(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Incomplete Adoption of a Superior Innovation
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genres/1738.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Incomplete Adoption of a Superior Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Lapan, Harvey E.
  • Moschini, GianCarlo

Abstract

We consider a model in which an innovating monopolist of a technologically superior intermediate input must sell this product to final output producers. Prior research shows that, with complete information, the monopolist's optimal strategy will lead to complete adoption of this technologically superior innovation. In this article we show that, when the price of some competitively supplied input used in the final product market is endogenous and is altered by adoption of the innovation, then the optimal pricing strategy of the monopolist may lead to incomplete innovation. Thus, the standard result of complete adoption of the superior technology is partly attributable to the partial equilibrium nature of prior models.

Suggested Citation

  • Lapan, Harvey E. & Moschini, GianCarlo, 2000. "Incomplete Adoption of a Superior Innovation," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1738, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:isu:genres:1738
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan & Andrei Sobolevsky, 2000. "Roundup ready® soybeans and welfare effects in the soybean complex," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 33-55.
    2. Fuglie, Keith & Ballenger, Nicole & Rubenstein, Kelly Day & Klotz, Cassandra & Ollinger, Michael & Reilly, John & Vasavada, Utpal & Yee, Jet, 1996. "Agricultural Research and Development: Public and Private Investments Under Alternative Markets and Institutions," Agricultural Economic Reports 262031, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    3. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    4. Morton I. Kamien & Yair Tauman, 1986. "Fees Versus Royalties and the Private Value of a Patent," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(3), pages 471-491.
    5. 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.
    6. Nancy T. Gallini & Ralph A. Winter, 1985. "Licensing in the Theory of Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(2), pages 237-252, Summer.
    7. Huffman, Wallace E. & Evenson, Robert E., 1993. "Science for Agriculture: A Long Term Perspective," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10997, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    8. 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.
    9. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1986. "How to License Intangible Property," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(3), pages 567-589.
    10. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1987. "R&D Rivalry with Licensing or Imitation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 402-420, June.
    11. Nancy T. Gallini & Brian D. Wright, 1990. "Technology Transfer under Asymmetric Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 147-160, Spring.
    12. Reinganum, Jennifer F., 1989. "The timing of innovation: Research, development, and diffusion," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 14, pages 849-908, Elsevier.
    13. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 2.
    14. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    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. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2001. "Reshaping The Conventional Welfare Economics Framework For Estimating The Economic Impact Of Agricultural Biotechnology In The European Union," Working Papers 31835, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    2. Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan & Andrei Sobolevsky, 2000. "Roundup ready® soybeans and welfare effects in the soybean complex," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 33-55.
    3. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2001. "Welfare Effects Of Transgenic Sugarbeets In The European Union: A Theoretical Ex-Ante Framework," Working Papers 31852, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    4. Alexander E. Saak & David A. Hennessy, 2002. "Planting Decisions and Uncertain Consumer Acceptance of Genetically Modified Crop Varieties," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(2), pages 308-319.
    5. Matty Demont & Marie Cerovska & Wim Daems & Koen Dillen & József Fogarasi & Erik Mathijs & František Muška & Josef Soukup & Eric Tollens, 2008. "Ex Ante Impact Assessment under Imperfect Information: Biotechnology in New Member States of the EU," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 463-486, September.
    6. Harvey E. Lapan & Giancarlo Moschini, 2004. "Innovation and Trade with Endogenous Market Failure: The Case of Genetically Modified Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(3), pages 634-648.
    7. Moschini, GianCarlo & Lapan, Harvey E. & Sobolevsky, Andrei, 2000. "Trading Technology As Well As Final Products: Roundup Ready Soybeans And Welfare Effects In The Soybean Complex," Transitions in Agbiotech: Economics of Strategy and Policy, June 24-25, 1999, Washington, D.C. 26002, Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance.
    8. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2001. "Ex-Ante Evaluation Of The Economic Impact Of Agricultural Biotechnology In The European Union: The Case Of Transgenic Sugarbeets," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20631, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    9. Wilson, William W. & Huso, Scott R., 2008. "Trait Stacking, Licensing, and Seed Firm Acquisitions on Genetically Modified Grains: A Strategic Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-20.
    10. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2001. "Uncertainties Of Estimating The Welfare Effects Of Agricultural Biotechnology In The European Union," Working Papers 31828, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    11. Dillen, Koen & Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2008. "Modelling heterogeneity to estimate the ex ante value of biotechnology innovations," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43945, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Merel, Pierre R. & Carter, Colin A., 2005. "The Coexistence of GM and non-GM Crops and the Role of Consumer Preferences," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19512, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Demont, Matty & Dillen, Koen & Daems, Wim & Sausse, Christophe & Tollens, Eric & Mathijs, Erik, 2009. "On the proportionality of EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 508-518, December.
    14. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, "undated". "When Modern Agricultural (BIO)Technologies Meet Obsolete Trade PoliciesL The Case of the European Union's Sugar Industry," 2002 Conference (46th), February 13-15, 2002, Canberra, Australia 125079, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    15. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2001. "Economic Impact Of Agricultural Biotechnology In The Eu: The Euwab Project," Working Papers 31857, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.

    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. Sen, Debapriya & Tauman, Yair, 2007. "General licensing schemes for a cost-reducing innovation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 163-186, April.
    2. Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan, 1997. "Intellectual Property Rights and the Welfare Effects of Agricultural R&D," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1229-1242.
    3. Sen, Debapriya, 2005. "On the coexistence of different licensing schemes," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 393-413.
    4. Sen, Debapriya & Stamatopoulos, Giorgos, 2009. "Drastic innovations and multiplicity of optimal licensing policies," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 7-10, October.
    5. Yair Tauman & Debrapiya Sen, 2012. "Patents and Licenses," Department of Economics Working Papers 12-05, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics.
    6. Sudipto Bhattacharya & Claude d’Aspremont & Sergei Guriev & Debapriya Sen & Yair Tauman, 2014. "Cooperation in R&D: Patenting, Licensing, and Contracting," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Kalyan Chatterjee & William Samuelson (ed.), Game Theory and Business Applications, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 265-286, Springer.
    7. Debapriya Sen & Giorgos Stamatopoulos, 2009. "Technology Transfer Under Returns To Scale," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 77(3), pages 337-365, June.
    8. Isabelle Brocas, 2003. "Les enjeux de la réglementation de la recherche et développement," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 113(1), pages 125-148.
    9. Jay Pil Choi, 2002. "A Dynamic Analysis of Licensing: The "Boomerang" Effect and Grant-Back Clauses," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 43(3), pages 203-229, August.
    10. Luigi Filippini, 2002. "Cost Reduction, Licensing and Incentive to Innovate: A Note," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 51-59.
    11. Sen, Debapriya & Stamatopoulos, Giorgos, 2016. "Licensing under general demand and cost functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(3), pages 673-680.
    12. Schmitz, Patrick W., 2002. "On Monopolistic Licensing Strategies under Asymmetric Information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 177-189, September.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Sen, Debapriya & Tauman, Yair, 2018. "Patent licensing in a Cournot oligopoly: General results," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 37-48.
    16. Carlo Capuano & Iacopo Grassi, 2019. "Imperfect patent protection, licensing, and Social Welfare," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 39(4), pages 2639-2649.
    17. Nisvan Erkal, 2005. "Optimal Licensing Policy in Differentiated Industries," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(252), pages 51-60, March.
    18. Iritié, B. G. Jean-Jacques, 2014. "Enjeux des politiques industrielles basées sur les clusters d'innovation: cas des pôles de compétitivité [Issues of Innovative Clusters-based Industrial Policy: Case of Pole of Competitiveness]," MPRA Paper 54429, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Hoppe, Heidrun C., 2000. "Second-mover advantages in the strategic adoption of new technology under uncertainty," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 315-338, February.
    20. Daniel F. Spulber, 1992. "Economic Analysis And Management Strategy: A Survey," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(3), pages 535-574, September.

    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:isu:genres:1738. 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: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.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.