Suchergebnisse

This study investigates how the partial privatization on the public firm affects the R&D risk choice in a mixed duopoly market. It mainly finds that: (i) the partial privatization of the public firm leads to a decline in the optimal level of R&D risk chosen by the private (or public) firm, and the higher the degree of privatization the lower the optimal level of R&D risk; (ii) for the public firm, the partial privatization policy always causes the private optimum to be lower than the social optimum; (iii) for the private firm, whether the private optimum is higher or lower than the social optimum depends on the partial privatization level of the public firm. When the degree of privatization is small (large), the private optimum is higher (lower) than the social optimum.

ABSTRACTThis study examines the R&D risk choice in a duopoly market with technology spill overs. The firms conduct R&D programmes with different degrees of risk but an identical expected outcome and they compete or cooperate in R&D. Findings indicate that, in equilibrium, the R&D risk level decreases in the spill over rate under noncooperative R&D, while it may increase under cooperative R&D. Firms are more likely to engage in higher R&D risks under cooperative R&D than they are under non‐cooperative R&D. Moreover, the equilibrium R&D risk level both under competition and cooperation R&D is always too low from the perspective of social welfare, and the extent of this inefficiency increases with the spill over rate if the size of the spill over is large, but the opposite may occur if the size of the spill over is small.

AbstractWhen managers face relative profit performance competition, we formulate a green managerial delegation contract where the owners impose profit‐oriented environmental corporate social responsibility (ECSR) on their managers. We show that the owner adopts ECSR as a commitment device to reduce outputs under quantity competition if the degree of relative profit performance competition is sufficiently high, which can increase not only industry profits but also environmental quality. We also examine an endogenous choice of ECSR and find that the profitable level of ECSR in the asymmetric ECSR case is higher than that in the symmetric ECSR case while both firms undertake ECSR in equilibrium if the severity of competition is sufficiently high.

AbstractThis paper examines the impact of cross-ownership on the strategic incentive of environmental corporate social responsibility (ECSR) within a green managerial delegation contract in a triopoly market engaged in price competition. It demonstrates that bilateral cross-ownership between insiders provides weak incentives to undertake ECSR, which has a non-monotone relationship with cross-ownership shares, while it provides strong incentives for outsiders, which increases the ECSR level as cross-ownership increases. It also compares unilateral cross-ownership and finds that a firm that owns shares in its rival has a greater incentive to undertake ECSR than its partially-owned rival, while an outsider has more incentive than firms in bilateral scenarios. These findings reveal that a firm's incentive to increase a market price through ECSR critically depends on its cross-ownership share, while it decreases environmental damage and increases social welfare when the environmental damage is serious.

Abstract
This paper adopts a green managerial delegation model in a polluting network industry wherein consumers form fulfilled rational expectations of network externalities. We show that firms are consistently incentivized to undertake ECSR (environmental corporate social responsibility) under price competition, while positive network externalities can increase the strategic level of ECSR. We also show that product substitutability between network products can play an important role in determining a firm's strategic level of ECSR and resulting profits. Finally, ECSR is conducive to increasing environmental quality and social welfare in a high-polluting network industry. Therefore, the strategic adoption of ECSR in a network industry is Pareto-improving as environmental damage becomes serious.

The study considers an environmental R&D subsidy in a mixed duopoly with spillovers. Public and private firms compete in environmental R&D investments and the government sets the subsidy to environmental R&D. This study examines three cases: (a) the public firm cares for the environment and maximises the welfare; (b) it does not care for the environment and maximises the sum of consumer and producer surpluses net of subsidy; and (c) it is privatised and maximises its own profit. The main findings are as follows: 1) the optimal subsidies are positive in all three cases; 2) the optimal subsidy always increases with spillovers in case (a), but it may decrease with spillovers in cases (b) and (c); 3) the optimal subsidy is higher in case (a) than in case (b) if the seriousness of environmental damage generated by pollution is small, however the opposite case may be the case if it is large; 4) the use of subsidy results in higher total R&D and lower environmental damage in all three cases; 5) privatisation lowers optimal subsidy (or environmental damage) no matter whether the public firm cares for the environment or not; and 6) privatisation reduces welfare if the public firm cares for the environment, but may raise welfare if it does not care for the environment.