IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/cesptp/halshs-01130413.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trade Liberalization and Optimal R&D Policies with Process Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Thanh Le

    (UQ [All campuses : Brisbane, Dutton Park Gatton, Herston, St Lucia and other locations] - The University of Queensland)

  • Cuong Le Van

    (IPAG - Business School, 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, VCREME - Van Xuan Center of Research in Economics, Management and Environment, CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

We set up a theoretical framework to discuss the impact of trade liberalization and R&D policies on domestic exporting firms' incentive to innovate and social welfare. In this framework, exporting firms invest in R&D to reduce their production costs and, in return, receive R&D subsidies from the government. While firms target at maximizing their profits, the government aims to maximize the social welfare. We consider different settings of firm competition to explore their strategic behaviors as well as the government's strategic behavior at the policy stage. We find that trade liberalization in the foreign market always increases firms' output sales and social welfare and, in most cases, leads to higher R&D investments and productivity at firms as well as industry level. When firms are independent monopolies in the overseas market, it is optimal for the government not to provide any R&D subsidy. When goods are close substitutes, the social optimum can be achieved as a Nash equilibrium by applying an optimal R&D tax. Trade liberalization induces a higher R&D tax rate to be levied on firms. When firms also conduct business in the home market, it is always optimal for the government to provide firms with a financial support to their R&D activity. While this R&D subsidy is decreasing in the trade cost when firms are independent monopolies, its monotonicity in the trade costs is determined by the convexity of the R&D cost function when firms produce close substitutes.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:cesptp:halshs-01130413
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01130413
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01130413/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haaland, Jan I. & Kind, Hans Jarle, 2008. "R&D policies, trade and process innovation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 170-187, January.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), 1995. "Handbook of International Economics," Handbook of International Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 3, number 3.
    6. 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.
    7. Long, Ngo Van & Raff, Horst & Stähler, Frank, 2011. "Innovation and trade with heterogeneous firms," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 149-159, July.
    8. Barbara J. Spencer & James A. Brander, 1983. "International R & D Rivalry and Industrial Strategy," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 50(4), pages 707-722.
    9. Paula Bustos, 2011. "Trade Liberalization, Exports, and Technology Upgrading: Evidence on the Impact of MERCOSUR on Argentinian Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 304-340, February.
    10. Dermot Leahy & J. Peter Neary, 2000. "Robust Rules for Industrial Policy in open Economies," Working Papers 200021, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
    11. Alla Lileeva & Daniel Trefler, 2010. "Improved Access to Foreign Markets Raises Plant-level Productivity…For Some Plants," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(3), pages 1051-1099.
    12. 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.
    13. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
    14. 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.
    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. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-499 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-574 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-550 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Lucian-Florin Onișor, 2015. "Marketing and Business Development between Idea, Scientific Discovery and Innovation," International Conference on Marketing and Business Development Journal, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, vol. 1(1), pages 29-39, July.
    5. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-488 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-504 is not listed 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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Haaland, Jan I. & Kind, Hans Jarle, 2008. "R&D policies, trade and process innovation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 170-187, January.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    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. Darong Dai, 2018. "Intellectual property rights and R&D subsidies: are they complementary policies?," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 125(1), pages 27-49, September.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Ufuk Akcigit & Sina T. Ates & Giammario Impullitti, 2018. "Innovation and Trade Policy in a Globalized World," NBER Working Papers 24543, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Giammario Impullitti, 2007. "International Schumpeterian Competition and Optimal R&D subsidies," Economics Working Papers ECO2007/55, European University Institute.
    12. 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.
    13. Peters, Bettina & Roberts, Mark J. & Vuong, Van Anh, 2022. "Firm R&D investment and export market exposure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    14. Rutzer, Christian, 2014. "From the Loser to the Winner - How Trade Liberalization can lead to Leapfrogging between Countries," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100313, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    15. Kresimir Zigic, 2010. "Second-Best Trade Policies, R&D Spillovers and Government (In)ability to Precommit in an Intra-Industry Trade Framework," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp427, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    16. Antonio Navas & Davide Sala, 2015. "Innovation and Trade Policy Coordination: The Role of Firm Heterogeneity," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(8), pages 1205-1224, August.
    17. Dermot Leahy & J. Peter Neary, 2000. "Robust Rules for Industrial Policy in open Economies," Working Papers 200021, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
    18. Marc J. Melitz & Stephen J. Redding, 2021. "Trade and innovation," CEP Discussion Papers dp1777, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    19. 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.
    20. Bettina Peters & Rebecca Riley & Iulia Siedschlag & Priit Vahter & John McQuinn, 2018. "Internationalisation, innovation and productivity in services: evidence from Germany, Ireland and the United Kingdom," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 154(3), pages 585-615, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    trade; R&D; subsidies; welfare; process innovation;
    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
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    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:hal:cesptp:halshs-01130413. 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.