IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/bstrat/v5y1996i1p1-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technology Strategy In A Regulation‐Driven Market: Lessons From The Us Superfund Program

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew J. Hoffman

Abstract

Estimates by the US Office of Technology Assessment of the costs to clean up the 1246 EPA National Priority List sites stand at more than $500 billion over the next 50 years. This cost estimate is based on existing technologies which are neither as technically advanced nor economically efficient as is necessary to realistically complete the job. However, despite the potential profits for remediation technology vendors, new and innovative technologies are not entering the market as rapidly as is needed. This is the result of major flaws in the US regulatory program, the Superfund, for dealing with the issue. Using neoclassical economic theories of technological change, the two primary obstacles to remediation technology research are identified: appropriability and market uncertainty. The conclusions reached offer valuable lessons for US policy‐makers in revamping the present system. These lessons can also be applied to policy‐makers in other countries as an example of how government intervention in the market can be not only inefficient, but also a hindrance for technological development.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew J. Hoffman, 1996. "Technology Strategy In A Regulation‐Driven Market: Lessons From The Us Superfund Program," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(1), pages 1-11, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:bstrat:v:5:y:1996:i:1:p:1-11
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0836(199603)5:13.0.CO;2-C
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0836(199603)5:13.0.CO;2-C
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0836(199603)5:13.0.CO;2-C?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. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-748, September.
    2. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. David Skidmore, 1997. "Encouraging sustainable business practice through managing policies and instruments dynamically," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(3), pages 163-167, July.

    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. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2002. "When Does Start-Up Innovation Spur the Gale of Creative Destruction?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(4), pages 571-586, Winter.
    2. Bruno Cassiman & Masako Ueda, 2006. "Optimal Project Rejection and New Firm Start-ups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 262-275, February.
    3. Prajit K. Dutta & Saul Lach & Aldo Rustichini, 1995. "Better Late than Early: Vertical Differentiation in the Adoption of a New Technology," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(4), pages 563-589, December.
    4. He, Zi-Lin & Lim, Kwanghui & Wong, Poh-Kam, 2006. "Entry and competitive dynamics in the mobile telecommunications market," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1147-1165, October.
    5. Neus Palomeras, 2007. "An Analysis of Pure‐Revenue Technology Licensing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 971-994, December.
    6. Mudambi, Ram & Swift, Tim, 2011. "Proactive R&D management and firm growth: A punctuated equilibrium model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 429-440, April.
    7. Yang Pan & Peng Huang & Anandasivam Gopal, 2019. "Storm Clouds on the Horizon? New Entry Threats and R&D Investments in the U.S. IT Industry," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 540-562, June.
    8. Bertrand, Olivier & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2006. "R&D and M&A: Are cross-border M&A different? An investigation on OECD countries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 401-423, March.
    9. Chang, Sungyong & Kim, Hyunseob & Song, Jaeyong & Lee, Keun, 2021. "Dynamics of Imitation versus Innovation in Technological Leadership Change: Latecomers’ Catch-up Strategies in Diverse Technological Regimes," SocArXiv b8fae, Center for Open Science.
    10. Kim, Jongwook & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2008. "A Strategic Theory of the Firm as a Nexus of Incomplete Contracts: A Property Rights Approach," Working Papers 08-0108, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    11. Mary J. Benner, 2010. "Securities Analysts and Incumbent Response to Radical Technological Change: Evidence from Digital Photography and Internet Telephony," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 42-62, February.
    12. Jeroen Struben & Brandon H. Lee & Christopher B. Bingham, 2020. "Collective Action Problems and Resource Allocation During Market Formation," Post-Print hal-02927584, HAL.
    13. Hualde, Alfredo & Micheli, Jordy, 2016. "The evolution of call centres and the implications for service quality and workforce management in Mexico," Coediciones, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), number 43205.
    14. Argyres, Nicholas S. & Liebeskind, Julia Porter, 2002. "Governance inseparability and the evolution of US biotechnology industry," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 197-219, February.
    15. Clément Bonnet, 2016. "Revisiting the optimal patent policy tradeoff for environmental technologies," EconomiX Working Papers 2016-34, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    16. Cantner, Uwe & Graf, Holger, 2006. "The network of innovators in Jena: An application of social network analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 463-480, May.
    17. Joly, P. B. & Mangematin, V., 1996. "Profile of public laboratories, industrial partnerships and organisation of R & D: the dynamics of industrial relationships in a large research organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 901-922, September.
    18. Figueroa, Nicolás & Serrano, Carlos J., 2019. "Patent trading flows of small and large firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1601-1616.
    19. Tombak, Mihkel & Röller, Lars-Hendrik & Siebert, Ralph, 2000. "Strategic Choice of Partners: Research Joint Ventures and Market Power," CEPR Discussion Papers 2617, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Ceccagnoli, Marco & Lee, You-Na & Walsh, John P., 2024. "Reaching beyond low-hanging fruit: Basic research and innovativeness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).

    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:bstrat:v:5:y:1996:i:1:p:1-11. 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://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0836 .

    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.