Learning and Technology Adoptions
A government that wants to increase welfare by subsidizing either an industry’s sales or process innovations or both has to account for possible changes of production, when firms can foresee the government’s actions. In an optimal control framework welfare can be increased by subsidizing either an industry’s sales or process innovations. An earlier innovation date increases the price that is charged up to that innovation date, but decreases it afterwards, when process innovation costs depend on the date of innovation. Hence the welfare effect might be negative. This paper will be the first that sets up a framework, which helps to examine the optimal mixture of sales and innovation subsidies, where innovation costs depend on time and learning on cumulative production quantities. The process innovation can be understood as a substitute to learning. In this set up innovation subsidies are more beneficial for the monopolist, sales subsidies for consumers.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" 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.
|Date of creation:||31 Oct 2008|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.vwl.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- repec:tpr:qjecon:v:106:y:1991:i:2:p:369-405 is not listed on IDEAS
- Brueckner, Jan K. & Raymon, Neil, 1983. "Optimal production with learning by doing," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 127-135, September.
- Tracy R. Lewis & Huseyin Yildirim, 2002. "Learning by Doing and Dynamic Regulation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(1), pages 22-36, Spring.
- Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1983. "Learning-by-Doing and Market Performance," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(2), pages 522-530, Autumn.
- Irwin, Douglas A & Klenow, Peter J, 1994. "Learning-by-Doing Spillovers in the Semiconductor Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(6), pages 1200-1227, December.
- Alwyn Young, 1991. "Learning by Doing and the Dynamic Effects of International Trade," NBER Working Papers 3577, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Ray Rees, 1986. "Indivisibilities, pricing and investment: The case of the second best," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 195-210, December.
- A. M. Spence, 1981. "The Learning Curve and Competition," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(1), pages 49-70, Spring.
- Ray Rees, 1986. "Indivisibilities, pricing and investment: The case of the second best," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 195-210, December.
- Young, Alwyn, 1993. "Invention and Bounded Learning by Doing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(3), pages 443-72, June.
- Harris, Christopher & Vickers, John, 1987. "Racing with Uncertainty," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 1-21, January.
- Parente Stephen L., 1994. "Technology Adoption, Learning-by-Doing, and Economic Growth," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 346-369, August.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:lmu:muenec:7575. 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: (Tamilla Benkelberg)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.