Public/private partnerships: Stimulating competition in a dynamic market

International Journal of Industrial Organization

Volumn 19, Issue 5, 2001, Pages 763-794

  Link, Albert N ^a   Scott, John T ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO   (United States)

^b Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory   (United States)

Author keywords

Advanced Technology Program; D62; O31; Public private partnership; R D; Technology policy

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035631285     PISSN: 01677187     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-7187(00)00093-X     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Arrow, K.J., 1962. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In: Universities - National Bureau Committee for Economic Research, The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp. 609-625.
2. Baldwin W.L., Scott J.T. Market Structure and Technological Change. 1987;Harwood Academic Publishers, London.
3. Cohen W.M., Klepper S. The tradeoff between firm size and diversity in the pursuit of technological progress. Small Business Economics. 4:1992;1-14.
4. David P.A. Some new standards for the economics of standardization in the information age. Dasgupta P., Stoneman P. Economic Policy and Technological Performance. 1987;206-239 Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
5. Economic Report of the President, 1994. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
6. Executive Office of the President, 1990. U.S. technology policy. Office of Science and Technology Policy, Washington, DC.
7. Hagedoorn J., Link A.N., Vonortas N. Research partnerships. Research Policy. 29:2000;567-586.
8. Hall, B.H., 1992. Investment and research and development: Does the source of financing matter? University of California at Berkeley Working Paper No. 92-194.
9. Hall, B.H., Link, A.N., Scott, J.T., 1998. Universities as partners in ATP-funded research projects. Preliminary final report submitted to the Advanced Technology Program.
10. Hansen R.G. Auctions with contingent payments. American Economic Review. 74:1985;862-865.
11. Hao K.Y., Jaffe A.B. Effect of liquidity on firms' R&D spending. Economics of Innovation and New Technology. 2:1993;275-282.
12. Himmelberg C.P., Petersen B.C. R&D and internal finance: A panel study of small firms in high-tech industries. Review of Economics and Statistics. 76:1994;38-51.
13. Hubbard R.G. Capital-market imperfections and investment. Journal of Economic Literature. 36:1998;193-225.
14. Jaffe A.B. The importance of 'spillovers' in the policy mission of the Advanced Technology Program. Journal of Technology Transfer. 23:1998;11-19.
15. Lee T., Wilde L.L. Market structure and innovation: a reformulation. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 94:1980;429-436.
16. Lerner, J., 1996. The government as venture capitalist: The long-run impact of the SBIR program. NBER Working Paper 5753.
17. Leyden D.P., Link A.N. Federal laboratories as research partners. International Journal of Industrial Organization. 17:1999;572-592.
18. Link A.N. On the classification of R&D. Research Policy. 25:1996;379-401.
19. Link, A.N., 1998. Public/private partnerships as a tool to support industrial R&D: Experiences in the United States. Final report prepared for the working group on technology and innovation policy, division of science and technology at OECD.
20. Link A.N. Public/private partnerships in the United States. Industry and Innovation. 6:1999;191-216.
21. Link A.N., Scott J.T. Public Accountability: Evaluating Technology-based Institutions. 1998;Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, Massachusetts.
22. McAfee R.P., McMillan J. Auctions and bidding. Journal of Economic Literature. 25:1987;699-738.
23. Martin, S., Scott, J.T., 1998. Financing and leveraging public/private partnerships. Final report prepared for the working group on technology and innovation policy, division of science and technology at OECD.
24. Martin S., Scott J.T. The nature of innovation market failure and the design of public support for private innovation. Research Policy. 29:2000;437-447.
25. Office of Management and Budget, 1992. Circular No. A-94: Guidelines and discount rates for benefit-cost analysis of federal programs. Washington, DC.
26. Office of Management and Budget, 1996. Economic analysis of federal regulations under Executive Order 12866. Washington, DC.
27. Office of Science and Technology Policy, 1994. Science in the national interest. Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC.
28. Office of Science and Technology Policy, 1998. Science and technology: Shaping the twenty-first century. Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC.
29. Samuelson W.F. Bidding for contracts. Management Science. 32:1986;1533-1550.
30. Schumpeter J.A. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. 1950;Harper & Row, New York.
31. Scott J.T. Research diversity induced by rivalry. Acs Z.J., Audretsch D. Innovation and Technological Change. 1991;132-151 Harvester-Wheatsheaf, London.
32. Scott J.T. Purposive Diversification and Economic Performance. 1993;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
33. Scott J.T. Financing and leveraging public/private partnerships: The hurdle-lowering auction. STI Review. 23:1998;67-84.
34. Tassey G. Technology Infrastructure and Competitive Position. 1992;Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, Massachusetts.
35. Tassey G. The Economics of R&D Policy. 1997;Quorum Books, Westport, Connecticut.
36. Teece D.J. Economies of scope and the scope of the enterprise. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, September. 1:1980;223-247.