IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/bejeap/v17y2017i3p22n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Vertical Integration Smooths Innovation Diffusion

Author

Listed:
  • Filippini Luigi

    (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo Gemelli 1Milano, Italy)

  • Vergari Cecilia

    (University of Bologna, Department of Economics, Piazza Scaravilli 2Bologna, Italy)

Abstract

Does vertical integration of an input innovator with a downstream firm entail innovation foreclosure? We study the licensing incentives of an independent input producer owning a patented product innovation which allows the downstream firms to improve the quality of their final goods. We consider two-part tariff contracts for both outside and incumbent innovators. We find that the incumbent innovator has always the incentive to license its innovation to the rival firm so that under vertical integration complete technology diffusion takes place. In contrast, the external patent holder may prefer exclusive licensing depending on the innovation size as well as on the set of allowed contracts. As a result vertical integration does not entail innovation foreclosure, rather it facilitates innovation diffusion with respect to vertical separation. As for the profitability, the vertical integration with either downstream firm is always privately profitable and it is welfare improving for large innovations: this implies that not all profitable mergers should be rejected.

Suggested Citation

  • Filippini Luigi & Vergari Cecilia, 2017. "Vertical Integration Smooths Innovation Diffusion," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 17(3), pages 1-22, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:bejeap:v:17:y:2017:i:3:p:22:n:3
    DOI: 10.1515/bejeap-2016-0126
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/bejeap-2016-0126
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/bejeap-2016-0126?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Claire Chambolle & Clémence Christin & Guy Meunier, 2015. "Optimal Production Channel for Private Labels: Too Much or Too Little Innovation?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 348-368, June.
    2. Morton I. Kamien & Yair Tauman, 1986. "Fees Versus Royalties and the Private Value of a Patent," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(3), pages 471-491.
    3. Klaus M. Schmidt, 2014. "Complementary Patents and Market Structure," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 68-88, March.
    4. Lemarié, S., 2005. "Vertical integration and the licensing of innovation with a fixed fee or a royalty," Working Papers 200517, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    5. Wauthy, Xavier, 1996. "Quality Choice in Models of Vertical Differentiation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 345-353, September.
    6. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1986. "How to License Intangible Property," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(3), pages 567-589.
    7. Henry Wang, X., 2002. "Fee versus royalty licensing in a differentiated Cournot duopoly," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 253-266.
    8. Wang, X. Henry, 1998. "Fee versus royalty licensing in a Cournot duopoly model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 55-62, July.
    9. Sen, Debapriya & Tauman, Yair, 2007. "General licensing schemes for a cost-reducing innovation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 163-186, April.
    10. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
    11. Motta, Massimo, 1993. "Endogenous Quality Choice: Price vs. Quantity Competition," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 113-131, June.
    12. Shi, Guanming & Chavas, Jean-Paul, 2011. "The Effects of Vertical Organization on the Pricing of Differentiated Products," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(3), pages 1-17, December.
    13. Roman Inderst & Greg Shaffer, 2009. "Market power, price discrimination, and allocative efficiency in intermediate‐goods markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 658-672, December.
    14. Claire Chambolle & Clémence Christin & Guy Meunier, 2015. "Optimal Production Channel for Private Labels: Too Much or Too Little Innovation?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 348-368, June.
    15. Chun‐Hsiung Liao & Debapriya Sen, 2005. "Subsidy In Licensing: Optimality And Welfare Implications," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 73(3), pages 281-299, June.
    16. Milliou, Chrysovalantou & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2007. "Upstream horizontal mergers, vertical contracts, and bargaining," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 963-987, October.
    17. Milliou, Chrysovalantou & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2012. "Vertical integration, knowledge disclosure and decreasing rival's cost," UC3M Working papers. Economics we1213, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    18. Can Erutku & Yves Richelle, 2007. "Optimal Licensing Contracts and the Value of a Patent," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 407-436, June.
    19. Annabelle Gawer & Rebecca Henderson, 2007. "Platform Owner Entry and Innovation in Complementary Markets: Evidence from Intel," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 1-34, March.
    20. Anil Arya & Brian Mittendorf, 2006. "Enhancing Vertical Efficiency Through Horizontal Licensing," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 333-342, May.
    21. Marvel, Howard P, 1982. "Exclusive Dealing," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(1), pages 1-25, April.
    22. Aldo González & Loreto Ayala, 2012. "Does Input Purchase Cooperation Foster Downstream Collusion?," Working Papers wp358, University of Chile, Department of Economics.
    23. Didier Laussel, 2008. "Buying Back Subcontractors: The Strategic Limits of Backward Integration," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(4), pages 895-911, December.
    24. Kamien, Morton I. & Tauman, Yair & Zang, Israel, 1988. "Optimal license fees for a new product," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 77-106, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xingtang Wang & Leonard F. S. Wang, 2022. "Indirect taxation, quality choice, and social welfare," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 1764-1772, September.
    2. Montinaro, Marta & Scrimitore, Marcella, 2019. "Per unit and ad valorem royalties in a patent licensing game," MPRA Paper 96642, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Cecilia Vergari & Luigi Filippini, 2023. "Innovation Diffusion and Strategic Outside Option in a Bargaining Game," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 63(1), pages 41-71, August.
    4. Xingtang Wang & Leonard F. S. Wang, 2022. "Corporate social responsibility, vertical product differentiation, and privatization policy," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 403-425, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marta San Martín & Ana I. Saracho, 2015. "Optimal Two-part Tariff Licensing Mechanisms," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 83(3), pages 288-306, June.
    2. Debapriya Sen & Giorgos Stamatopoulos, 2009. "Technology Transfer Under Returns To Scale," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 77(3), pages 337-365, June.
    3. Miao, Chun-Hui, 2016. "Licensing a technology standard," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 33-61.
    4. Sudipto Bhattacharya & Claude d’Aspremont & Sergei Guriev & Debapriya Sen & Yair Tauman, 2014. "Cooperation in R&D: Patenting, Licensing, and Contracting," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Kalyan Chatterjee & William Samuelson (ed.), Game Theory and Business Applications, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 265-286, Springer.
    5. Kim, Seung-Leul & Lee, Sang-Ho, 2021. "Optimal tariffs with emissions taxes under non-restrictive two-part licensing strategies by a foreign eco-competitor," MPRA Paper 108496, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Stefano Colombo & Luigi Filippini, 2015. "Patent Licensing with Bertrand Competitors," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 83(1), pages 1-16, January.
    7. Kishimoto, Shin & Watanabe, Naoki & Muto, Shigeo, 2011. "Bargaining outcomes in patent licensing: Asymptotic results in a general Cournot market," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 114-123, March.
    8. Stamatopoulos, Giorgos & Tauman, Yair, 2008. "Licensing of a quality-improving innovation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 410-438, November.
    9. Banerjee, Swapnendu & Poddar, Sougata, 2019. "‘To sell or not to sell’: Licensing versus selling by an outside innovator," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 293-304.
    10. Poddar, Sougata & Bouguezzi, Fehmi, 2011. "Patent licensing in spatial competition: Does pre-innovation cost asymmetry matter?," MPRA Paper 32764, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Kim, Seung-Leul & Lee, Sang-Ho, 2016. "The licensing of eco-technology under emission taxation: Fixed fee vs. auction," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 343-357.
    12. San Martín Lizarralde, Marta & Saracho de la Torre, Ana Isabel, 2012. "Two-part tariff licensing mechanisms," IKERLANAK http://www-fae1-eao1-ehu-, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.
    13. Sen, Debapriya & Tauman, Yair, 2007. "General licensing schemes for a cost-reducing innovation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 163-186, April.
    14. Sen, Debapriya & Tauman, Yair, 2018. "Patent licensing in a Cournot oligopoly: General results," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 37-48.
    15. Kabiraj, Abhishek & Kabiraj, Tarun, 2017. "Tariff induced licensing contracts, consumers’ surplus and welfare," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 439-447.
    16. Nisvan Erkal, 2005. "Optimal Licensing Policy in Differentiated Industries," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(252), pages 51-60, March.
    17. Yan, Qingyou & Yang, Le, 2018. "Optimal licensing schemes for a mixed ownership firm when facing uncertain R&D outcomes and technology spillover," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 550-572.
    18. Zhang, Huaige & Wang, Xuejun & Qing, Ping & Hong, Xianpei, 2016. "Optimal licensing of uncertain patents in a differentiated Stackelberg duopolistic competition market," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 215-229.
    19. Can Erutku & Yves Richelle, 2009. "Licensing a technological headstart," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 225-242.
    20. Lemarié, S., 2005. "Vertical integration and the licensing of innovation with a fixed fee or a royalty," Working Papers 200517, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    negative royalties; patent licensing; product innovation; two-part tariff; vertical differentiation; vertical integration;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L24 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Contracting Out; Joint Ventures

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:bejeap:v:17:y:2017:i:3:p:22:n:3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.