Journal of Economics

, Volume 112, Issue 3, pp 253–282 | Cite as

Innovation or imitation? The effect of spillovers and competitive pressure on firms’ R&D strategy choice

Article

Abstract

In this paper a firm’s R&D strategy is assumed to be endogenous and allowed to depend on both internal firm characteristics and external factors. Firms choose between two strategies, either they engage in R&D or abstain from own R&D and imitate the outcomes of innovators. This yields three types of equilibria, in which either all firms innovate, some firms innovate and others imitate, or no firm innovates. Firms’ equilibrium strategies crucially depend on external factors. We find that the efficiency of intellectual property rights protection positively affects firms’ incentives to engage in R&D, while excessive competitive pressure has a negative effect. In addition, smaller firms are found to be more likely to become imitators when the product is homogeneous and the level of spillovers is high. Regarding social welfare our results indicate that strengthening intellectual property protection can have an ambiguous effect. In markets characterized by a high rate of innovation a reduction of intellectual property rights protection can discourage innovative performance substantially. However, a reduction of patent protection can also increase social welfare because it may induce imitation. This indicates that policy issues such as the optimal length and breadth of patent protection cannot be resolved without taking into account specific market and firm characteristics.

Keywords

Innovation Imitation Spillovers Product differentiation Market competition Intellectual property rights protection 

JEL Classification

O31 O34 L13 C62 C72 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are very grateful to the participants in these meetings and, especially, to Reinhilde Veugelers, Matthias Dahm, Xose-Luís Varela, Ricardo Flores-Fillol, Galina Zudenkova, and two anonymous referees for their comments and suggestions. The authors also acknowledge financial support from the Spanish “Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación” under project ECO2010-17113.

References

  1. Aghion P, Howitt P (1992) A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica 60:323–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aghion P, Harris C, Howitt P, Vickers J (2001) Competition, imitation, and growth with step-by-step innovation. Rev Econ Stud 68:467–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aghion P, Bloom N, Blundell R, Griffith R, Howitt P (2005) Competition and innovation: an inverted-U relationship. Q J Econ 120:701–728Google Scholar
  4. Amir R, Wooders J (2000) One-way spillovers, endogenous innovator/imitator roles, and research joint ventures. Games Econ Behav 31:1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arora A, Gambardella A (1994) The changing technology of technological change: general and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour. Res Policy 32:523–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arrow K (1962) Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In: Nelson R (ed) The rate and direction of inventive activity: economic and social factors. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  7. Bessen J, Maskin E (2009) Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation. RAND J Econ 40:611–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blundell R, Griffith R, Van Reenen J (1999) Market share, market value and innovation in a panel of British manufacturing firms. Rev Econ Stud 66:529–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boldrin M, Levine D (2009) Market size and intellectual property protection. Int Econ Rev 50:855–881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De Bondt R, Slaets P, Cassiman B (1992) The degree of spillovers and the number of rivals for maximum effective R &D. Int J Ind Organ 10:35–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Bondt R (1996) Spillovers and innovative activities. Int J Ind Organ 15:1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boone J (2000) Competitive pressure: the effects on investments in product and process innovation. RAND J Econ 31:549–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bower JL, Christensen CM (1995) Disruptive technologies: catching the wave. Harv Bus Rev 73:43–53Google Scholar
  14. Bowley AL (1924) The mathematical groundwork of economics. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. Braguinsky S, Gabdrakhmanov S, Ohyama A (2007) A theory of competitive industry dynamics with innovation and imitation. Rev Econ Dyn 10:729–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cefis E, Orsenigo L (2001) The persistence of innovative activities. A cross-countries and cross-sectors comparative analysis. Res Policy 30:1139–1158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cefis E (2003) Is there persistence in innovative activities? Int J Ind Organ 21:489–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Che J, Qiu L, Zhou W (2009) Intellectual property rights enforcement in imperfect markets. Levine’s Working Paper Archive, David K. LevineGoogle Scholar
  19. Cohen WM, Klepper St (1992) The anatomy of industry R &D intensity distributions. Am Econ Rev 82:773–799Google Scholar
  20. Cohen WM, St Klepper (1996) Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries: the case of process and product R &D. Rev Econ Stat 78:232–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Czarnitzki D, Etro F, Kraft K (2008) The effect of entry on R &D investment of leaders: theory and empirical evidence. ZEW Discussion Paper No. 08–078, MannheimGoogle Scholar
  22. Dasgupta P, Stiglitz J (1980) Industrial structure and the nature of innovative activity. Econ J 90:226–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. d’Aspremont C, Jacquemin A (1988) Cooperative and noncooperative R &D in duopoly with spillovers. Am Econ Rev 78:1133–1137Google Scholar
  24. Fershtman C, Markovich S (2010) Patents, imitation and licensing in an asymmetric dynamic R &D race. Int J Ind Organ 28:113–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Futia C (1980) Schumpeterian competition. Q J Econ 94:675–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gallini NT, Scotchmer S (2002) Intellectual property: when is it the best incentive system? In: Jaffe A, Lerner J, Stern S (eds) Innovation policy and the economy, vol 2. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  27. Gans J, Stern S (2003) The product market and the market for ideas: commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs. Res Policy 32:333–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gans J, Hsu DH, Stern S (2008) The impact of uncertain intellectual property rights on the market for ideas: evidence for patent grant delays. Manage Sci 54:982–997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Geroski P (1990) Innovation, technological opportunity, and market structure. Oxford Econ Papers 42:586–602Google Scholar
  30. Gilbert R, Newbery D (1982) Preemptive patenting and the persistence of monopoly. Am Econ Rev 72:514–526Google Scholar
  31. Grossman G, Helpman E (1991) Endogenous product cycles. Econ J 101:1214–1229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Halmenschlager C (2006) Spillovers and absorptive capacity in a patent race. Manch Sch 74:85–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Helpman E (1993) Innovation, imitation, and intellectual property rights. Econometrica 61:1247–1280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Henderson R, Cockburn I (1996) Scale, scope, and spillovers: determinants of research productivity in the pharmaceutical industry. RAND J Econ 27:32–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Palokangas T (2011) Optimal patent length and breadth in an economy with creative destruction and non-diversifiable risk. J Econ 102:1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Reinganum J (1983) Uncertain innovation and the persistence of monopoly. Am Econ Rev 73:741–748Google Scholar
  37. Schmidt RC (2013) Price competition and innovation in markets with brand loyalty. J Econ 109:147–173Google Scholar
  38. Schumpeter J (1934) The theory of economic development: an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest and the business cycle (transl. Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung, 1911)Google Scholar
  39. Schumpeter J (1942) Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. Allen & Unwin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  40. Segestrom P (1991) Innovation, imitation, and economic growth. J Political Econ 99:807–827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shankar V, Carpenter GS, Krishnamurthi L (1998) Late mover advantage: how innovative late entrants outsell pioneers. J Mark Res 35:54–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Theilen B (2012) Product differentiation and competitive pressure. J Econ 107:257–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tishler A, Milstein I (2009) R &D wars and the effects of innovation on the success and survivability of firms in oligopoly markets. Int J Ind Organ 27:519–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Vives X (2008) Innovation and competitive pressure. J Ind Econ 56:419–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zhou W (2009) Innovation, imitation and competition. B E J Econ Anal Policy 9(1), article 27Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Department Information and Communication TechnologiesCentre for European Economic Research (ZEW)MannheimGermany
  2. 2.Departament d’Economia and CREIPUniversitat Rovira i VirgiliReusSpain

Personalised recommendations