IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ausecp/v56y2017i4p292-303.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Note on Optimal Industrial Policy Towards Bertrand Homogeneous Duopoly

Author

Listed:
  • Qi Duan
  • Jie Ma

Abstract

Recent studies in strategic trade and industrial policy analysis suggest that an investment subsidy, in the form of an R&D subsidy, a capacity subsidy or an advertising subsidy, would be a robust industrial policy recommendation towards an international differentiated oligopoly. However, in this paper, we show that this result does not carry over to the case of a Bertrand homogeneous duopoly. This result together with the fact that the optimal industrial policy is to set an investment subsidy when in product market competition firms play a Cournot output game, imply immediately that there hardly exists a robust industrial policy recommendation towards homogeneous goods industries.

Suggested Citation

  • Qi Duan & Jie Ma, 2017. "A Note on Optimal Industrial Policy Towards Bertrand Homogeneous Duopoly," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 292-303, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ausecp:v:56:y:2017:i:4:p:292-303
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-8454.12101
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8454.12101
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-8454.12101?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Neary, J Peter & Leahy, Dermot, 2000. "Strategic Trade and Industrial Policy towards Dynamic Oligopolies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 484-508, April.
    2. Elizabeth Schroeder & Victor Tremblay, 2015. "A Reappraisal of Strategic Trade Policy," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 435-442, December.
    3. Dermot Leahy & J. Peter Neary, 2000. "Robust Rules for Industrial Policy in open Economies," Working Papers 200021, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
    4. Jie Ma & Alistair M. Ulph, 2012. "Advertising Subsidy and International Oligopolistic Competition," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(4), pages 793-806, September.
    5. Dermot Leahy & J. Peter Neary, 2001. "Robust rules for industrial policy open economies," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 393-409.
    6. Brander, James A. & Spencer, Barbara J., 1985. "Export subsidies and international market share rivalry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1-2), pages 83-100, February.
    7. Jonathan Eaton & Gene M. Grossman, 1986. "Optimal Trade and Industrial Policy Under Oligopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(2), pages 383-406.
    8. Maggi, Giovanni, 1996. "Strategic Trade Policies with Endogenous Mode of Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 237-258, March.
    9. Elizabeth Schroeder & Victor J. Tremblay, 2016. "Strategic advertising policy in international oligopoly markets," The International Trade Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(1), pages 3-13, January.
    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. Partha Pratim Dube, 2018. "Bertrand Game Under Cost Function," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 489-496, December.

    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. Praveen Kujal & Juan Ruiz, 2003. "Cost Effectiveness of R&D and the Robustness of Strategic Trade Policy," International Trade 0302001, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 04 Feb 2003.
    2. Desai, Mihir A. & Hines Jr., James R., 2008. "Market reactions to export subsidies," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 459-474, March.
    3. Dermot Leahy & J. Peter Neary, 2013. "Oligopoly and Trade," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Daniel Bernhofen & Rod Falvey & David Greenaway & Udo Kreickemeier (ed.), Palgrave Handbook of International Trade, chapter 7, pages 197-235, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Hoefele, Andreas, 2016. "Endogenous product differentiation and international R&D policy," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 335-346.
    5. Choi, Kangsik & Lee, Ki-Dong & Lim, Seonyoung, 2016. "Strategic Trade Policies In International Rivalry When Competition Mode Is Endogenous," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 57(2), pages 223-241, December.
    6. Mustafa Caglayan & Murat Usman, 2004. "Incompletely informed policymakers and trade policy in oligopolistic industries," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 72(3), pages 283-297, June.
    7. Shengbao Ji & Yin-Fang Zhang & Tooraj Jamasb, 2014. "Reform of the Coal Sector in an Open Economy: The Case of China," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1445, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    8. Dermot Leahy & J. Neary, 2009. "Multilateral subsidy games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 41(1), pages 41-66, October.
    9. Delia Ionaºcu & Kresimir Zigic, 2005. "Strategic Tariff Protection, Market Conduct, and Government Commitment Levels in Developing Economies," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp249, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    10. John Gilbert & Onur A. Koska & Reza Oladi, 2022. "International trade, differentiated goods, and strategic asymmetry," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 88(3), pages 1178-1198, January.
    11. Kresimir Zigic, 2011. "Strategic Interactions in Markets with Innovative Activity: The Cases of Strategic Trade Policy and Market Leadership," CERGE-EI Books, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague, edition 1, number b06, May.
    12. Lim, Seonyoung & Choi, Kangsik, 2014. "Strategic Subsidy Policies with Endogenous Choice of Competition Mode," MPRA Paper 59462, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Dermot Leahy & J. Peter Neary, 2001. "Robust rules for industrial policy open economies," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 393-409.
    14. Tsai, Shoou-Rong & Tsai, Pan-Long & Weng, Yungho, 2018. "Endogenous strategic trade policy: The case of the third market model," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 676-682.
    15. Yoon, Jeong & Choi, Kangsik, 2018. "Why do export subsidies still exist? R&D and output subsidies," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 30-38.
    16. Tsuyoshi Toshimitsu, 2017. "Strategic Trade Policy and Network Compatibility," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 237-249, June.
    17. Praveen Kujal & Juan Ruiz, 2003. "Policy Synchronization and Staggering in a Dynamic Model of Strategic Trade," International Trade 0302003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Kresimir Zigic, 2010. "Second-Best Trade Policies, R&D Spillovers and Government (In)ability to Precommit in an Intra-Industry Trade Framework," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp427, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    19. Dewit, Gerda & Leahy, Dermot, 2004. "Rivalry in uncertain export markets: commitment versus flexibility," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 195-209, October.
    20. Žigić, Krešimir, 2011. "Does a ‘non-committed’ government always generate lower social welfare than its ‘committed’ counterpart? Strategic trade policy when consumer surplus matters," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 533-556.

    More about this item

    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:bla:ausecp:v:56:y:2017:i:4:p:292-303. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0004-900X .

    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.