Environmental Research Joint Ventures under Emission Taxes

The effect of environmentalpolicy depends crucially on the strategicbehavior of firms. Firms can undertakepollution abatement innovation cooperativelythrough environmental R&D joint ventures(RJVs). Environmental RJVs have not onlyenvironmental but also economic impacts. Threetypes of environmental RJV are discussed inthis paper: R&D cartelization in which firmschoose R&D efforts to maximize the jointprofit, RJV competition in which firms sharethe R&D fruits to maximize their own profits,and RJV cartelization in which firms share R&Dfruits and maximize the joint profit. An R&Dcartelization minimizes output quantities,maximizes the total emission, and minimizes thesocial surplus. An RJV cartelization with asufficiently high spillover coefficientmaximizes R&D efforts, minimizes the totalemission, and maximizes the social surplus.     

Vertical R&D Spillovers,Cooperation, Market Structure,and Innovation

This paper studies vertical R&D spillovers between upstream and downstream firms. The model incorporates two vertically related industries, with horizontal spillovers within each industry and vertical spillovers between the two industries. Four types of R&D cooperation are studied: no cooperation, horizontal cooperation, vertical cooperation, and simultaneous horizontal and vertical cooperation. Vertical spillovers always increase R&D and welfare, while horizontal spillovers may increase or decrease them. The comparison of cooperative settings in terms of R&D shows that no setting uniformly dominates the others. Which type of cooperation yields more R&D depends on horizontal and vertical spillovers, and market structure. The ranking of cooperative structures hinges on the signs and magnitudes of three "competitive externalities" (vertical, horizontal, and diagonal) which capture the effect of the R&D of a firm on the profits of other firms. One of the basic results of the strategic investment literature is that cooperation between competitors decreases R&D when horizontal spillovers are low; the model shows that this result does not necessarily hold when vertical spillovers are sufficiently high, and/or when horizontal cooperation is combined with vertical cooperation.     

R&D cooperation with asymmetric spillovers

Abstract.  This paper analyses R&D cooperation with asymmetric spillovers. It is shown that the change in R&D by a firm following cooperation is proportional to the gap between the spillover rate transmitted by that firm and a critical level of spillovers. In consequence, cooperation increases total R&D investments when the average of firms' spillover rates is sufficiently high. Whereas with symmetric spillovers cooperation is always beneficial to firms, with asymmetric spillovers only a very limited range of spillovers makes cooperation beneficial to both firms. Asymmetries also create a potential conflict between maximizing total welfare and maximizing effective cost reduction. JEL classification: L13, O33     

Cooperation vs. competition in R&D: The role of stability of equilibrium

We consider a model in which firms first choose process R&D expenditures and then compete in an output market. We show the symmetric equilibrium under R&D competition is sometimes unstable, in which case two asymmetric equilibria must also exist. For the latter, we find, in contrast to the literature that total profits are sometimes higher with R&D competition than with research joint venture cartelization (due to the cost asymmetry of the resulting duopoly in the noncooperative case). Furthermore, these equilibria provide another instance of R&D-induced firm heterogeneity.     

Spillovers,product innovation and R&D cooperation: a theoretical model

ABSTRACT

We analyze the impact of post-innovation knowledge spillovers on firms’ decisions to invest and cooperate in R&D, forming a research joint venture (RJV). We study the case of two potential investors involved in a non-tournament stochastic competition for developing a new but imitable product. We propose a theoretical model where cooperation may emerge as a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium of a three-stage game. In the first stage, firms decide whether to cooperate; in the second, they decide whether to invest; and in the third, they compete. We show that firms cooperate in R&D when the spillovers are high enough and the fixed costs associated with R&D activities are low enough; however, our analysis suggests that forming an RJV may not always be socially optimal, and subsidizing R&D cooperation may not be efficient. We propose an optimal scheme of subsidies, which should be designed according to the intensity of the spillovers, the level of the R&D costs, and the probability of innovation success. Finally, we show that in the case of mergers the private incentive to invest is maximized, and firms may not need public subsidies to cooperate. When subsidies are costly, not hindering mergers may be the second-best solution.     

Strategic timing in R&D agreements

We study the endogenous formation of R&D agreements in a R&D/Cournot duopoly model with spillovers where also the timing of R&D investments is endogenous. This allows us to consider the incentives for firms to sign R&D agreements over time. It is shown that, when both R&D spillovers and investment costs are sufficiently low, firms may find difficult to maintain a stable agreement due to the strong incentive to invest noncooperatively as leaders. In this case, the stability of an agreement requires that the joint investment occurs at the initial stage, thus avoiding any delay. When spillovers are sufficiently high, the coordination of R&D efforts becomes a profitable option, although firms may also have an incentive to sequence noncooperatively their investment over time. Finally, when spillovers are asymmetric and knowledge mainly leaks from the leader to the follower, investing as follower may become extremely profitable, making R&D agreements hard to sustain unless firms strategically delay their joint investment in R&D.     

Information sharing and the stability of cooperation in research joint ventures*

The model studies information sharing and the stability of cooperation in cost reducing Research Joint Ventures (RJVs). In a three-stage game-theoretic framework, firms decide on participation in a RJV, information sharing along with R&D expenditures, and output. An important feature of the model is that voluntary information sharing between cooperating firms increases information leakage from the RJV to outsiders. It is found that RJVs representing a larger portion of firms in the industry are more likely to share information. It is also found that when sharing information is costless, firms generally don't choose intermediate levels of information sharing: they share all the information or none at all. The size of the RJV is found to depend on three effects: a coordination effect, an information sharing effect, and a competition effect. Depending on the relative magnitudes of these effects, the size of the RJV may increase or decrease with spillovers. In response to an increase in leakages, RJV members reduce their R&D spending. In addition, they either increase the RJV size while maintaining information sharing unchanged (when leakages are low), or they reduce both information sharing and RJV size (when leakages are high).     

R&D and foreign direct investment with asymmetric spillovers

This paper analyzes how firms’ R&D investment decisions are affected by asymmetries in knowledge transmission, considering different sources of asymmetry such as unequal know-how management capabilities and spillovers localization within an international oligopoly. We show that a better ability to manage knowledge flows incentivizes the firm to invest more in R&D. By introducing geographically bounded spillovers, we also find that one-way foreign direct investment (FDI) stimulates the multinational enterprise to raise its own R&D and that an FDI equilibrium is more likely to occur. Finally, spillovers localization leading to two-way FDI is welfare improving when compared with non-localized spillovers.     

STRATEGIC R&D AND NETWORK COMPATIBILITY

We analyse the effects of network externalities in strategic R&D competition. We present a model of two firms competing with R&D investments and prices in a differentiated consumer market. Buyers form firm-specific networks which can be compatible. A high degree of compatibility and large spillovers moderate price competition due to weak strategic value of firm-specific networks and R&D investments, respectively. Asymmetry in product qualities brings out network effects that cancel out in conventional symmetric settings. The lower quality firm increases R&D and decreases its price as spillovers or network compatibility is increased. This happens when R&D and firm-specific network size have high strategic value.     

R&D Efficiency Gains Due to Cooperation

A theoretical and widely-quoted finding is that levels of cooperative R&D exceed noncooperative R&D levels when technological spillovers are relatively large, while the opposite holds for relatively small technological spillovers. We qualify this result by showing that for relatively small technological spillovers the comparison is not driven by the extent of technological spillover, but by the increase in technological spillover due to cooperation in R&D. In particular, an agreement to cooperate in R&D always raises R&D efforts if the post-cooperative technological spillover rate is high enough.     

Infra-industry spillovers and R&D cooperation: Theory and evidence

We analyse both the theoretical and the empirical side of the issue of R&D spillovers. Each firm's R&D costs are increasing in the amount of information transmitted to other firms, and we account for the possibility that firms control spillovers. We consider both Cournot-Nash and Cournot-Stackelberg behavior. The empirical analysis suggests that (i) firms' control on spillovers is relatively low; (ii) the cost-saving effect associated to joint ventures or R&D cartels is confirmed for industries where firms rely mainly upon own R&D as a source of innovation; (iii) R&D cooperation may increase information sharing, thereby enhancing spillovers.     

R&D competition, absorptive capacity, and market shares

This paper deals with an oligopolistic industry where firms are engaged in cost-reducting R&D activity to maximize their market shares. The existence and uniqueness of a feedback-Nash-optimal R&D strategy for each firm are discussed. Our simulations highlight that variations in spillovers hardly influence the firms' R&D investment, if their absorptive capacities to exploit extramural knowledge depend on their R&D efforts. Moreover, extramural knowledge cannot completely replace in-house R&D. However, a high level of public R&D favors the firm with the most restrictive R&D expenditure constraint and/or with the lowest initial R&D stock, provided it invests in R&D.     

Cournot duopoly and environmental R&D under regulator’s precommitment to an emissions tax

This study examines the environmental R&D (E-R&D) of Cournot duopolists with end-of-pipe technology under a regulator’s precommitment to an emissions tax. Under technological spillover effect, the government invariably prefers E-R&D cartelization to E-R&D competition. Highly contrary to earlier studies, consumer surplus is not necessarily maximized by environmental research joint venture cartelization, although this offers private and social incentives.     

Intra-industry spillovers and innovation: An econometric analysis at the firm level

This paper studies spillover effects of innovation at the firm level and the comparability of generalized method of moments (GMM) estimators with maximum likelihood estimators of the earlier studies. Two sources of spillovers are identified, i.e. intra-industry R&D expenditure and intra-industry innovation output. This paper estimates a negative R&D spillover effect and a positive output spillover effect. Because of the substitution effect of intra-industry R&D spillovers, the elasticity of patent with respect to firm's own R&D expenditure is greater than those estimated in the earlier studies. With GMM, individual effects are incorporated into the models either by developing proxies for them or attempting to eliminate them.     

DEFECTING FROM R&D COOPERATION

This paper introduces defection into the strategic R&D model. In defecting, a firm cheats by choosing its R&D expenditures to maximise its own profits, instead of maximising the joint profits of the cooperating firms. Two cooperative environments are considered: R&D cartelisation, where firms coordinate R&D activities; and RJV cartelisation, where firms coordinate R&D activities and share information. Under R&D cartelisation, defection entails an increase (decrease) in R&D and effective spillovers for low (high) spillovers; whereas under RJV cartelisation, defection always entails a decrease in R&D and effective spillovers. Under R&D cartelisation, consumer surplus and total welfare increase (decrease) with defection when spillovers are low (high). Whereas consumer surplus and welfare always decrease with defection under RJV cartelisation. Under R&D cartelisation, the incentives for defection first decrease then increase with spillovers; they also increase with the size of the market, but decline with production costs and R&D costs. Moreover, the incentives for defection are higher under RJV cartelisation. With low spillovers under RJV cartelisation, a firm prefers to be subject to defection by the other firm, to not cooperating at all. Punishment for defection is considered, under the form of abstaining from information sharing.     

R&D spillover effects on firms’ export behavior: evidence from South Korea

This paper investigates the spillover effects of R&D investments made by foreign multinational enterprises (MNEs) and domestic firms on their export activities, using a manufacturing firm-level panel dataset from South Korea. The theoretical framework predicts two conflicting spillover effects: positive technology spillovers and negative market rivalry spillovers. Thus, the net spillover effect is determined by the relative degree of the two conflicting spillovers. The empirical results show that negative intra-industry spillovers exist from the R&D of foreign MNEs on the export performance of firms, which implies that, in general, negative market rivalry spillovers dominate positive technology spillovers. However, notably, in the case of firms equipped with absorptive capacity, the negative spillovers can be alleviated; firms can gain positive spillovers by muting negative ones. Firms without absorptive capacity cannot avoid such negative effects. This paper shows that absorptive capacity is vital in capturing positive spillovers as firms build competency by accumulating their own know-how and improving their ability to capture better external technologies.     

Equal treatment and socially optimal R&D in duopoly with one‐way spillovers

This paper examines the standard symmetric two‐period R&D model with a deterministic one‐way spillover structure: know‐how flows only from the high R&D firm to the low R&D firm (but not vice versa). Though firms are ex ante identical, one obtains a unique asymmetric equilibrium (pair) in R&D investments, leading to interfirm heterogeneity in the industry. R&D cooperation by means of a joint lab is considered and compared to the non cooperative solution. The main part of the paper provides a second‐best welfare analysis in which we show that the joint lab yields a socially optimal R&D level subject to an equal treatment (of firms) constraint, which also coincides with the noncooperative solution in the absence of spillovers. We also investigate the welfare costs of this equal treatment constraint and find that they can be quite significant.     

What drives the choice of the type of partner in R&D cooperation? Evidence for Spanish manufactures and services

We analyse the heterogeneity in firms’ decisions to engage in R&D cooperation, taking into account the type of partner (competitors, suppliers or customers, and research institutions) and the sector to which the firm belongs (manufactures or services). We use information from the Technological Innovation Panel (PITEC) for Spanish firms and estimate multivariate probit models corrected for endogeneity which explicitly consider the interrelations between the different R&D cooperation strategies. We find that placing a higher importance to publicly available information (incoming spillovers), receiving public funding and firm size increase the probability of cooperation with all kind of partners but the role is much stronger in the case of cooperative agreements with research institutions and universities. Our results also suggest that R&D intensity and the importance attributed to the lack of qualified personnel as a factor hampering innovation are key factors influencing positively R&D cooperation activities in the service sector but not in manufactures.     

The two ways of FDI R&D spillovers: evidence from the French manufacturing industry

Using French firm-level panel data, this study investigates R&D spillovers from inward foreign direct investment (FDI) with respect to both horizontal and vertical linkages (backward and forward). Using a Crepon, Duguet and Mairesse (CDM) model, we estimate an R&D-augmented Cobb–Douglas production function to assess the impact of R&D spillovers on firm performance. The results emphasize that international spillovers (from foreign affiliates to local firms) have a greater effect on firm performance than reverse spillovers (from local firms to foreign affiliates) and are more likely to be backward than forward. Moreover, the effect of backward spillovers depends on a firm’s absorptive capacity and is amplified in the case of outsourcing relationships.     

R&D spillovers and productivity: Evidence from U.S. manufacturing microdata

This paper deals with the estimation of the impact of technology spillovers on productivity at the firm level. Panel data for American manufacturing firms on sales, physical capital inputs, employment and R&D investments are linked to R&D data by industry. The latter data are used to construct four different sets of `indirect' R&D stocks, representing technology obtained through spillovers. The differences between two distinct kinds of spillovers are stressed. Cointegration analysis is introduced into production function estimation. Spillovers are found to have significant positive effects on productivity, although their magnitudes differ between high-tech, medium-tech and low-tech firms. First version received: April 1997/final version received: April 1999