Vertical differentiation in a Cournot industry: The Porter hypothesis and beyond

Resource and Energy Economics

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 374-380

  Lambertini, Luca ^a,b   Tampieri, Alessandro ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Environmental quality; Green technology; Porter hypothesis; Quantity competition

Indexed keywords

BERTRAND; COST PARAMETERS; COURNOT; DOMINANT STRATEGY; DUOPOLY MODELS; ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY; GREEN TECHNOLOGY; PORTER HYPOTHESIS; PRISONER'S DILEMMA; VERTICAL DIFFERENTIATION;

ECONOMICS;

ASYMMETRY; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY; EQUILIBRIUM; NUMERICAL MODEL;

EID: 84859910959     PISSN: 09287655     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2012.03.001     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. André F.J., González P., Porteiro N. Strategic quality competition and the Porter hypothesis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2009, 57:182-194.
2. Beckman M. Edgeworth-Bertrand duopoly revisited. Operations Research-Verfahren 1967, Verlag Anton Hein, III, Meisenhein. R. Henn (Ed.).
3. Constantatos C., Herrmann M. Market inertia and the introduction of green products: can strategic effects justify the Porter hypothesis?. Environmental and Resource Economics 2011, 50:267-284.
4. Edgeworth F. La teoria pura del monopolio. Giornale degli Economisti 1897, 40:13-31. Reprinted in English as The pure theory of monopoly, in Edgeworth, F., 1925. Papers Relating to Political Economy, Vol. 1, London, Macmillan, 111-142.
5. Gabszewicz J.J., Thisse J.-F. Price competition, quality, and income disparities. Journal of Economic Theory 1979, 20:340-359.
6. Hart R. Growth, environment and innovation - a model with production vintages and environmentally oriented research. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2004, 48:1078-1098.
7. Kreps D., Scheinkman J. Quantity precommitment and Bertrand competition yield Cournot outcomes. Bell Journal of Economics 1983, 14:326-337.
8. Levitan R., Shubik M. Price duopoly and capacity constraints. International Economic Review 1972, 13:111-123.
9. Mussa M., Rosen S. Monopoly and product quality. Journal of Economic Theory 1978, 18:301-317.
10. Osborne M., Pitchik C. Price competition in a capacity-constrained duopoly. Journal of Economic Theory 1986, 38:238-260.
11. Porter M. The Competitive Advantage of Nations 1990, Free Press, New York.
12. Porter M. America's green strategy. Scientific American 1991, 264:96.
13. Porter M., van der Linde C. Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Journal of Econonomic Perspectives 1995, 9:97-118.
14. Simpson R.D., Bradford R.L. Taxing variable cost: environmental regulation as industrial policy. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 1996, 30:282-300.
15. Singh N., Vives X. Price and quantity competition in a differentiated duopoly. Rand Journal of Economics 1984, 15:546-554.
16. Xepapadeas A., de Zeeuw A. Environmental policy and competitiveness: the Porter hypothesis and the composition of capital. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 1999, 37:165-182.