IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jemstr/v12y2003i2p179-205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Endogenous Technological Spillovers: Causes and Consequences

Author

Listed:
  • Hans Gersbach
  • Armin Schmutzler

Abstract

We develop a new approach to endogenizing technological spillovers. We analyze a game in which firms can first invest in cost‐reducing R&D, then compete on the human‐capital market for their knowledge‐bearing employees, and finally enter the product market. If R&D employees change firms, spillovers arise. We show that technological spillovers are most likely when they increase total industry profits. We use this result to show that innovation incentives are usually stronger for endogenous than for exogenous spillovers and that endogenous spillovers may reverse the result that innovation incentives are stronger under quantity competition than under price competition. Finally, we explore the robustness of our results with respect to contractual incompleteness and the number of R&D workers.

Suggested Citation

  • Hans Gersbach & Armin Schmutzler, 2003. "Endogenous Technological Spillovers: Causes and Consequences," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 179-205, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jemstr:v:12:y:2003:i:2:p:179-205
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1430-9134.2003.00179.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1430-9134.2003.00179.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1430-9134.2003.00179.x?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. Hans Gersbach & Armin Schmutzler, 2003. "Endogenous spillovers and incentives to innovate," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 21(1), pages 59-79, January.
    2. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    4. Paul Klemperer, 1990. "How Broad Should the Scope of Patent Protection Be?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 113-130, Spring.
    5. Nancy T. Gallini, 1992. "Patent Policy and Costly Imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(1), pages 52-63, Spring.
    6. Hart, Oliver, 1995. "Firms, Contracts, and Financial Structure," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198288817.
    7. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1985. "On the Licensing of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(4), pages 504-520, Winter.
    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. Jos Jansen, 2011. "On Competition and the Strategic Management of Intellectual Property in Oligopoly," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(4), pages 1043-1072, December.
    2. Eren Inci, 2009. "R&D tax incentives: a reappraisal," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 16(6), pages 797-821, December.
    3. Antonio Guarino & Piero Tedeschi, 2006. "Endogenous Knowledge Spillovers and Labor Mobility in Industrial Clusters," Working Papers 20060507, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Dipartimento di Statistica.
    4. Cassiman, Bruno & Perez-Castrillo, David & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2002. "Endogenizing know-how flows through the nature of R&D investments," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 775-799, June.
    5. Ricardo Pinheiro Alves, 2017. "Portugal: a Paradox in Productivity," GEE Papers 0070, Gabinete de Estratégia e Estudos, Ministério da Economia, revised Jun 2017.
    6. Matthias Krakel, 2005. "On the Benefits of Withholding Knowledge in Organizations," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 193-209.
    7. Marzieh Abolhassani, 2024. "Productivity Spillovers of Superior Firms Through Worker Mobility," De Economist, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 1-23, March.
    8. Hoisl, Karin, 2007. "Tracing mobile inventors--The causality between inventor mobility and inventor productivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 619-636, June.
    9. repec:wsr:wpaper:y:2013:i:117 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Robert E.B. Lucas & Lyn Squire & T. N. Srinivasan (ed.), 2010. "Global Exchange and Poverty," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13102.
    11. Montserrat Vilalta-Bufi, Departament de Teoria Economica and CAEPS (Universitat de Barcelona) and & Departament d'Economia i Historia Economica (Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona), 2008. "Inter-firm labor mobility and knowledge diffusion: a theoretical approach," Working Papers in Economics 210, Universitat de Barcelona. Espai de Recerca en Economia.
    12. Chad Syverson, 2011. "What Determines Productivity?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(2), pages 326-365, June.
    13. Luca Stanca & Herbert Dawid & Mariacristina Piva & Marco Vivarelli, 2015. "Are R&D investments by incumbents decreasing in the availability of complementary assets for start-ups?," LEM Papers Series 2015/12, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    14. Colombo, Luca & Dawid, Herbert, 2016. "Complementary assets, start-ups and incentives to innovate," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 177-190.
    15. Vitaliy Oryshchenko, 2010. "Does Foreign Ownership Matter for Enterprise Training? Empirical Evidence from Transition Countries," Chapters, in: Robert E.B. Lucas & Lyn Squire & T. N. Srinivasan (ed.), Global Exchange and Poverty, chapter 10, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2007. "Are external technology sourcing strategies substitutes or complements? The case of embodied versus disembodied technology acquisition," IESE Research Papers D/672, IESE Business School.
    17. L. Colombo & H. Dawid & M. Piva & M. Vivarelli, 2017. "Does easy start-up formation hamper incumbents’ R&D investment?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 513-531, October.
    18. Jan Zwolak, 2018. "Sold Commercial Production and Its Financial Security in Polish Agriculture," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 1, pages 141-151.
    19. Jos Jansen, 2010. "Strategic Information Disclosure And Competition For An Imperfectly Protected Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 349-372, June.
    20. Claire Bonnard, 2011. "Les incitations à l'innovation dans le secteur privé," Post-Print halshs-00599700, HAL.
    21. Colombo, Luca & Dawid, Herbert & Piva, Mariacristina & Vivarelli, Marco, 2013. "Does Easy Start-Up Formation Hamper Incumbents' R&D Investment? A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis," IZA Discussion Papers 7302, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    22. João Amador & Ana Fernandes, 2022. "The competitiveness of the Portuguese economy: A view from a composite indicator," Economic Bulletin and Financial Stability Report Articles and Banco de Portugal Economic Studies, Banco de Portugal, Economics and Research Department.

    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. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1999. "Markets for technology (why do we see them, why don't we see more of them and why we should care)," DEE - Working Papers. Business Economics. WB 6520, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía de la Empresa.
    2. Anja, Breitwieser & Neil, Foster, 2012. "Intellectual property rights, innovation and technology transfer: a survey," MPRA Paper 36094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Nicolas van Zeebroeck & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "Filing strategies and patent value," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 539-561, February.
    4. Giacomo A. M. Ponzetto, 2008. "Intellectual property rights and efficient firm organization," Economics Working Papers 1254, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised May 2014.
    5. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 315-380, Elsevier.
    6. Luigi Aldieri, 2013. "Knowledge technological proximity: evidence from US and European patents," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(8), pages 807-819, November.
    7. Arijit Mukherjee, 2017. "Patent Protection and R&D with Endogenous Market Structure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(1), pages 220-234, March.
    8. Arijit Mukherjee, 2002. "R&D, Licensing and Patent Protection," Industrial Organization 0211011, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Régibeau, P & Rockett, K, 2004. "The Relationship Between Intellectual Property Law and Competition Law: An Economic Approach," Economics Discussion Papers 2851, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    10. Prokop, Jacek & Regibeau, Pierre & Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Minimum quality standards and novelty requirements in a one-short development race," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 4, pages 1-49.
    11. James Bergin, 2022. "Patent Licensing, Non‐Practising Entities, and Investment in R&D," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 396-462, June.
    12. Leonard F.S. Wang & Arijit Mukherjee, 2014. "Patent Protection, Innovation and Technology Licensing," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3-4), pages 245-254, December.
    13. Chen, Ping-Chuan & Hung, Shiu-Wan, 2016. "An actor-network perspective on evaluating the R&D linking efficiency of innovation ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 303-312.
    14. Mustafa Gomleksiz, 2023. "International Knowledge Spillovers and Economic Growth: New Evidence from High-Tech Imports and R&D Cooperation," Istanbul Journal of Economics-Istanbul Iktisat Dergisi, Istanbul University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 73(73-1), pages 281-305, June.
    15. Shiyuan Pan & Heng-fu Zou & Tailong Li, 2010. "Patent Protection, Technological Change and Wage Inequality," CEMA Working Papers 437, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
    16. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2017. "Digital knowledge generation and the appropriability trade-off," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 991-1002.
    17. Elif Bascavusoglu & Maria Pluvia Zuniga, 2005. "The effects of intellectual property protection on international knowledge contracting," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques bla05009, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    18. Pedro Mendi, 2005. "The Structure of Payments in Technology Transfer Contracts: Evidence from Spain," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(2), pages 403-429, June.
    19. Pop Silaghi, Monica Ioana & Alexa, Diana & Jude, Cristina & Litan, Cristian, 2014. "Do business and public sector research and development expenditures contribute to economic growth in Central and Eastern European Countries? A dynamic panel estimation," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 108-119.
    20. Bertschek, Irene & Kesler, Reinhold, 2022. "Let the user speak: Is feedback on Facebook a source of firms’ innovation?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).

    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:jemstr:v:12:y:2003:i:2:p:179-205. 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.kellogg.northwestern.edu/research/journals/JEMS/ .

    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.