IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/cesptp/hal-00636117.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

R&D cooperation and collusion: the case of Joint Labs

Author

Listed:
  • Marie-Laure Cabon-Dhersin

    (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, PSE - Paris School of Economics - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - ENS-PSL - École normale supérieure - Paris - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement)

Abstract

In the standard two‐stage framework of R&D/product market competition, the present note compares the performance of full cooperation (firms conduct R&D in a joint lab and collude in the product market) and full competition (firms compete in R&D as well as in the product market). The paper shows that (i) full cooperation leads to better results in terms of R&D efforts compared with non‐cooperation; (ii) collusion at the production stage may increase both producers' and consumers' surplus especially when the degree of spillovers is not too high and the products are not homogeneous; (iii) the gains in terms of social welfare from full cooperation increase when the efficiency of R&D decreases.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Marie-Laure Cabon-Dhersin, 2008. "R&D cooperation and collusion: the case of Joint Labs," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00636117, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:cesptp:hal-00636117
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9957.2008.01067.x
    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. van Wegberg, M.J., 1995. "Can R&D alliances facilitate the formation of a cartel? The example of the European IT industry," Research Memorandum 004, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    2. Xavier Vives, 2001. "Oligopoly Pricing: Old Ideas and New Tools," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026272040x, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anna Stepanova & Antonio Tesoriere, 2011. "R&D With Spillovers: Monopoly Versus Noncooperative And Cooperative Duopoly," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 79(1), pages 125-144, January.
    2. Marie‐Laure Cabon‐Dhersin & Romain Gibert, 2020. "R&D cooperation, proximity and distribution of public funding between public and private research sectors," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 88(6), pages 773-800, December.
    3. Deming Zeng & Luyun Xu & Xia-an Bi, 2017. "Effects of asymmetric knowledge spillovers on the stability of horizontal and vertical R&D cooperation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 32-60, March.
    4. Marie-Laure Cabon-Dhersin & Romain Gibert, 2019. "R&D cooperation, proximity and distribution of public funding between public and private research sectors," Working Papers hal-02006489, HAL.
    5. Georg Götz & Anna Hammerschmidt, 2009. "R&D Cooperation With Unit‐Elastic Demand," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 179-188, April.

    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. Rodney Beard, 2015. "N-Firm Oligopoly With General Iso-Elastic Demand," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(4), pages 336-345, October.
    2. Ciwei Dong & Liu Yang & Chi To Ng, 2020. "Quantity Leadership for a Dual-Channel Supply Chain with Retail Service," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 37(02), pages 1-32, March.
    3. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    4. McCarthy, Ian M., 2016. "Advertising intensity and welfare in an equilibrium search model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 20-26.
    5. Rodrigo J. Harrison & Roberto Munoz, 2003. "Stability and Equilibrium Selection in a Link Formation Game," Game Theory and Information 0306004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Prokop, Jacek & Karbowski, Adam, 2013. "R&D cooperation and industry cartelization," Economics Discussion Papers 2013-41, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    7. Leandro Arozamena & Estelle Cantillon, 2004. "Investment Incentives in Procurement Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 71(1), pages 1-18.
    8. Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., 2004. "Cartel Pricing Dynamics in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(4), pages 651-673, Winter.
    9. Lapo Filistrucchi & Tobias J. Klein, 2013. "Price Competition in Two-Sided Markets with Heterogeneous Consumers and Network Effects," Working Papers 13-20, NET Institute.
    10. MITRAILLE Sébastien & MOREAUX Michel, 2007. "Inventories and Endogenous Stackelberg Hierarchy in Two-period Cournot Oligopoly," LERNA Working Papers 07.02.223, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    11. Alexandre de Corniere, 2013. "Search Advertising," Economics Series Working Papers 649, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    12. Nocke, Volker & White, Lucy, 2010. "Vertical merger, collusion, and disruptive buyers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 350-354, July.
    13. Sen, Debapriya & Stamatopoulos, Giorgos, 2016. "Licensing under general demand and cost functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(3), pages 673-680.
    14. Alex Dickson & Roger Hartley, 2006. "On a foundation for Cournot equilibrium," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0638, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    15. Sudipta Sarangi & Pascal Billand & Christophe Bravard & S. Chakrabarti, 2009. "Spying in Multi-market Oligopolies," Departmental Working Papers 2009-11, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    16. Jingsong Cui, 2005. "The Demand for International Message Telephone Services: A Two-Stage Budgeting Model," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 27(2), pages 167-183, September.
    17. Léautier, Thomas-Olivier & Rochet, Jean-Charles, 2014. "On the strategic value of risk management," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 153-169.
    18. Ludovic Julien & Olivier Musy & Aurélien Saïdi, 2011. "Do Followers Really Matter in Stackelberg Competition?," Lecturas de Economía, Universidad de Antioquia, Departamento de Economía, issue 75, pages 11-27.
    19. Giovanni Paolo Crespi & Davide Radi & Matteo Rocca, 2017. "Robust games: theory and application to a Cournot duopoly model," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 40(1), pages 177-198, November.
    20. Claude d'Aspremont & Rodolphe Dos Santos Ferreira & Louis-André Gérard-Varet, 2007. "Competition For Market Share Or For Market Size: Oligopolistic Equilibria With Varying Competitive Toughness," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(3), pages 761-784, August.

    More about this item

    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:hal:cesptp:hal-00636117. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.