{"title":"The R&D Investment Decision Game with Product Differentiation","authors":"D. Buccella, L. Fanti, L. Gori","doi":"10.1515/bejte-2021-0129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article extends the cost-reducing R&D model with spillovers by d’Aspremont and Jacquemin (1988. “Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers.” The American Economic Review 78: 1133–7, 1990. “Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers: Erratum.” The American Economic Review 80: 641–2) to allow quantity-setting firms (Cournot rivalry) to play the non-cooperative R&D investment decision game with horizontal product differentiation. Unlike Bacchiega, Lambertini, and Mantovani (2010. “R&D-hindering Collusion.” The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy 10 (Topics): 66), who identify a parametric region (defined by the extent of technological spillovers and the efficiency of R&D activity), in which the game is a prisoner’s dilemma (self-interest and mutual benefit of cost-reducing innovation conflict), this work shows that product differentiation changes the game into a deadlock (self-interest and mutual benefit do not conflict), regardless of the parameter scale (i.e. also in the absence of spill-over effects). Then investing in R&D challenges the improvement of interventions aimed at favouring product differentiation. This is because social welfare when firms invest in cost-reducing R&D is greater than when firms do not invest in R&D. Alternatively, R&D subsidies can be used as a social welfare maximising tool also in the absence of R&D spillovers. These results also hold for price-setting firms (Bertrand rivalry).","PeriodicalId":44773,"journal":{"name":"B E Journal of Theoretical Economics","volume":"23 1","pages":"601 - 637"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"B E Journal of Theoretical Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bejte-2021-0129","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Abstract This article extends the cost-reducing R&D model with spillovers by d’Aspremont and Jacquemin (1988. “Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers.” The American Economic Review 78: 1133–7, 1990. “Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers: Erratum.” The American Economic Review 80: 641–2) to allow quantity-setting firms (Cournot rivalry) to play the non-cooperative R&D investment decision game with horizontal product differentiation. Unlike Bacchiega, Lambertini, and Mantovani (2010. “R&D-hindering Collusion.” The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy 10 (Topics): 66), who identify a parametric region (defined by the extent of technological spillovers and the efficiency of R&D activity), in which the game is a prisoner’s dilemma (self-interest and mutual benefit of cost-reducing innovation conflict), this work shows that product differentiation changes the game into a deadlock (self-interest and mutual benefit do not conflict), regardless of the parameter scale (i.e. also in the absence of spill-over effects). Then investing in R&D challenges the improvement of interventions aimed at favouring product differentiation. This is because social welfare when firms invest in cost-reducing R&D is greater than when firms do not invest in R&D. Alternatively, R&D subsidies can be used as a social welfare maximising tool also in the absence of R&D spillovers. These results also hold for price-setting firms (Bertrand rivalry).
期刊介绍:
We welcome submissions in all areas of economic theory, both applied theory and \"pure\" theory. Contributions can be either innovations in economic theory or rigorous new applications of existing theory. Pure theory papers include, but are by no means limited to, those in behavioral economics and decision theory, game theory, general equilibrium theory, and the theory of economic mechanisms. Applications could encompass, but are by no means limited to, contract theory, public finance, financial economics, industrial organization, law and economics, and labor economics.