Research ArticleOpen AccessGoogle Scholar indexed
Competition Strategy and Geographical Proximity of Contract Research Organizations
Department of Economics, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, USA
Department of Economics, Mercer University, Atlanta, GA, USA
- 1 Department of Economics, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, USA
- 2 Department of Economics, Mercer University, Atlanta, GA, USA
Theoretical Economics Letters·Volume 07 (2017)·Pages 1413–1422·Published 30 June 2017·DOI10.4236/tel.2017.75095
Copy link · social · email
Abstract
We investigate the evidence for geographical proximity of contract research organizations (CROs) in the United States. We examine whether CROs locate near each other for knowledge spillover motivation, or whether they avoid each other as a competition strategy. If they are not located near to each other, then they are not likely to cooperate, or source knowledge from each other. We use a spatial pattern approach and find that CROs are located spatially in the United States. CROs do not consistently access localized knowledge from other CROs, rather they avoid each other and establish in isolated locations to capture the entire market.
KeywordsContract Research OrganizationsPharmaceuticalR &DOutsourcing
- Banerjee, T. and Siebert, R. (2017) The Impact of R & D Cooperations and Mergers in Pharmaceuticals on Research Activities and Drugs Offered on the Market. Southern Economic Journal, 84, 202-228. https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12221
- Frost and Sullivan (2006) U.S. Drug Discovery Contract Research Organization Market. http://www.frost.com
- Jaffe, A.B. (1989) Real Effects of Academic Research. American Economic Review, 79, 957-970.
- Feldman, M.P. (1994) Knowledge Complementarity and Innovation. Small Business Economics, 6, 363-372. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01065139
- Feldman, M.P. (1994) The Geography of Innovation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3333-5
- D’Aspremont, C. and Jacquemin, A. (1988) Cooperative and Noncooperative R & D in Duopoly with Spillovers. American Economic Review, 78, 1133-1137.
- Kamien, M., Muller, E. and Zang, I. (1992) Research Joint Ventures and R & D Cartels. American Economic Review, 82, 1293-1306.
- Appold, S.J. (1991) The Location Process of Industrial Research Laboratories. The Annals of Regional Science, 25, 131-144. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01581891
- Ellison, G. and Glaeser, E. (1997) Geographic Concentration in U.S. Manufacturing Industries: A Dartboard Approach. Journal of Political Economy, 105, 889-927. https://doi.org/10.1086/262098
- Dumais, G., Ellison, G. and Glaeser, E. (2002) Geographic Concentration as a Dynamic Process. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84, 193-204. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465302317411479
- Audretsch, D. and Feldman, M. (1996) R & D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production. American Economic Review, 86, 630-640.
- Audretsch, D. and Stephen, P. (1996) Company-Scientists Locational Links: The Case of Biotechnologies. American Economic Review, 86, 641-652.
- Glaeser, E. (1998) Are Cities Dying? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12, 139-160. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.12.2.139
- Jaffe, A., Trajtenberg, M. and Henderson, R. (1993) Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, 577-598. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118401
- Furman, J.L., Margaret, K.K., Cockburn, I. and Henderson, R. (2006) Use Geographical Distribution of Research Activities of Pharmaceutical Firms to Investigate the Extent of Knowledge Spillover from Private and Public Institutions. Annales d’économie et de Statistique, 79-80, 165-188.