Optimal fixed cost subsidies in Melitz-type models

This paper analyzes the reallocation and welfare effects of fixed cost subsidies in a Melitz-type model. In a closed economy, the planner trades off product variety and average productivity effects. Neither subsidies on entry fixed costs nor on operating fixed costs are welfare enhancing. These results reflect the Pareto optimality of the laissez faire equilibrium. In a “small” open economy à la Demidova and Rodríguez-Clare (J Int Econ 78(1):100–112, 2009), an entry fixed cost subsidy does not enhance welfare, while a small operating fixed cost subsidy does. Only the latter affects the relative attractiveness of exporting. The average firm thus realloactes labor from export to domestic activity and operates at a smaller scale, which allows for a larger increase in domestic product variety than in the closed economy.     

INEFFICIENT LOCK‐IN AND SUBSIDY COMPETITION*

This article studies a subsidy game among two asymmetric regions in a new trade model. Capital can freely move among regions, but capital rewards are repatriated to the region of residence. The activity of the modern sector is associated with positive spillovers. We study subsidy competition, starting from an equilibrium where the industry core is inefficiently locked in to the smaller region. When regions weigh workers’ and capitalists’ welfare equally, subsidy competition results in a relocation of industry to the larger region, restoring an efficient allocation. When workers’ welfare is weighted more heavily, the smaller (core) region may pay subsidies that are high enough to prevent a relocation of industry.     

产学研合作创新补贴方式研究:以欠发达地区企业为例

针对企业创新行为给予补贴是政府鼓励企业创新的常见政策,由于受自身条件限制,欠发达地区政府在创新补贴发放形式上必须作出合理的选择。在考虑企业学习吸收能力的同时引入创新投入分配比例系数并建立三阶段博弈模型,分析欠发达地区产学研合作创新政府补贴策略的最优方式。分析结果表明:欠发达地区政府实施创新补贴策略可以有效激励企业加大创新投入规模;在宽松的知识产权保护政策下,随着学习吸收能力的提高,企业投入产出及社会福利均增加;相比之下,政府采取创新产品补贴策略时的各项产出均优于创新投入补贴。     

Over- and under-investment according to different benchmarks

In a two-stage oligopoly, with investment in the first stage and quantity or price competition in the second stage, there is a “Common Wisdom” Theorem which states that we find over-investment if the goods are substitutes and competition is in strategic substitutes, or if goods are complements and competition is in strategic complements, and that we find under-investment if we have complements and strategic substitutes or substitutes and strategic complements. The existing literature, however, lacks a proof of this theorem and, in particular, it lacks a systematic comparison of the different benchmarks for over- and under-investment. A “naive” benchmark is the cost efficient investment with respect to the subgame perfect (closed loop) equilibrium quantities. Alternative benchmarks (which are more often proposed) are the open loop equilibrium investment or the welfare maximizing investment. The chosen benchmark is critical because the Common Wisdom Theorem applies (under certain conventional conditions) only for the naive benchmark. The other two benchmarks give rise to subcases.     

Economic Growth and (Re-)Distributive Policies in a Non-cooperative World

Many models show that redistribution is bad for growth. This paper argues that in a non-cooperative world optimizing, redistributing (“left-wing”) governments mimic non-redistributing (“right-wing”) policies for fear of capital loss if capital markets become highly integrated and the countries are technologically similar. “Left-right” competition leads to more redistribution and lower GDP growth than “left-left” competition. Efficiency differences allow for higher GDP growth and more redistribution than one's opponent. Irrespective of efficiency differences, however, “left-wing” governments have higher GDP growth when competing with other “left-wing” governments. The results may explain why one observes a positive correlation between redistribution and growth across countries, and why capital inflows and current account deficits may be good for relatively high growth.     

On the welfare effects of competition for foreign direct investments

This paper investigates welfare effects of subsidy competition for the location of a multinational enterprise. One of the competing regions benefits more from the inward investment but, in the absence of incentives, the multinational's preferred location is the other, more advanced region. The paper shows that subsidies, by making the multinational switch location, may increase aggregate welfare. If the multinational exports in the absence of incentives, the welfare effects of subsidy competition may look very different. Allowing subsidies attracts the direct investment, which otherwise would not take place, in one of the two regions. Further, it intensifies competition in the market. The paper shows that the welfare increasing role of incentives may be amplified, but also that the competition effect, by hurting domestic firms, may cancel out any other positive role of incentives.     

Subsidy competition and imperfect labor markets

This study presents a two‐country model of subsidy competition for manufacturing firms under labor market imperfections. Because subsidies affect the distribution of firms, subsidies influence unemployment rates and welfare in both countries. We show that when labor market frictions are high, subsidy competition is beneficial, although subsidies under subsidy competition are inefficiently high. In the coordinated equilibrium, the supranational authority provides a subsidy to firms that equal the expected total search costs, which increases the number of firms relative to laissez‐faire and improves welfare relative to laissez‐faire and subsidy competition. Finally, we find that a rise in a country's labor market frictions raises the equilibrium subsidy rate, affects unemployment rates, and lowers welfare.     

Competing for Foreign Direct Investment

The paper analyzes 'subsidy games' between countries in order to attract foreign direct investment (FDI) from a third country. The winner of this game results from the interaction of two factors, relative country size and employment gains from FDI: a large (or 'central') country is more likely to attract FDI, and so is a country with high unemployment. The subsidy equilibrium is compared with two alternative solutions: zero subsidies and first-best subsidies. It is shown that total welfare may be greater under subsidy competition than under zero subsidies: the gains from efficient location implied by subsidy competition may more than outweigh the losses from higher subsidies. Moreover, departing from subsidy competition to zero subsidies or to first-best subsidies (without side payments) implies a gain to one country and a loss to the other. This suggests that it may be difficult to reach a consensus to move away from the status quo of subsidy competition.     

Climate Policies and Induced Technological Change: Which to Choose, the Carrot or the Stick?

Policies to reduce emissions of greenhousegases such as CO₂, will affect the rate andpattern of technological change in alternativeenergy supply and other production processes.Imperfections in markets for non-pollutingtechnologies imply that a decentralised economydoes not deliver a socially optimal outcome,and this could justify policy interventionssuch as subsidies. This paper considers thewelfare effects of technology subsidies as partof a carbon abatement policy package. We arguethat the presence of spillovers in alternativeenergy technologies does not necessarily implythat subsidy policies are welfare improving. Weillustrate this point in the context of ageneral equilibrium model with two forms ofcarbon-free energy, an existing alternative energy which is a substitute for carbon-basedfuels, and new vintage energy which providesa carbon-free replacement for existing energyservices. Subsidisation of alternative energyon the grounds of spillover effects can bewelfare-worsening if it crowds-out new vintagetechnologies.     

R&;D spillovers and firms’ performance in Italy

Using a translog production function we estimate the impact of R&D spillovers on the output performance of Italian manufacturing firms over the period 1998-2003. Technological flows are measured through an asymmetric similarity index that takes also into account the geographical proximity of firms. Results show that R&D spillovers positively affect firms production and that geography matters in determining the role of the external technology. Moreover, we find that the effect of R&D spillovers is high in the Centre-South of Italy and that the stock of R&D spillovers is Morishima complement to the stock of R&D own-capital. The authors thank Giovanni Anania, Olof Ejermo, Vincenzo Scoppa, Alessandro Sterlacchini and Marco Vivarelli for useful comments on an earlier draft. We are also grateful to the participants at the Workshop on “Spatial Econometrics and Statistics” in Rome (University “Guido Carli, May 2006) and at the 2006 ADRES Conference, “Networks of Innovation and Spatial Analysis of Knowledge Diffusion” in St Etienne for helpful discussion and to an anonymous referee for many detailed and constructive comments on an earlier version. All remaining errors and omissions are our own. Financial support received by MIUR is gratefully acknowledged.     

International R&D Rivalry with Spillovers and Policy Cooperation in R&D Subsidies and Taxes

Abstract

We have investigated non-cooperative and jointly optimal R&D policies in the framework of Spencer & Brander (1983) in the presence of R&D spillovers. When R&D activities are strategic substitutes and the R&D game exhibits a positive externality, the result of Spencer & Brander (1983) reverses: the non-cooperative policy is a tax while the jointly optimal policy is a subsidy. Moreover, when R&D activities are strategic complements, the usual result of the prisoners' dilemma in the strategic subsidy game does not hold, implying that a welfare intervention is preferable over laissez-faire. When spillovers are sufficiently large, the joint welfare increases with subsidies being higher than those under non-cooperation.     

Environment,Directed Technical Change and Economic Policy

We study the effects of an economic policy in an endogenous growth general equilibrium framework where production of consumption goods requires two resource inputs: a polluting non-renewable resource and a non-polluting labour resource. The use of the former contributes to the accumulation of pollution in the atmosphere, which affects welfare. There is a specific research sector associated with each of those resources. We provide a full welfare analysis, and we describe the equilibrium paths in a decentralized economy. We go on to study the effects of three associated economic policy tools: a tax on the polluting resource, and two research subsidies. We show that the optimal environmental policy has two main effects; it delays the extraction of the resource and with it the level of polluting emissions and it reallocates research efforts, decreasing the amount put into “grey” research to the benefit of “green” research. We also show that the environmental policy is grey-biased in the short-term, and green-biased in the long-term. Finally, we compute the optimal values for these tools.      

International trade agreements, environmental policy, and relocation of production

This paper studies the influence of free trade agreements on national environmental policies and location strategies of polluting firms. It is shown that banning export subsidies makes relocation of production more attractive for firms. When export subsidies are banned relocation is profitable because: (1) the rival firm reduces output due to more stringent emission regulation in the host country of the investment and (2) relocation leads to lower emission tax rate in the original home country of the investing firm. When export subsidies are used, the first effect is absent because the host government is able to use the export subsidy to compensate the negative effect of more stringent emission taxation on domestic shareholders.     

Subsidizing charitable contributions: a natural field experiment comparing matching and rebate subsidies

We report the results of a field experiment conducted in conjunction with a mailed fundraising campaign of a nonprofit organization. The experiment is designed to compare the response of donors to subsidies in the form of matching amounts or rebated amounts. Matching subsidies are used by many corporations as an employee benefit; the US federal tax system encourages giving using a rebate subsidy by making donations tax deductible. The design includes a control group and two levels of subsidy of each type. Our main result is that matching subsidies result in larger total donations to charities than rebate subsidies, a result that is qualitatively similar to the lab findings. The estimated price elasticities for the matching subsidy are very similar to (and insignificantly different from) the lab experiments, while rebate subsidies lead to lower contributions in the field than in the lab. Since rebates in the field involve substantial lags and additional complications as compared with the “instant rebates” of the lab, this latter difference is not unexpected. The matching results are an important step in validating lab estimates of responsiveness to subsidies of charitable giving.

---

Electronic Supplementary Material  The online version of this article () contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.      

Attracting private investment: Tax reduction,investment subsidy,or both?

This paper uses a real-option model to examine the net benefit to a government from using tax cut and/or investment subsidy as incentives to induce immediate investment. Although earlier papers generally concluded that investment subsidy dominates tax cut, it is observed that many governments use a combination of subsidy and tax cut. We show that, when the government uses a different discount rate from private firms, and when it has to borrow money to provide an investment subsidy, it is possible to get an internal optimum; that is, it might be optimal for the government to provide an investment subsidy as well as charge a positive tax rate on the profits from the project. Thus, we provide an explanation for the puzzling fact that many governments provide an investment subsidy to a firm while simultaneously taxing its profits.     

Vertical integration, market foreclosure and quality investment

We study incentives to vertically integrate in an industry with vertically differentiated downstream firms. Vertical integration by one of the firms increases production costs for the rival. Increased production costs negatively affects quality investment both by the integrated firm and the unintegrated rival. Quality investment by both firms decreases under any (vertical integration) scenario. The decrease in quality invesment by both firms softens competition among downstream firms. By integrating first, a firm always produces the high quality good and earns higher profits. A fully integrated industry, with increased product differentiation, is observed in equilibrium. Due to increase in firm profits, social welfare under this structure is greater than under no integration.     

R&D subsidy and output subsidy in a duopoly: The role of technology spillover and R&D budget

Technology spillover and research and development (R&D) budget are relevant on government subsidies that aim at improving social welfare through enhancing R&D incentives of firms. However, there has not been related literature considering these two factors. To fill this gap, this paper examines the effect of technology spillover and R&D budget on R&D competition of duopolistic firms and government subsidies by constructing a game-theoretic model. We find that while each firm's profit sometimes increases with R&D budget for low coefficient of technology spillover, this profit may decrease with R&D budget for high coefficient of technology spillover due to the intensified R&D competition. We show that when both R&D budget and the coefficient of technology spillover remain high, R&D subsidy leads to higher social welfare than output subsidy and otherwise R&D subsidy results in lower social welfare.     

A re-analysis of the trade and welfare effects of export subsidies

This article proposes a new analysis of the market and welfare effects of export subsidies. Current analysis uses a default assumption of imports being prohibited by the exporting country. We contend that this assumption fails on several fronts: it is not consistent with the ceteris paribus assumption used in economic analysis; it is unrealistic in a world of fast-dropping transportation costs and free trade; and it hides the true effect of an export subsidy which is to create inefficient intra-industry trade. Correcting the analysis is important as, even with a proliferation of treaties, governments continue to enact policies to promote trade that may have similar effects to an export subsidy. Proceeding at a basic level, this article presents graphical analysis of export subsidies to replace the content in current undergraduate textbooks, in order to train the next generation of economists to think clearly about the effects of this policy.     

扶持我国出口导向企业实施RRC战略的理论依据

文章探讨本国企业与外国企业在以产量竞争的方式争夺出口市场的情况下,本国政府对本国企业实施提高竞争对手成本(RRC)战略的投资进行补贴的理论依据。通过两次运用两阶段博弈,文章对由补贴政策、企业RRC投资、产量和利润水平决定构成的三阶段博弈进行了因果关系的比较静态分析,认为在一般情况下,对本国企业RRC投资补贴有利于本国企业在国际市场中产量、市场份额和利润的增加,也有利于本国社会总福利水平的增加,对外国企业产量、利润和社会福利则形成负面影响。由于RRC战略较之掠夺性定价温和且更易实施,这一政策对于保持我国出口稳定增长具有一定积极意义。     

International Trade and the Environment: Theoretical and Policy Linkages

I review and extend three approaches to trade and environmental policies: competitive general equilibrium, oligopoly and monopolistic competition. The first two have surprisingly similar implications: deviations from first-best rules are justified only by constraints on policy choice (which motivates what I call a “single dividend” approach to environmental policy), and taxes and emissions standards differ in ways which reflect the Le Chatelier principle. I also show how environmental taxes may lead to a catastrophic relocation of industry in the presence of agglomeration effects, although not necessarily if there is a continuum of industries which differ in pollution intensity. *An earlier version was presented as an invited plenary lecture to the European Association for Environmental and Resource Economics Conference, Oslo, 1999.