成本不对称条件下双寡头 R&D 合作行为分析

本文构建了存在技术外溢且成本不对称情况的双寡头垄断企业R&D投入和产量决策的模型,这一模型是AJ模型的拓展,旨在分析不同成本和技术外溢程度对企业R&D投入和产量决策影响.分析了完全不合作、半合作、完全合作和福利最大化状态下,不同的成本和技术外溢程度对企业间R&D合作行为的影响.通过对模型结果和AJ模型结果的横向和纵向对比得出,成本较低的企业有较大的R&D投入倾向,在技术外溢程度较低的情况下,完全不合作是次优状态,在技术外溢程度较高的情况下,半合作是次优状态.     

异质产品双寡头企业R&D最佳技术含量的博弈分析

技术创新已成为企业获得竞争优势的重要途径。在异质产品双寡头市场中,企业的技术创新存在一个最佳技术含量可使企业利润最大的问题,企业差异化程度越大,边际技术含量的投入参数越小,则所能达到的最佳技术含量越高。同时,企业间开展合作创新能提高最佳技术含量,并有利于技术进步。     

浅谈企业间的合作与非合作博弈

非合作博弈的结果可能缺乏效率性,采用什么样的非合作博弈能提高效率一直是人们关注的问题。通过讨论双寡头企业的合作型竞争问题,运用补偿激励原则,在非合作博弈框架内讨论企业间的合作关系,构造了相应的博弈模型。最后,非合作博弈模型的分析结果,每位参与者都理性地迫使自己和其他参与者,放弃皆大欢喜的共赢结果,而接受一个各方都极为不利的局面。     

寡头垄断企业技术创新最佳技术含量的博弈分析

构建了双寡头垄断企业技术创新的收益函数和博弈模型,对双寡头垄断竞争企业的技术创新进行了定量分析,并与两企业合作创新的情况作对比,说明企业的技术创新有一个最佳的技术含量,而且技术含量越高的行业,越容易形成寡头垄断;并推翻了以往模型中得出的认为不合作对社会更有效率的说法。提出应鼓励企业,尤其是创新空间很大的企业之间进行合作,而不是一味地提倡竞争,并对模型进行了实例研究。     

成本不对称条件下双寡头R＆D合作行为分析

本文构建了存在技术外溢且成本不对称情况的双寡头垄断企业R＆D投入和产量决策的模型，这一模型是AJ模型的拓展，旨在分析不同成本和技术外溢程度对企业R＆D投入和产量决策影响。分析了完全不合作、半合作、完全合作和福利最大化状态下，不同的成本和技术外溢程度对企业间R＆D合作行为的影响。通过对模型结果和AJ模型结果的横向和纵向对比得出，成本较低的企业有较大的R＆D投入倾向，在技术外溢程度较低的情况下，完全不合作是次优状态，在技术外溢程度较高的情况下，半合作是次优状态。     

基于我国成品油定价机制的石油双寡头行为分析

我国成品油定价实行最高零售限价已三年有余,价格管制在平抑国际油价冲击的同时也产生许多问题,管制效果备受争议,政府的补贴政策也饱受诟病.基于成品油最高零售限价,石油双寡头、寡头与政府之间的博弈行为表明:最高零售限价不能解决高油价问题,对形成成品油市场的竞争格局作用不大,而且政府在与石油寡头的博弈中处于弱势地位,针对国有石油企业的补贴政策将造成财政资金的浪费.我国成品油定价改革方向为市场定价,根本问题是尚未形成垄断竞争的市场格局.成品油定价改革应在培育垄断竞争格局的基础上,改革燃油税为从价计征、完善石油储备体系,为市场化定价改革铺平道路.     

校企合作技术创新的博弈分析

面对国内外激烈的竞争压力和技术要求,企业与具有知识密集和专家众多的高校合作,创新才有希望。从博弈理论的角度出发,高校和企业长期合作对双方都有利,因而高校和企业在技术创新中应该加强合作,选择适合双方的合作模式,建立长期合作和信任机制,并努力寻求政府的帮助,从而实现双方的共赢。     

汽车工业研发的合作博弈

汽车工业研发的现状基本上是一个合作博弈的结构，合作博弈理论在汽车工业中是适用的。建立了汽车工业的研发投入“官产学”合作博弈模型，阐述了合作博弈各方在研发中的作角，最后提出了最优化研发合作博弈的结论。     

双寡头市场上下游企业合作创新动力分析

产业链中的企业通过合作创新在降低原材料、零部件、产成品生产成本的同时,也可以满足不断变化的市场需求,提高产业链的整体收益.本文通过建模分析双寡头市场下上下游企业进行合作创新决策的动力.     

基于非合作博弈的期货市场策略分析

本文基于非合作博弈的方法,通过建立非合作博弈模型对期货市场多空双方的行动策略进行分析,分别就完全信息博弈、不完全信息博弈和不完美信息博弈三种不同的博弈环境,讨论了多空双方在不同的市场形势下的行动策略、博弈的均衡及结果。分析结果表明在不同的博弈环境下,无论是均势市场、多头市场还是空头市场,资金和信息对于期货市场多空双方的博弈策略具有至关重要的影响。基于此结论,本文进一步提出,为了获得资金优势和信息优势,建立期货投资基金,形成博弈联盟是一种有效的博弈形式,以此为基础的合作博弈分析方法是分析联盟博弈的有效方法。     

转移成本、价格歧视和非对称寡头竞争

通过在Hotelling空间差异模型的基础上结合转移成本构建非对称企业竞争博弈模型.主要研究在非对称情况下,两企业在一致定价与价格歧视下竞争的均衡结果.还对两种不同定价体制下的均衡结果进行了比较,分析价格歧视是否强化竞争.研究发现价格歧视对竞争的效应是不确定的,很大程度受到两企业不对称程度的影响.     

企业创新竞争的期权博弈行为分析

本文在不确定环境中,探讨专利权体制下实物期权与创新竞争的相互关系．建立模型刻画了两个对称企业在合作与非合作情况下进行创新投资的最佳策略。企业间的竞争并不一定损害延迟期权的价值,相反,企业对引发专利竞争的畏惧使竞争的影响内在化,进一步提高了延迟的价值,推迟了投资时间。     

Endogenous Timing in a Mixed Duopoly: Price Competition

The endogenous order of moves is analyzed in a mixed duopoly for differentiated goods, where firms choose whether to set prices sequentially or simultaneously. It is shown that, in contrast to the private duopoly where firms set prices sequentially, in the mixed duopoly firms choose prices simultaneously. Moreover, the result obtained in the mixed duopoly under price competition differs from the one under quantity competition, since in the latter case decisions are taken sequentially.      

Price Competition and Consumer Externalities in a Vertically Differentiated Duopoly with Information Disparities

In this paper, we extend the model of vertical product differentiation to consider information disparities about quality differences and their effects on price competition. If uninformed consumers overestimate vertical differentiation, asymmetric information is a source of market power and informed consumers exert positive externalities on high quality product purchasers and negative externalities on low quality product purchasers. Such a result is consistent with the fact that information undermines brand. If uninformed consumers are skeptical, adverse selection issues arise and market demands may be perfectly inelastic to prices. With elastic demands equilibrium prices may be either distorted downwards or reflect real quality if the share of informed consumers is suffciently high. Therefore, with skeptical consumers firms may want either to signal quality or subsidize information provision.     

Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly With Network Compatibility Effects

We consider the efficiency of price and quantity competition in a network products market, where we observe product compatibility with network externalities (hereafter, network compatibility effects). In particular, if network compatibility effects between firms are sufficiently asymmetric, the Cournot equilibrium is more efficient than the Bertrand equilibrium in terms of larger consumer, producer and total surpluses. Then, we consider an endogenous choice of the strategic variables, price and quantity. If the degree of network compatibility effects of the rival firm is larger (smaller) than the degree of product substitutability, then choosing prices (quantities) is a dominant strategy for the firm. Thus, if the network compatibility effects of both firms are larger (smaller), the Bertrand (Cournot) equilibrium arises. Furthermore, if the network compatibility effects between the firms are sufficiently asymmetric, the firm with a larger (smaller) network compatibility effect than a certain level of product substitutability chooses quantities (prices). In this case, the Cournot–Bertrand equilibrium arises, which is less (more) efficient than the Cournot equilibrium in terms of consumer (producer) surplus.     

A Noncooperative Analysis of Hotelling's Location Game

We study the location equilibrium in Hotelling's model of spatial competition. As d'Aspremontet al.have shown, with quadratic consumer transportation cost the two sellers will seek to move as far away from each other as possible. We show that the location game possesses an infinity of mixed strategy Nash equilibria. In these equilibria coordination failure invalidates the principle of “maximum differentiation” and firms may even locate at the same point.Journal of Economic LiteratureClassification Numbers: C72, D43, L11.     

网络外部性下基于投资溢出的企业合作研发博弈模型

本文建立了网络外部性环境下基于投资溢出的企业合作研发博弈模型,研究了企业合作研发策略,分析了网络外部性、兼容性以及投资溢出等对企业合作研发动机、企业利润和社会福利等的影响。研究表明,合作研发能提高企业利润和社会福利;兼容性较大或外部性较小时,提高产品外部性会增强企业合作研发意愿;提高兼容性或投资溢出则始终会增强企业合作研发意愿,提高企业利润和社会福利。因此,政府应鼓励企业生产高网络外部性和高兼容性的产品,并增强投资溢出效应,激励企业投入更多研发资源,提高企业利润和社会福利。     

R&D Subsidies versus R&D Cooperation in a Duopoly with Spillovers and Pollution

We introduce pollution, as a by‐product of production, into a non‐tournament model of R&D with spillovers. Technology policy takes the form of either R&D subsidisation or pre‐competitive R&D cooperation. We show that, when the emissions tax is exogenous, the optimal R&D subsidy can be negative, i.e. there should be a tax on R&D, depending on the extent of the appropriability problem and the degree of environmental damage. In a wide class of cases, depending on the parameter values, welfare in the case of R&D cooperation, is lower than welfare in the case of R&D subsidisation.