Disruptive Innovation by Heterogeneous Incumbents and Economic Growth: When do incumbents switch to new technology?

Ohki, Kazuyoshi (2019): Disruptive Innovation by Heterogeneous Incumbents and Economic Growth: When do incumbents switch to new technology?

Abstract

In this paper, we construct a tractable endogenous growth model to examine heterogeneous incumbents' current technology-switching behavior. Then, we examine the effects of policies such as a subsidy for innovation by incumbents, a subsidy for innovation by entrants, and the extension of patent length. Our setting suggests interesting and counterintuitive results. High quality incumbents tend to be less likely to conduct innovation, which is inconsistent with Schumpeter's hypothesis. A subsidy for innovation by entrants decreases the average quality of differentiated goods. Moreover, it may decrease the growth rate of the economy if the positive spillover of innovation from average quality production is adequately large. Aggregate innovation can be small even when the population size is large if the barriers to entry are extremely high.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Economic Growth, R&D, Firm-Heterogeneity, Innovation by Incumbents, IPR Policy
• Subjects: O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O31 - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O32 - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O33 - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences ; Diffusion Processes; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O34 - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O4 - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity > O41 - One, Two, and Multisector Growth Models

References

Acemoglu, D., Akcigit, U., 2012, Intellectual property rights policy, competition and innovation, Journal of the European Economic Association 10(1), 1--42.

Acemoglu, D., Cao, D., 2015, Innovation by entrants and incumbents, Journal of Economic Theory 157, 255--294.

Aghion, P., Harris, C., Howitt, P., Vickers, J., 2001, Competition, imitation and growth with step-by-step innovation, Review of Economic Studies 68(3), 467--492.

Aghion, P., Harris, C., Vickers, J., 1997, Competition and growth with step-by-step innovation: an example, European Economic Review 41(3--5), 771--782.

Aghion, P., Howitt, P., 1992, A model of growth through creative destruction, Econometrica 60(2), 323--351.

Akcigit, U., Kerr, W., 2018, Growth through heterogeneous innovations, Journal of Political Economy 126(4), 1374--1443.

Basu, S., 1996, Procyclical productivity: increasing returns or cyclical utilization? The Quarterly Journal of Economics 111, 719--751.

Bartelsman, E.J., Doms, M., 2000, Understanding productivity: lessons from longitudinal microdata, Journal of Economic Literature 38(3), 569--594.

Christensen, C., 1997, The innovator's dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail, Boston, MA, USA: Harvard Business School Press.

Chu, A., Cozzi, G., Furukawa, Y., Liao, C.H., 2017. Inflation and economic growth in a Schumpeterian model with endogenous entry of heterogeneous firms, European Economic Review, 98(C), 392--409.

Chu, A., Cozzi, G., Fang, H., Furukawa, Y., Liao, C.H., 2019. Innovation and inequality in a monetary Schumpeterian model with heterogeneous households and firms, Review of Economic Dynamics, 34, 141--164.

Cohen, W.M., 1995, Empirical studies of innovative activity, Handbook of the Economics of Innovation and Technological Change, 182--264.

Cohen, W.M., Levin, R.C., 1989, Empirical studies of innovation and market structure, Handbook of Industrial Organization, 1059--1107.

Denicolo, V., Zanchettin, P., 2012, Leadership cycles in a quality-ladder model of endogenous growth, Economic Journal, 122, 618--650.

Dixit, A., Stiglitz, J., 1977, Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity, The American Economic Review, 67(3), 297--308.

Dinopoulos, E., Segerstrom, P., 2010, Intellectual property rights, multinational firms and economic growth, Journal of Development Economics, 92(1), 13--27.

Etro, F., 2004, Innovation by leaders, Economic Journal 114(495), 281--303.

Grossman, G., Helpman, E., 1991, Innovation and growth in the global economy, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Igami, M., 2017, Estimating the innovator's dilemma: structural analysis of creative destruction in the hard disk drive industry, 1981--1998, Journal of Political Economy 125(3), 798--847.

Iwaisako, T., Ohki, K., 2019, Innovation by heterogeneous leaders, The Scandinavian Journal of Economics 121(4), 1673--1704.

Jones, C.I., 1995, Time series tests of endogenous growth models, Quarterly Journal of Economics 110, 495--525.

Jones, C.I., Williams, J.C., 2000, Too much of a good thing? The economics of investment in R\&D. Journal of Economic Growth 5, 65--85.

Kiedaisch, C., 2015, Intellectual property rights in a quality-ladder model with persistent leadership, European Economic Review 80(C), 194--213.

Klette, T.J., Kortum, S., 2004, Innovating firms and aggregate innovation, Journal of Political Economy, 112(5), 986--1018.

Ledezma, I., 2013, Defensive strategies in quality ladders, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 37, 176--194.

Melitz, M., 2003, The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity, Econometrica, 71, 1695--1725.

Minniti, A., Parello, C., Segerstrom, P.S., 2013, A Schumpeterian growth model with random quality improvements, Economic Theory 52, 755--791.

Norrbin, S.C., 1993, The relation between price and marginal cost in US industry: a contradiction. Journal of Political Economy 101, 1149--1164.

Ohki, K., 2015, Analysis of transition dynamics caused by technological breakthroughs -cause of productivity slowdown and drop in existing firms' stock prices-, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 35, 12--25.

Parello, C., 2019, R\&D policy and competition in a Schumpeterian growth model with heterogeneous firms, Oxford Economic Papers, 71(1), 187--202.

Peretto, P, 1998, Technological change and population growth, Journal of Economic Growth 3(4), 283--311.

Segerstrom, P., Anant, T.C.A., Dinopoulos, E., 1990, A Schumpeterian model of the product life cycle, American Economic Review, 80(5), 1077--1091.

Segerstrom, P., 1998. Endogenous growth without scale effects. American Economic Review 88, 1290--1310.

Segerstrom, P.S., 2007, Intel economics, International Economic Review 48, 247--280.

Segerstrom, P.S., Zornierek, J.M., 1999, The R\&D incentives of industry leaders, International Economic Review 40, 745--766.

Thompson, P., Waldo, D., 1994, Growth and trustified capitalism, Journal of Monetary Economics 34, 455--462.

Romer, P., 1990, Endogenous technological change, Journal of Political Economy 98, 71--102.

World Bank, 2007, World Bank indicators. Report, World bank, Washington