IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/kud/kuieci/1998-01.html

Product market competition policy and technological performance

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Martin

    (Institute of Economics, University of Copenhagen)

Abstract

Stricter competition policy reduces expected payoffs before and after innovation, but reduces pre-innovation payoffs relatively more than post-innovation payoffs, and therefore increases the equilibrium level of R&D activity: tough product-market competition policy stimulates innovation. There is an inverted-U relationship between competition policy and expected welfare. The model also permits analysis of the effect of R&D spillovers and of alternative R&D cooperation regimes on expected welfare, on R&D efforts, and on the expected time to discovery of a cost-saving innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Martin, 1998. "Product market competition policy and technological performance," CIE Discussion Papers 1998-01, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Industrial Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:kud:kuieci:1998-01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.ku.dk/cie/dp/dp_1997-1999/1998-01.pdf/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-748, September.
    2. Irvin M. Grossack, 1986. "OPEC and the Antitrust Laws," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 725-741, September.
    3. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Martin, Stephen, 1996. "R & D joint ventures and tacit product market collusion," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 733-741, April.
    5. Bulow, Jeremy I & Geanakoplos, John D & Klemperer, Paul D, 1985. "Multimarket Oligopoly: Strategic Substitutes and Complements," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(3), pages 488-511, June.
    6. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    7. 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.
    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. Martin, Stephen & Scott, John T., 2000. "The nature of innovation market failure and the design of public support for private innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 437-447, April.
    2. Stephen Martin*, 2001. "Competition Policy for High Technology Industries," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 1(4), pages 441-465, December.

    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. Barbosa, Natália & Faria, Ana Paula, 2011. "Innovation across Europe: How important are institutional differences?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1157-1169.
    3. Joshua S. Gans & Scott Stern, 2000. "Incumbency and R&D Incentives: Licensing the Gale of Creative Destruction," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 485-511, December.
    4. Gilbert, Richard J, 2007. "Competition and Innovation," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt9xh5p5p9, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    5. Daiya Isogawa & Kohei Nishikawa & Hiroshi Ohashi, 2015. "Innovation Height and Firm Performance:Using Innovation Survey from Japan," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-956, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    6. Daiya ISOGAWA & Kohei NISHIKAWA & Hiroshi OHASHI, 2012. "New-to-Market Product Innovation and Firm Performance: Evidence from a firm-level innovation survey in Japan," Discussion papers 12077, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    7. He, Zi-Lin & Lim, Kwanghui & Wong, Poh-Kam, 2006. "Entry and competitive dynamics in the mobile telecommunications market," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1147-1165, October.
    8. 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, Nam Duck-Woo Economic Research Institute, Sogang University (Former Research Institute for Market Economy).
    9. Erkal, Nisvan, 2005. "The decision to patent, cumulative innovation, and optimal policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(7-8), pages 535-562, September.
    10. Enrique Schroth & Dezsö Szalay, 2010. "Cash Breeds Success: The Role of Financing Constraints in Patent Races," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 14(1), pages 73-118.
    11. Bruno Cassiman & Masako Ueda, 2006. "Optimal Project Rejection and New Firm Start-ups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 262-275, February.
    12. Gans, Joshua S. & Murray, Fiona E. & Stern, Scott, 2017. "Contracting over the disclosure of scientific knowledge: Intellectual property and academic publication," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 820-835.
    13. Bruno D. Badia, 2019. "Patent Licensing and Technological Catch-Up in a Heterogeneous Duopoly," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 55(2), pages 287-300, September.
    14. Prajit K. Dutta & Saul Lach & Aldo Rustichini, 1995. "Better Late than Early: Vertical Differentiation in the Adoption of a New Technology," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(4), pages 563-589, December.
    15. Paul de Bijl & M. Bennett & Marcel Canoy, 2001. "Future policy in telecommunications: an analytical framework," CPB Document 5, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    16. Mahdiyeh Entezarkheir & Saeed Moshiri, 2021. "Innovation spillover and merger decisions," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(5), pages 2419-2448, November.
    17. Mehmet Ugur, 2013. "Governance, market power and innovation: evidence from OECD countries," Chapters, in: Mehmet Ugur (ed.), Governance, Regulation and Innovation, chapter 2, pages 25-57, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Garella, Paolo G., 2012. "Monopoly incentives for cost-reducing R&D," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 21-24.
    19. Latzer, Hélène, 2018. "A Schumpeterian theory of multi-quality firms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 766-802.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    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:kud:kuieci:1998-01. 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: Thomas Hoffmann (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciekudk.html .

    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.