Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/57518 
Year of Publication: 
2010
Series/Report no.: 
Preprints of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods No. 2010,48
Publisher: 
Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Bonn
Abstract: 
The European Commission is working on a revision of its Guidelines on Research and Development Agreements. On this occasion, this note surveys the existing experimental evidence. Experiments add a number of additional arguments to the normative assessment. R&D agreements have a much smaller effect on later competition in the product market if they serve as a substitute for incomplete (legal) protection of innovation effort. They may help firms settle the resulting fairness issue, and stay away from investment wars. Using the results from 107 published experiments on oligopoly, a meta-study shows that clearing an R&D agreement can be beneficial since it removes the additional collusion incentive resulting from fear that, through successful innovation, competitors might gain an advantage. This is the case if the opposite market side has countervailing power, and the more market conditions are stable. By contrast, the meta-data suggests that R&D agreements increase the risk of collusion in the product market if products are substitutes, if capacity cannot immediately be extended, if market participants may communicate, and if they are experienced; the latter two conditions are very likely to hold in the field.
Subjects: 
antitrust
innovation
research and development agreements
block exemption
oligopoly experiments
meta-study
JEL: 
D43
K21
L13
L41
O31
D03
O34
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
249.03 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.