IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v141y2016icp107-111.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technology adoption: Hysteresis and absence of lock-in

Author

Listed:
  • Colla, Paolo
  • Garcia, Filomena

Abstract

We introduce a simple model of technology adoption with overlapping generations of players. Technologies generate network effects, and players are both backward- and forward-looking. We use results from the supermodular games literature to guarantee equilibrium existence and uniqueness. In line with the empirical literature, the equilibrium adoption path exhibits hysteresis and technologies cannot lock-in. We characterize the expected time of adoption, which can be seen as a measure of technology dominance.

Suggested Citation

  • Colla, Paolo & Garcia, Filomena, 2016. "Technology adoption: Hysteresis and absence of lock-in," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 107-111.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:141:y:2016:i:c:p:107-111
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2015.12.017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176515005340
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2015.12.017?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. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1985. "Standardization, Compatibility, and Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(1), pages 70-83, Spring.
    2. Cabral, Luis M. B., 2002. "Increasing Dominance with No Efficiency Effect," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 471-479, February.
    3. Joseph Farrell & Michael L. Katz, 2005. "Competition Or Predation? Consumer Coordination, Strategic Pricing And Price Floors In Network Markets," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 203-231, June.
    4. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    5. Van Zandt, Timothy & Vives, Xavier, 2007. "Monotone equilibria in Bayesian games of strategic complementarities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 339-360, May.
    6. 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.
    7. Luís Cabral, 2011. "Dynamic Price Competition with Network Effects," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 78(1), pages 83-111.
    8. repec:bla:jindec:v:48:y:2000:i:4:p:373-90 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Cabral, Luis M B & Riordan, Michael H, 1994. "The Learning Curve, Market Dominance, and Predatory Pricing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(5), pages 1115-1140, September.
    10. Farrell, Joseph & Klemperer, Paul, 2007. "Coordination and Lock-In: Competition with Switching Costs and Network Effects," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 31, pages 1967-2072, Elsevier.
    11. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-526, June.
    12. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-748, September.
    13. Christopher Budd & Christopher Harris & John Vickers, 1993. "A Model of the Evolution of Duopoly: Does the Asymmetry between Firms Tend to Increase or Decrease?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 60(3), pages 543-573.
    14. Robin S. Lee, 2013. "Vertical Integration and Exclusivity in Platform and Two-Sided Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(7), pages 2960-3000, December.
    15. Jeffrey Rohlfs, 1974. "A Theory of Interdependent Demand for a Communications Service," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 5(1), pages 16-37, Spring.
    16. Athey, Susan & Schmutzler, Armin, 2001. "Investment and Market Dominance," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 1-26, Spring.
    17. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 2000. "Pricing a Network Good To Deter Entry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 373-390, December.
    18. 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.
    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. Sukanto Bhattacharya & Surjasama Lahiri & Munirul Nabin, 2021. "A novel technology adoption in an OLG framework: examining the cross-generational effects of promotional policies," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 1(4), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Zhao, Congyu & Dong, Kangyin & Jiang, Hong-Dian & Wang, Kun & Dong, Xiucheng, 2023. "How does energy poverty eradication realize the path to carbon unlocking? The case of China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    3. Orlando Gomes, 2022. "Human capital and growth in an OLG-life cycle model," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 1-26, January.

    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. Luís Cabral, 2011. "Dynamic Price Competition with Network Effects," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 78(1), pages 83-111.
    2. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107069978.
    3. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    4. Corrado Benassi & Marcella Scrimitore, 2017. "Income Distribution in Network Markets," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 251-271, September.
    5. Jiawei Chen & Ulrich Doraszelski & Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., 2009. "Avoiding market dominance: product compatibility in markets with network effects," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(3), pages 455-485, September.
    6. Cabral, Luís, 2014. "Aftermarket power and foremarket competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 60-69.
    7. Jullien, Bruno & Pavan, Alessandro & Rysman, Marc, 2021. "Two-sided Markets, Pricing, and Network Effects," TSE Working Papers 21-1238, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    8. Jullien, Bruno & Sand-Zantman, Wilfried, 2021. "The Economics of Platforms: A Theory Guide for Competition Policy," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    9. Tobias Kretschmer, 2008. "Splintering And Inertia In Network Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 685-706, December.
    10. 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.
    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. Greaker, Mads & Midttømme, Kristoffer, 2016. "Network effects and environmental externalities: Do clean technologies suffer from excess inertia?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 27-38.
    13. Kretschmer, Tobias & Rösner, Mariana, 2010. "Increasing Dominance - the Role of Advertising, Pricing and Product Design," Discussion Papers in Business Administration 11500, University of Munich, Munich School of Management.
    14. Montinaro, Marta & Scrimitore, Marcella, 2019. "Per unit and ad valorem royalties in a patent licensing game," MPRA Paper 96642, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," 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 129-213, Elsevier.
    16. Jing, Bing, 2007. "Network externalities and market segmentation in a monopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 7-13, April.
    17. Luís Cabral, 2018. "We’re Number 1: Price Wars for Market Share Leadership," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(5), pages 2013-2030, May.
    18. Paul W.J. de Bijl & Sanjeev Goyal, 2002. "Market Integration and Technological Change," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 19-37, March.
    19. Siciliani, Paolo & Giovannetti, Emanuele, 2019. "Platform competition and incumbency advantage under heterogeneous switching cost — exploring the impact of data portability," Bank of England working papers 839, Bank of England.
    20. Kováč, Eugen & Schmidt, Robert C., 2014. "Market share dynamics in a duopoly model with word-of-mouth communication," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 178-206.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Path dependence; Supermodular games; Overlapping generations; Stochastic technology values;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games
    • D84 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Expectations; Speculations
    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation

    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:eee:ecolet:v:141:y:2016:i:c:p:107-111. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.