IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jindec/v52y2004i4p547-568.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Open Architecture And R&D Incentives

Author

Listed:
  • Jae Nahm

Abstract

In open systems, firms give up their property rights to technologies and permit other companies to use these technologies. We ask how an incumbent's architecture choice affects social welfare by altering R&D competition among firms. More specifically, we ask whether an incumbent, by adopting an open system, can establish its socially inefficient technology as the market standard, while an entrant is developing a more efficient technology. It is shown that an incumbent has an incentive to preempt an entrant's competing technology by choosing an open system, but that the open system might result in a premature market standard.

Suggested Citation

  • Jae Nahm, 2004. "Open Architecture And R&D Incentives," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(4), pages 547-568, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jindec:v:52:y:2004:i:4:p:547-568
    DOI: 10.1111/j.0022-1821.2004.00240.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-1821.2004.00240.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.0022-1821.2004.00240.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. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1986. "Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 822-841, August.
    2. Economides, Nicholas, 1996. "Network externalities, complementarities, and invitations to enter," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 211-233, September.
    3. Regibeau, Pierre & Rockett, Katherine E., 1996. "The timing of product introduction and the credibility of compatibility decisions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 801-823, October.
    4. Jay Pil Choi, 1994. "Irreversible Choice of Uncertain Technologies with Network Externalities," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(3), pages 382-401, Autumn.
    5. Choi, Jay Pil, 1996. "Do converters facilitate the transition to a new incompatible technology? A dynamic analysis of converters," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 825-835, October.
    6. Andrea Shepard, 1987. "Licensing to Enhance Demand for New Technologies," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(3), pages 360-368, Autumn.
    7. Stanley M. Besen & Joseph Farrell, 1994. "Choosing How to Compete: Strategies and Tactics in Standardization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 117-131, Spring.
    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. Kevin Boudreau, 2010. "Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(10), pages 1849-1872, October.
    2. Gauguier, Jean-Jacques, 2009. "L’industrialisation de l’Open Source," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/4388 edited by Toledano, Joëlle.
    3. Peng Huang & Marco Ceccagnoli & Chris Forman & D. J. Wu, 2013. "Appropriability Mechanisms and the Platform Partnership Decision: Evidence from Enterprise Software," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 102-121, 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. Heli Koski & Tobias Kretschmer, 2004. "Survey on Competing in Network Industries: Firm Strategies, Market Outcomes, and Policy Implications," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-31, March.
    2. Matutes, Carmen & Regibeau, Pierre, 1996. "A selective review of the economics of standardization. Entry deterrence, technological progress and international competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 183-209, September.
    3. Kerstan, Sven & Kretschmer, Tobias & Muehlfeld, Katrin, 2012. "The dynamics of pre-market standardization," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 105-119.
    4. Paul W.J. de Bijl & Sanjeev Goyal, 2002. "Market Integration and Technological Change," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 19-37, March.
    5. den Hartigh, E. & Langerak, F. & Commandeur, H.R., 2002. "The Effects of Self-Reinforcing Mechanisms on Firm Performance," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2002-46-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    6. Domenico Buccella & Luciano Fanti & Luca Gori, 2023. "Strategic product compatibility in network industries," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 141-168, October.
    7. Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars & Tå̊g, Joacim, 2014. "Acquisitions, entry, and innovation in oligopolistic network industries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-12.
    8. Fabio Manenti & Ernesto Somma, 2008. "One-Way Compatibility, Two-Way Compatibility and Entry in Network Industries," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 301-322.
    9. Deishin Lee & Haim Mendelson, 2007. "Adoption of Information Technology Under Network Effects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 395-413, December.
    10. Oz Shy, 2011. "A Short Survey of Network Economics," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(2), pages 119-149, March.
    11. Marta Montinaro & Rupayan Pal & Marcella Scrimitore, 2020. "Per unit and ad valorem royalties in a patent licensing game," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2020-014, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    12. Choi, Jay Pil & Thum, Marcel, 1998. "Market structure and the timing of technology adoption with network externalities," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 225-244, February.
    13. Kevin Boudreau, 2010. "Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(10), pages 1849-1872, October.
    14. Cerquera Dussán, Daniel, 2006. "Dynamic R&D incentives with network externalities," ZEW Discussion Papers 06-094, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    15. de Palma, Andre & Leruth, Luc & Regibeau, Pierre, 1999. "Partial compatibility with network externalities and double purchase," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 209-227, July.
    16. Ho-Chyuan Chen & Chien-Chen Chen, 2011. "Compatibility Under Differentiated Duopoly with Network Externalities," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 43-55, March.
    17. Christian Dahl Winther, 2007. "Optimal research effort and product differentiation in network industries," Economics Working Papers 2007-19, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    18. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    19. Snellman, Heli, 2006. "Automated teller machine network market structure and cash usage," Bank of Finland Scientific Monographs, Bank of Finland, volume 0, number sm2006_038, July.
    20. Kari Kemppainen, 2004. "Competition and regulation in European retail payment systems," Microeconomics 0404008, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:jindec:v:52:y:2004:i:4:p:547-568. 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=0022-1821 .

    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.