IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/teavfo/2000-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovative Activity and Sunk Cost

Author

Listed:
  • Kaplan, T.R.
  • Luski, I.
  • Wettstein, D.

Abstract

We analyze a patent race where the first innovator receives a time-dependent reward while all firms incur costs. When firms are identical, there is a unique, symmetric, mixed-strategy equilibrium that yields zero expected profits for all firms. Furthermore, the expected innovation time is an increasing function of the number of firms and a decreasing function of the size of the reward. When one firm has a higher reward than another, it is more likely to win. Although similar to an all-pay auction, our approach may yield both similar and qualitatively different behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaplan, T.R. & Luski, I. & Wettstein, D., 2000. "Innovative Activity and Sunk Cost," Papers 2000-6, Tel Aviv.
  • Handle: RePEc:fth:teavfo:2000-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jennifer F. Reinganum, 1985. "Innovation and Industry Evolution," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 100(1), pages 81-99.
    2. Martin, Stephen, 2001. "Industrial Organization: A European Perspective," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198297284.
    3. Dan Kovenock & Michael R. Baye & Casper G. de Vries, 1996. "The all-pay auction with complete information (*)," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 291-305.
    4. Dasgupta, Partha & Stiglitz, Joseph, 1980. "Industrial Structure and the Nature of Innovative Activity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(358), pages 266-293, June.
    5. Christopher Harris & John Vickers, 1987. "Racing with Uncertainty," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 54(1), pages 1-21.
    6. F. M. Scherer, 1967. "Research and Development Resource Allocation Under Rivalry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 81(3), pages 359-394.
    7. Tom Lee & Louis L. Wilde, 1980. "Market Structure and Innovation: A Reformulation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 94(2), pages 429-436.
    8. Baye, Michael R. & Morgan, John, 1999. "A folk theorem for one-shot Bertrand games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 59-65, October.
    9. Vickers, John S, 1986. "The Evolution of Market Structure When There Is a Sequence of Innovations," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 1-12, September.
    10. Glenn C. Loury, 1979. "Market Structure and Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 93(3), pages 395-410.
    11. Osborne, Martin J. & Pitchik, Carolyn, 1986. "Price competition in a capacity-constrained duopoly," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 238-260, April.
    12. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-526, June.
    13. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-748, September.
    14. Jennifer F. Reinganum, 1981. "On the Diffusion of New Technology: A Game Theoretic Approach," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(3), pages 395-405.
    15. Robert Vossen, 1999. "Market Power, Industrial Concentration and Innovative Activity," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 15(4), pages 367-378, December.
    16. Amann, Erwin & Leininger, Wolfgang, 1996. "Asymmetric All-Pay Auctions with Incomplete Information: The Two-Player Case," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 1-18, May.
    17. Denicolo, Vincenzo, 1996. "Patent Races and Optimal Patent Breadth and Length," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 249-265, September.
    18. Todd R. Kaplan & David Wettstein, 2000. "The possibility of mixed-strategy equilibria with constant-returns-to-scale technology under Bertrand competition," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 65-71.
    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. Ronald Goettler & Brett Gordon, 2014. "Competition and product innovation in dynamic oligopoly," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-42, March.
    2. Mathias Erlei & Anne-Kathrin Dimmig, 2012. "Quasi-Rational R&D Behavior in an Environment with Fundamental Uncertainty," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0008, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    3. Andreas Fier & Dietmar Harhoff, 2002. "Die Evolution der bundesdeutschen Forschungs– und Technologiepolitik: Rückblick und Bestandsaufnahme," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 3(3), pages 279-301, August.
    4. Langinier, Corinne & Moschini, GianCarlo, 2002. "Economics of Patents: An Overview, The," Staff General Research Papers Archive 2061, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    5. Aldieri, Luigi & Aprile, Maria Carmela & Vinci, Concetto Paolo, 2015. "R&D Spillovers Effects on strategic behaviour of Large International Firms," MPRA Paper 63402, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Ping Lin & Tianle Zhang & Wen Zhou, 2020. "Vertical integration and disruptive cross‐market R&D," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 51-73, January.
    7. Uwe Cantner & Werner Güth & Andreas Nicklisch & Torsten Weiland, 2009. "Competition In Product Design: An Experiment Exploring Innovation Behavior," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(4), pages 724-752, November.
    8. Michael Peneder & Martin Woerter, 2014. "Competition, R&D and innovation: testing the inverted-U in a simultaneous system," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 653-687, July.
    9. Hyunbae Chun & Sung-Bae Mun, 2014. "Innovative Activities of an Incumbent and a Potential Entrant: An Empirical Exploration of the Role of Uncertainty in Product and Process Innovations," Working Papers 1406, Research Institute for Market Economy, Sogang University.
    10. Lin, Ping, 1998. "Product market competition and R&D rivalry," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 105-111, January.
    11. Chang, Shun-Chiao & Wu, Ho-Mou, 2006. "Production experiences and market structure in R&D competition," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 163-183, February.
    12. Richard Gilbert, 2006. "Looking for Mr. Schumpeter: Where Are We in the Competition-Innovation Debate?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 6, pages 159-215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Boone, Jan, 2001. "Intensity of competition and the incentive to innovate," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 705-726, April.
    14. Eric W. Zitzewitz, 2003. "Competition and Long–run Productivity Growth in the UK and US Tobacco Industries, 1879–1939," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 1-33, March.
    15. F. Delbono & L. Lambertini, 2017. "Innovation and product market concentration: Schumpeter, Arrow and the inverted-U shape curve," Working Papers wp2006, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    16. Gilbert, Richard J. & Katz, Michael L., 2011. "Efficient division of profits from complementary innovations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 443-454, July.
    17. Deck, Cary & Sheremeta, Roman M., 2019. "The tug-of-war in the laboratory," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    18. Shakun D. Mago & Roman M. Sheremeta, 2017. "Multi‐battle Contests: An Experimental Study," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 84(2), pages 407-425, October.
    19. Baik, Kyung Hwan, 1998. "Difference-form contest success functions and effort levels in contests," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 685-701, November.
    20. Dirk Czarnitzki & Kornelius Kraft, 2010. "Which Firms Buy Licenses? Market Positions and License Expenditures," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 112(3), pages 471-488, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    INNOVATIONS ; PATENTS ; COSTS;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:fth:teavfo:2000-6. 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://edirc.repec.org/data/fotauil.html .

    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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fotauil.html .

    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.