Innovation Clusters Effects on Adoption of a General Purpose Technology under Uncertainty
- 1 Department of Management, Business and Applied Economics, National Polytechnic Institute Houphouet Boigny, Yamoussoukro, Ivory Coast
Abstract
This paper analyzes the effect of innovation clusters on the adoption of a general purpose technology (GPT) and on firms R&D investment levels in imperfect information situation. We developed a theoretical model of vertical relation, described as a four-step game between an upstream firm providing innovative GPT and an innovative downstream associated sector, integrator of this technology. The downstream sector ignores the quality of the GPT and we model the innovation cluster as a coordination mode of firms, improving the probability of the downstream firm to receive information about the quality of the GPT technology. Then, we determine firms equilibria ( i.e. prices and technological qualities) and we showed that the effect of innovation clusters on the choice of qualities, the adoption behavior, levels of R&D investment as well as that social welfare depends on the quality of R&D activities carried out before the establishment of the clusters and a threshold effect ( i.e. cluster critical mass); if the critical mass in terms of information sharing and interaction is not reached, the cluster may have negative effects. In other words, the consensual idea of expected positive effects of innovation clusters must be put into perspective.
- Bresnahan, T.F. and Trajtenberg, M. (1995) General Purpose Technology “Engines of Growth”? Journal of Econometrics, 65, 83-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01598-T
- Astebro, T.B. and Dahlin, K.B. (2005) Opportunity Knocks. Research Policy, 34, 1404-1418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.06.003
- Crampes, C. and Encaoua, D. (2005) Microéconomie de l’innovation, Editor: Economica, Encyclopédie de l’innovation, 405-430.
- Youtie, J., Iacopetta, M. and Graham, S. (2005) Assessing the Nature of Nanotechnology: Can We Uncover an Emerging General Purpose Technology? Journal of Technological Transfer, 33, 315-329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-007-9030-6
- Menz, N. and Ott, I. (2011) On the Role of General Purpose Technologies within the Marshall-Jacobs Controversy: The Case of Nanotechnologies. KIT Working Paper Series Economics, 18.
- Roco, M., Harthorn, B., Guston, D. and Shapira, P. (2010) Innovation and Responsible Governance. In: Roco, M., Mirkin, C. and Hersam, M., Eds., Nanotechnology Research Direction for Societal Needs in 2020, Springer, 440-487.
- Graham, S. and Iacopetta, M. (2014) Nanotechnology and the Emergence of a General Purpose Technology. Annals of Economics and Statistics, 115/116, 5-35.
- Thoma, G. (2009) Striving for a Large Market: Evidence from a General Purpose Technology in Action. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18, 107-138. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtn050
- Bozeman, B., Hardin, J. and Link, A.N. (2008) Barriers to the Diffusion of Nanotechnology. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 17, 751-763. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438590701785819
- Palmberg, C. and Nikulainen, T. (2006) Nanotechnology as a General Purpose Technology of the 21st Century? An Overview with Focus on Finland. DIME Working Paper Series.
- Lipsey, R., Carlaw, K. and Bekar, C. (1998) The Consequences of Changes in GPTs. In: Helpman, E., Ed., General Purpose Technology and Economic Growth, MIT Press, Cambridge, 193-218.
- Lipsey, R. and Carlaw, K. and Bekar, C. (1998) What requires explanation?. In General purpose technology and economic growth, Editors : Helpman, E. Cambridge: MIT Press, 14-54.
- Jovanic, B. and Rousseau, P. and Bekar, C. (2005) General Purpose Technologies. In: Aghion, P. and Durlauf, S.N., Eds., Handbook of Economic Growth, Volume 1B, Elsevier B.V., 1181-1224. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0684(05)01018-X