 1996. "Monopolistic Competition and the Diffusion of New Technology," Vienna Economics Papers vie9610, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
  11. Hannan, Timothy H & McDowell, John M, 1987. "Rival Precedence and the Dynamics of Technology Adoption: An Empirical Analysis," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 54(214), pages 155-71, May.
  12. James G. Mulligan & Emmanuel Llinares, 2003. "Market Segmentation and the Diffusion of Quality-Enhancing Innovations: The Case of Downhill Skiing," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(3), pages 493-501, August.
  13. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1985. "Preemption and Rent Equalization in the Adoption of New Technology," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 52(3), pages 383-401.
  14. Thomas, Louis A., 1999. "Adoption order of new technologies in evolving markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 453-482, April.
  15. Massoud Karshenas & Paul L. Stoneman, 1993. "Rank, Stock, Order, and Epidemic Effects in the Diffusion of New Process Technologies: An Empirical Model," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(4), pages 503-528, Winter.
  16. Cabral, Ricardo & Leiblein, Michael J, 2001. "Adoption of a Process Innovation with Learning-by-Doing: Evidence from the Semiconductor Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 269-80, September.
  17. Geroski, P. A., 2000. "Models of technology diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 603-625, April.
  18. Rosenberg, Nathan, 1972. "Factors affecting the diffusion of technology," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 3-33.
  19. Silvia Massini, 2004. "The diffusion of mobile telephony in Italy and the UK: an empirical investigation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 251-277.
  20. Levin, Sharon G & Levin, Stanford L & Meisel, John B, 1987. "A Dynamic Analysis of the Adoption of a New Technology: The Case of Optical Scanners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(1), pages 12-17, February.
  21. Sarkar, Jayati, 1998. " Technological Diffusion: Alternative Theories and Historical Evidence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 131-76, April.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dlw:wpaper:06-11. 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: (Saul Hoffman)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.