IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/not/notecp/11-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Unionisation structure and product innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Debasmita Basak
  • Arijit Mukherjee

Abstract

This paper considers the e¤ects of di¤erent labour unionisation structure (viz., decentralised and centralised unions) on product innovation. Although the presence of labour unions reduces the incentive for product innovation compared to the situation with no labour union (or if the unions have no bargaining power in wage determination), the e¤ects of different labour unionisation structure on innovation are not so straightforward. In the case of symmetric product differentiation, the incentive for innovation is higher under decentralised unions. However, the incentive for innovation can be higher under a centralised union than under decentralised unions in the presence of asymmetric product differentiation. Our paper provides a new perspective to the literature by focusing on product innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Debasmita Basak & Arijit Mukherjee, 2011. "Unionisation structure and product innovation," Discussion Papers 11/12, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:not:notecp:11/12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/economics/documents/discussion-papers/11-12.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Justus Haucap & Christian Wey, 2004. "Unionisation structures and innovation incentives," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(494), pages 149-165, March.
    2. Lambertini, Luca & Mantovani, Andrea, 2009. "Process and product innovation by a multiproduct monopolist: A dynamic approach," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 508-518, July.
    3. Calabuig, Vicente & Gonzalez-Maestre, Miguel, 2002. "Union structure and incentives for innovation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 177-192, March.
    4. Mukherjee, Arijit & Pennings, Enrico, 2011. "Unionization structure, licensing and innovation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 232-241, March.
    5. Rosenkranz, Stephanie, 2003. "Simultaneous choice of process and product innovation when consumers have a preference for product variety," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 183-201, February.
    6. Leahy, Dermot & Montagna, Catia, 2000. "Unionisation and Foreign Direct Investment: Challenging Conventional Wisdom?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(462), pages 80-92, March.
    7. Stephen Nickell, 1997. "Unemployment and Labor Market Rigidities: Europe versus North America," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 55-74, Summer.
    8. Andrea Bassanini & Ekkehard Ernst, 2002. "Labour Market Institutions, Product Market Regulation, and Innovation: Cross-Country Evidence," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 316, OECD Publishing.
    9. Dhillon, Amrita & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2002. "A generalised wage rigidity result," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 285-311, March.
    10. Henrick Horn & Asher Wolinsky, 1988. "Bilateral Monopolies and Incentives for Merger," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(3), pages 408-419, Autumn.
    11. Arijit Mukherjee & Enrico Pennings, 2004. "Imitation, patent protection, and welfare," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 56(4), pages 715-733, October.
    12. Lin, Ping & Saggi, Kamal, 2002. "Product differentiation, process R&D, and the nature of market competition," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 201-211, January.
    13. Van Reenen, John & Menezes-Filho, Naercio, 2003. "Unions and Innovation: A Survey of the Theory and Empirical Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 3792, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Sebastian Braun, 2008. "Economic Integration, Process and Product Innovation, and Relative Skill Demand," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(5), pages 864-873, November.
    15. Alistair Ulph & David Ulph, 2001. "Strategic Innovation with Complete and Incomplete Labour Market Contracts," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 103(2), pages 265-282, June.
    16. Haucap, Justus & Pauly, Uwe & Wey, Christian, 2001. "Collective wage setting when wages are generally binding An antitrust perspective," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 287-307, September.
    17. Luca Lambertini & Andrea Mantovani, 2010. "Process and product innovation: A differential game approach to product life cycle," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 6(2), pages 227-252, June.
    18. Dobson, Paul W., 1994. "Multifirm unions and the incentive to adopt pattern bargaining in oligopoly," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 87-100, January.
    19. Vannini, Stefano & Bughin, Jacques, 2000. "To be (unionized) or not to be? A case for cost-raising strategies under Cournot oligopoly," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 1763-1781, October.
    20. John T. Addison & Joachim Wagner, 1994. "UK Unionism and Innovative Activity: Some Cautionary Remarks on the Basis of a Simple Cross-country Test," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 32(1), pages 85-98, March.
    21. DeGraba, Patrick, 1990. "Input Market Price Discrimination and the Choice of Technology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1246-1253, December.
    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. Debasmita Basak & Andreas Hoefele & Arijit Mukherjee, 2014. "Union Bargaining Power and Product Innovation: Relevance of the Preference Function," CESifo Working Paper Series 5007, CESifo.
    2. Basak, Debasmita & Mukherjee, Arijit, 2018. "Labour unionisation structure and product innovation," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 98-110.
    3. Mukherjee, Arijit & Pennings, Enrico, 2011. "Unionization structure, licensing and innovation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 232-241, March.
    4. Debasmita Basak & Andreas Hoefele & Arijit Mukherjee, 2022. "Wage bargaining and product innovation: The role of market expansion effect," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 90(3), pages 319-340, June.
    5. Debasmita Basask, 2012. "Price competition and the effects of labour union on process innovation," Discussion Papers 12/05, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
    6. Cao, Jiyun & Mukherjee, Arijit, 2018. "Foreign direct investment, unionised labour markets and welfare," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 330-339.
    7. Constantine Manasakis & Emmanuel Petrakis, 2009. "Union structure and firms' incentives for cooperative R&D investments," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 42(2), pages 665-693, May.
    8. Justus Haucap & Christian Wey, 2004. "Unionisation structures and innovation incentives," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(494), pages 149-165, March.
    9. Alex Bryson & Harald Dale-Olsen, 2020. "Unions, Tripartite Competition and Innovation," DoQSS Working Papers 20-02, Quantitative Social Science - UCL Social Research Institute, University College London.
    10. Arijit Mukherjee & Kullapat Suetrong, 2007. "Unionisation structure and strategic foreign direct investment," Discussion Papers 07/22, University of Nottingham, GEP.
    11. Kuang-Feng Cheng & Chien-Shu Tsai & Chu-Chuan Hsu & Szu-Chung Lin & Ting-Chung Tsai & Jen-Yao Lee, 2019. "Emission Tax and Compensation Subsidy with Cross-Industry Pollution," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-23, February.
    12. Meccheri Nicola, 2023. "On the Social Desirability of Centralized Wage Setting when Firms are Run by Biased Managers," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 23(3), pages 701-725, July.
    13. Elias Asproudis & Maria Gil-Moltó, 2015. "Green Trade Unions: Structure, Wages and Environmental Technology," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 60(2), pages 165-189, February.
    14. Justus Haucap & Christian Wey, 2002. "Unionization Structures and Firms' Incentives for Productivity Enhancing Investments," CIG Working Papers FS IV 02-10, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    15. Ben Ferrett & Vasileios Zikos, 2013. "Wage-Setting Institutions and R&D Collaboration Networks," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 61-78, June.
    16. Luciano Fanti & Nicola Meccheri, 2014. "Capacity choice and welfare under alternative unionisation structures," Discussion Papers 2014/176, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    17. Berton, Fabio & Dughera, Stefano & Ricci, Andrea, 2021. "Are Unions Detrimental to Innovation? Theory and Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 14102, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Mukherjee, Arijit, 2013. "Endogenous domestic market structure and the effects of a trade cost reduction in a unionised industry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 30-33.
    19. Mukherjee, Soma & Broll, Udo & Mukherjee, Arijit, 2007. "Licensing by a monopolist and unionized labor market," Dresden Discussion Paper Series in Economics 09/07, Technische Universität Dresden, Faculty of Business and Economics, Department of Economics.
    20. Asproudis, Elias, 2011. "Trade union structure with environmental concern and firms' technological choice," MPRA Paper 28767, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:not:notecp:11/12. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/denotuk.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.