IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/zbw/bofism/sm2000_018.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

The microeconomics of innovation: Oligopoly theoretic analyses with applications to banking and patenting

Author

Listed:
  • Kauko, Karlo

Abstract

The innovation activities of companies has long been a topic of interest in economics. Game theory models of oligopoly have since the start of the 1980s played a central role in the economics of innovation.In this study three game theory duopoly models are presented and each is used to analyse the firm's R&D activities. The first model is used to examine the variables that affect the incentives of banks providing payment services to develop an interbank payment system. A customer of a large bank may be in an advantageous situation in that most of his payments will be effected in that bank's internal payment system, which is more reliable and otherwise superior to the interbank system. A key result derived from the model is that provision of payment services free of charge to customers often results in a distortion of banks' incentives to develop the system. A smaller bank will overinvest in the system in order to improve its relative competitive position. Because system improvement would only weaken the large bank's superior position, it will not have a strong incentive to improve the system.Since only one of the model's two banks is investing in the quality of the system, the investments will generally not be cost-effective. If fees are charged for payment services, the distortions in incentives are less serious, even though it is often the case that both banks overinvest in the system. When model results are compared to historical situations regarding payment systems, a number of consistencies are found. The second model deals with the possibilities of a national government to influence domestic companies' investments in product development via patent laws that discriminate against foreign companies. If two countries have discriminatory patent laws in order to promote domestic companies' investments in product development, the results may well turn out to be offsetting. If just one of the two countries discriminates against foreign patent applicants, this may result in either more or less R&D effort by domestic companies, depending on the situation. The third model is used to study patenting decisions by a company that has made an innovation. A company can monopolize its innovation by either patenting it or keeping it secret. Patenting is the only viable option if a competitor independently comes up with the same innovation. A patent application, by contrast, is a public document, the contents of which are useful to others who would like to develop substitute products. Patenting is thus not advantageous unless the competitor is likely to come up with the same innovation independently. This means that a company will be the more inclined to patent an innovation, the more its rival invests in R&D. A risk-averse company is more inclined to patent than a risk-neutral one. This model is generally supported by empirical findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Kauko, Karlo, 2000. "The microeconomics of innovation: Oligopoly theoretic analyses with applications to banking and patenting," Bank of Finland Scientific Monographs, Bank of Finland, volume 0, number sm2000_018, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:bofism:sm2000_018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/212951/1/e18-bof-studies.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:zbw:bofism:1995_002 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Kemppainen, Kari, 2003. "Competition and regulation in European retail payment systems," Bank of Finland Research Discussion Papers 16/2003, Bank of Finland.

    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:zbw:bofism:sm2000_018. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bofgvfi.html .

    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.