IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ifwedp/200933.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Minimum quality standards and novelty requirements in a one-shot development race

Author

Listed:
  • Prokop, Jacek
  • Regibeau, Pierre
  • Rockett, Katharine

Abstract

The authors examine the timing and quality of product introduction in an R&D stopping game, where they allow for horizontal and vertical differentiation in the product market. They observe that discontinuous changes in introduction dates can occur as firms' abilities as researchers change. Further, the authors observe differences in the social optimality of entry patterns depending on the underlying research abilities of the firms. Minimum quality standards and novelty requirements can play a role in correcting these suboptimal patterns of entry. The authors find that increasing the novelty requirement does not necessarily increase either the profits or, consequently, the investment levels of the initial innovator, contrary to much of the cumulative innovation literature. When the research abilities of the firms differ, either the high ability firm or the low ability firm may be the first mover. Policy interventions have much more ambiguous welfare effects in this asymmetric case, as they can change the order of entry.

Suggested Citation

  • Prokop, Jacek & Regibeau, Pierre & Rockett, Katharine, 2009. "Minimum quality standards and novelty requirements in a one-shot development race," Economics Discussion Papers 2009-33, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ifwedp:200933
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.economics-ejournal.org/economics/discussionpapers/2009-33
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/27731/1/604544197.PDF
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scarpa, Carlo, 1998. "Minimum quality standards with more than two firms1," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 665-676, September.
    2. Crampes, Claude & Hollander, Abraham, 1995. "Duopoly and quality standards," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 71-82, January.
    3. Hopenhayn, Hugo A & Mitchell, Matthew F, 2001. "Innovation Variety and Patent Breadth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 152-166, Spring.
    4. Manski Charles F, 2009. "Adaptive Partial Drug Approval: A Health Policy Proposal," The Economists' Voice, De Gruyter, vol. 6(4), pages 1-5, March.
    5. Beath, John & Katsoulacos, Yannis & Ulph, David, 1987. "Sequential Product Innovation and Industry Evolution," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(388a), pages 32-43, Supplemen.
    6. Partha Dasgupta & Joseph Stiglitz, 1980. "Uncertainty, Industrial Structure, and the Speed of R&D," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(1), pages 1-28, Spring.
    7. Dutta, Prajit K & Lach, Saul & Rustichini, Aldo, 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, Winter.
    8. Paul Klemperer, 1990. "How Broad Should the Scope of Patent Protection Be?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 113-130, Spring.
    9. Nancy T. Gallini, 1992. "Patent Policy and Costly Imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(1), pages 52-63, Spring.
    10. Hugo Hopenhayn & Gerard Llobet & Matthew Mitchell, 2006. "Rewarding Sequential Innovators: Prizes, Patents, and Buyouts," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(6), pages 1041-1068, December.
    11. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2006. "Sequential Innovation, Patents, and Innovation," NajEcon Working Paper Reviews 321307000000000021, www.najecon.org.
    12. Boom, Anette, 1995. "Asymmetric International Minimum Quality Standards and Vertical Differentiation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(1), pages 101-119, March.
    13. Leland, Hayne E, 1979. "Quacks, Lemons, and Licensing: A Theory of Minimum Quality Standards," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(6), pages 1328-1346, December.
    14. Christopher Harris & John Vickers, 1987. "Racing with Uncertainty," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 54(1), pages 1-21.
    15. Ted O'Donoghue, 1998. "A Patentability Requirement for Sequential Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(4), pages 654-679, Winter.
    16. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    17. Glenn C. Loury, 1979. "Market Structure and Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 93(3), pages 395-410.
    18. Ted O'Donoghue & Suzanne Scotchmer & Jacques-François Thisse, 1998. "Patent Breadth, Patent Life, and the Pace of Technological Progress," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(1), pages 1-32, March.
    19. Quint, Daniel & Einav, Liran, 2005. "Efficient entry," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 278-283, August.
    20. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    21. Kuhn, Michael, 2007. "Minimum quality standards and market dominance in vertically differentiated duopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 275-290, April.
    22. Choi, Jay Pil, 1993. "Dynamic R&D Competition, Research Line Diversity, and Intellectual Property Rights," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(2), pages 277-297, Summer.
    23. Uri Ronnen, 1991. "Minimum Quality Standards, Fixed Costs, and Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(4), pages 490-504, Winter.
    24. Reinganum, Jennifer F., 1989. "The timing of innovation: Research, development, and diffusion," Handbook of Industrial Organization,in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 14, pages 849-908 Elsevier.
    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. Rockett, Katharine, 2012. "Perspectives on the knowledge-based society: An introduction to the special issue," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW), vol. 6, pages =1-22.
    2. Regibeau Pierre M & Rockett Katharine E, 2006. "Administrative Delays as Barriers to Trade," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-47, September.
    3. Regibeau, Pierre & Rockett, Katherine E., 1996. "The timing of product introduction and the credibility of compatibility decisions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 801-823, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; minimum quality standards; novelty requirements; stopping game;

    JEL classification:

    • L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality
    • L16 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Industrial Organization and Macroeconomics; Macroeconomic Industrial Structure
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:zbw:ifwedp:200933. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/iwkiede.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.