IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sce/scecf9/343.html

Competing R&D Strategies in an Evolutionary Industry Model

Author

Listed:
  • Murat Yildizoglu

    (Louis Pasteur University)

Abstract

Early evolutionary models of industry dynamics have used very simple ways of modeling bounded rationality. In the precursory work of Nelson and Winter (1982), for example, R&D decisions of firms are given by a fixed rule: firms invest in each period a fixed proportion of their capital stock in imitative and innovative R&D. Recent models have introduced more elaborate ways of modeling learning with bounded rationality, implicitly through replicator dynamics or simple adaptive mechanisms or explicitly through genetic algorithms or classifiers. Oltra & Yildizoglu (1998) provides a thorough analysis of different alternatives and proposes a general approach. In this work, I adopt a simpler framework to study the role of learning in industry dynamics. I use a simplified version of the initial model of Nelson and Winter (1982) that aims to neutralize the effects of the very peculiar capital-investment decision used in this model. With this version and its well-specified dynamics, I study the confrontation of two different types of investment behavior in Research and Development. The first corresponds to an updated version of Nelson and Winter's fixed-rule behavior: in each period, each firm invests a fixed proportion of its cash-flow on R&D. The second type of behavior includes learning: firms try to adapt their R&D/Cash-Flow ratio to the conditions of the industry. Learning is modeled here through the use of genetic algorithms by this type of firm. Both types of firms coexist initially in the industry. This simple framework is used to answer several questions that can be grouped under two headings: 1) The use of fixed R&D rules does not contradict the empirical evidence. One effectively observes quite stable R&D/CF ratios in industries, but it is important to study if this type of behavior is coherent with the presence of learning or if it can be endogenously generated in evolutionary models. 2) More theoretically, it is important to see if the explicit inclusion of learning in industry models is worthwhile: Does it enrich our understanding of technology dynamics? Does it suggest a competitive edge for strategies strongly based on learning? Does learning give a better chance of success in the long term? These questions are studied in a simulation program developed in Java. A first version of the program is already available in my web site.

Suggested Citation

  • Murat Yildizoglu, 1999. "Competing R&D Strategies in an Evolutionary Industry Model," Computing in Economics and Finance 1999 343, Society for Computational Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:sce:scecf9:343
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cournot.u-strasbg.fr/yildi/files/learnind.pdf
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Yıldızoğlu, Murat & Sénégas, Marc-Alexandre & Salle, Isabelle & Zumpe, Martin, 2014. "Learning The Optimal Buffer-Stock Consumption Rule Of Carroll," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 727-752, June.
    2. Safarzynska, Karolina & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2011. "Beyond replicator dynamics: Innovation-selection dynamics and optimal diversity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 78(3), pages 229-245, May.
    3. Aßmuth, Pascal, 2014. "Credit Constrained R&D Spending and Technological Change," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 532, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    4. Pascal Aßmuth, 2018. "The Impact of Credit Rating on Innovation in a Two-Sector Evolutionary Model," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 52(3), pages 839-872, October.
    5. CATTARUZZO Sebastiano, 2020. "On R&D sectoral intensities and convergence clubs," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2020-01, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Karolina Safarzyńska & Jeroen Bergh, 2013. "An evolutionary model of energy transitions with interactive innovation-selection dynamics," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 271-293, April.
    7. Murat YILDIZOGLU, 2009. "Evolutionary approaches of economic dynamics (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2009-16, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    8. d’Andria, D. & Savin, I., 2018. "A Win-Win-Win? Motivating innovation in a knowledge economy with tax incentives," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 38-56.
    9. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    10. Herbert Dawid & Philipp Harting, 2012. "Capturing Firm Behavior in Agent-based Models of Industry Evolution and Macroeconomic Dynamics," Chapters, in: Guido Buenstorf (ed.), Evolution, Organization and Economic Behavior, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Floortje Alkemade & Han Poutré & Hans Amman, 2009. "Robust Evolutionary Algorithm Design for Socio-Economic Simulation: A Correction," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 33(1), pages 99-101, February.
    12. Herbert Dawid & Marc Reimann, 2005. "Evaluating Market Attractiveness: Individual Incentives Versus Industry Profitability," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 24(4), pages 321-355, June.
    13. Diego d'Andria & Ivan Savin, 2015. "Motivating innovation in a knowledge economy with tax incentives," Jena Economics Research Papers 2015-004, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    14. Witold Kwasnicki, 2002. "Evolutionary models’ comparative analysis. Methodology proposition based on selected neo-schumpeterian models of industrial dynamics," Microeconomics 0203002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Diego d’Andria, 2019. "Tax policy and entrepreneurial entry with information asymmetry and learning," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 26(5), pages 1211-1229, October.

    More about this item

    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:sce:scecf9:343. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sceeeea.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.