Capacity Sharing Contracts and Subsidy Policies under R&D Uncertainty

Xiaole Wu,Shuyue Yi,Christopher S. Tang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4758792

2024-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:Download This Paper Open PDF in Browser Add Paper to My Library Share: Permalink Using these links will ensure access to this page indefinitely Copy URL Copy DOI

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Open or Closed? Technology Sharing, Supplier Investment, and Competition

Bin Hu,Ming Hu,Yi Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2016.0598

2017-01-01

Abstract:Competing technologies in emerging industries create uncertainties that discourage supplier investments. Open technology can induce supplier investments, but may also lead to intensified future competition. In this paper, we study competing manufacturers’ open-technology strategies. We show that despite the risk of intensifying future competition, open technologies by competing manufacturers may constitute an equilibrium and can indeed induce supplier investments. In addition, we identify a technology-risk-pooling benefit; namely, by opening technologies, competing manufacturers can induce supplier investments in both technologies and later adopt the one preferred by the market. However, manufacturers may also exhibit the prisoner’s dilemma and close their technologies despite the risk-pooling benefit. In this case, there is potential for collaborative technology sharing through cross licensing. Finally, we show that manufacturers may sometimes close their technologies to force supplier investments.
Uncertainty and Corporate R&D Investment: Evidence from Chinese Listed Firms

Yizhong Wang,Yueling Wei,Frank M. Song

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2016.10.004

2017-01-01

Abstract:Using data from Chinese listed firms, this paper studies the effects of policy and market uncertainties on corporate R&D investment. The empirical findings indicate that both policy and market uncertainties can negatively affect corporate R&D investment. Policy uncertainty poses a significant impact on R&D investment for politically connected firms, but has no impact on firms without political connections. Market uncertainty only has a clear impact on non-politically connected firms. The negative influence of uncertainty is more obvious for firms receiving fewer government subsidies.
Capacity Sharing Between Competitors.

Liang Guo,Xiaole Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2796

IF: 5.4

2018-01-01

Management Science

Abstract:Market competition may lead to mismatch between supply and demand. That is, overpricing may give rise to underselling, and underpricing may yield stockout. Capacity sharing is a common practice to align excessive capacity with excessive demand. Yet, the strategic interaction between competition and capacity sharing has not been adequately addressed. In this paper, we investigate optimal strategies and firm profitability of capacity sharing between competing firms under both ex ante and ex post contracting, depending on whether the capacity-sharing price is determined before or after price setting in the buyer market. We show that, with symmetric capacity, committing to an overly high capacity-sharing price may not necessarily improve firm payoffs. Capacity sharing softens price competition under either contracting scheme, whereas the optimal capacity-transfer price and equilibrium profits may be nonmonotonically influenced by buyer loyalty. The equilibrium outcome under ex ante contracting is more sensitive to variations in market parameters than ex post contracting. As a result, ex ante contracting is more likely to be preferred when the endowed capacity is low or buyer loyalty is high. However, when firms' capacity is asymmetric, capacity sharing may intensify equilibrium competition and hurt firm profitability through reversing the firms' relative pricing aggressiveness.The supplementary appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2796. This paper was accepted by Eric Anderson, marketing.
Supplier Behavior in Capacity Investment Competition: an Experimental Study

Shanshan Hu,Zhixi Wan,Qing Ye,Wei Chi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.12642

IF: 4.638

2017-01-01

Production and Operations Management

Abstract:Many manufacturers ensure supply capacity by using more than one supplier and sharing their capacity investment costs via supplier development programs. Their suppliers face competitive pressure from peers despite the reduced capacity investment cost. Although standard game theory makes clear prediction that cost sharing increases the suppliers' capacity choice and supply chain profit, the complex decision environment of capacity competition makes it interesting to test whether the theory predictions are robust and, if not, whether systematic deviations occur. We present a laboratory experiment study. The experiment data show that supplier subjects invested in higher capacities than what our theoretical analysis predicted, resulting in profit loss for the supply chain. Our econometric analysis indicates that the subjects are bounded rational and their concern for relative standing may be the potential driver of capacity over‐investment. Based on the experimental findings, we study a modified cost‐sharing mechanism that adapts to the behavioral biases. Its performance is validated in a second experiment.
How do firms design R&D cooperation contracts with innovation institutes by considering the impacts of selective subsidy?

Aiping Wu,Hua Li,Danyang Du,Wei Guo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.4278

2024-06-03

Managerial and Decision Economics

Abstract:In an R&D cooperation with an innovation institution, the firm needs to design an efficient cooperation contract to enhance the cooperation efficiency under asymmetric information. Many governments encourage innovation through selective subsidies, whose review and supervision do disclose more information. However, the existing studies have ignored these impacts on designing R&D cooperation contracts. Thus, this paper constructs game models of R&D cooperation to obtain the optimal contract terms under different subsidy strategies and then further discusses the impacts of selective subsidy on R&D contract design.

economics,management
The Distribution of Residual Controls and Risk Sharing: A Case Study of Farmland Transfer in China

Hongyun Han,Hanning Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10062041

IF: 3.9

2018-01-01

Sustainability

Abstract:Structuring contracts to share interest and risk is the central premise of farmland transfer, yet the contract framework and its determinants have rarely been empirically tested based on micro-level data. In this study, we aim to examine factors underlying the balanced distribution of residual controls and risk sharing on contract framework by using field surveyed data of 353 individual farmland transfer contracts. Our evidence shows that the policy of farmland property rights registration has a significant effect on the contract framework and supports the implication of enforcement costs exerted by the effects of the scale ratio and the contract form, contract duration, conversion way, and long-lived assets input. Although our findings fail to support the typical implication of risk sharing as an explanation of contract framework of farmland transfer, given the symmetric positions of two contracted parties of rural farmer households, it is proved that right confirmation and contract duration are two important factors underlying contract options.
Defining the Optimal Space of China Industrial Policy——Subsidy Effect, Competition Compatible and Overcapacity Solution

Xian-hai HUANG,Xue-yin SONG,Zhu-jun ZHU

2015-01-01

Abstract:After the worldwide disputation about East Asia miracle in the mid-1990 s,the new phenomenon-overcapacity of strategic emerging industries in China now attracts widespread attention to the government intervention policy once again.China industrial policy seems to fall into the circular path stimulationextension-elimination-stimulation.Based on the extended 2x2 Bertrand model,this paper found the theoretical mechanism through which subsidy policy show different results just because it's different implementation methods.Subsidy policy can gets more incentive effects of innovation if it implemented in a competitive way,but when the degree of market competition surpass a certain limit,ongoing would reduce the sensitivity of enterprises to the industry competition pressure,and cause the risk of production only in order to obtain subsidies and overcapacity.The core conclusion of this article is that there exists the space for industrial policy which based on industry characteristics.If industrial policy deviate more from the optimal space,the policy effect would expected to be inefficient.Based on these insights,we propose a high operational and systematic optimization framework for optimizing the Chinese industrial policy.
Government subsidy design: knowledge transfer in R&D networks considering risk attitudes and reputation effects

Xiaoxia Huang,Peng Guo,Victor Shi,Xiaonan Wang,Xiaoxia HuangPeng GuoVictor ShiXiaonan Wanga School of Management,Northwestern Polytechnical University,Xi'an,People's Republic of Chinab Lazaridis School of Business and Economics,Wilfrid Laurier University,Waterloo,Canada

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03081079.2024.2311910

2024-02-02

International Journal of General Systems

Abstract:The design of government subsidies is essential in supporting collaborative innovation and promoting sustainable development in R&D networks. This study explores the influence of different government subsidy strategies designed for R&D networks on inter-enterprise knowledge transfer. Drawing upon evolutionary game theory, it examines how impact is contingent upon enterprises' risk attitudes and reputation effects. The results indicate that when enterprises exhibit homogeneous risk attitudes, government subsidy policies encouraging risk-seeking behaviors can effectively enhance the knowledge-transferring level. When enterprises possess heterogeneous risk attitudes, a greater diversity of risk attitudes leads to a more conducive environment for knowledge transfer. Incorporating a rigorous reputation tolerance into the design of government subsidies in R&D networks can effectively elevate knowledge transfer. Therefore, policymakers can design tailored government subsidies and incentive mechanisms grounded in enterprises' risk attitudes and reputation effects. This study provides theoretical and policy implications for designing government subsidies and collaboration in R&D networks.

computer science, theory & methods
Supply chain coordination through capacity reservation contract and quantity flexibility contract

Jianbin Li,Xiaomeng Luo,Qifei Wang,Weihua Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2020.102195

IF: 8.673

2021-03-01

Omega

Abstract:This study considers a supply chain consisting of two independent agents, a manufacturer and a retailer. The demand and the price of the product are both uncertain, whereas capacity cost is high and capacity lead time is long. As a result, the manufacturer may not have the incentive to expand capacity if the retailer does not share the risk with her. This result induces a lower performance of the supply chain. We propose two types of contracts, i.e., capacity reservation contract and quantity flexibility contract, as risk-sharing mechanisms to encourage the manufacturer to expand the capacity and improve the overall performance of the supply chain. We find that when supply chain coordination is not achieved, our contracts can bring more system profit than other contracts with less flexibility. We further show that by setting elaborate parameters, the two contracts can coordinate the supply chain so that the total profit in the decentralized supply chain is the same as that in the centralized system. Furthermore, we compare the two contracts in terms of capacity and profits. We also show that the retailer prefers the quantity flexibility contract under coordination. Our conclusions are robust when the demand and retail price are correlated.

management,operations research & management science
Financing Mechanisms and R&D Investment

Haizhou Huang,Chenggang Xu

1998-01-01

Abstract:This paper analyzes how financial institutions affect efficiency in R&-D investments by providing a new contractual foundation for soft budget constraints. We show those inefficient elements (informational asymmetries and conflicts of interest among co-investors) in multi-investor financing can be used as, a commitment device to stop bad projects which are discovered ex post. In the case of single investors financing (such as internal financing). However, the commitment device does not exist. Our theory predicts that optimally many investors should finance an R&-D project if there are high uncertainties. Otherwise, internal financial preferable. In addition, an institutional cost affects firm decisions and efficiency in R&D investments.
CAPACITY COMMITMENT AND PRICING FOR SUBSTITUTABLE PRODUCTS UNDER COMPETITION

Hongyan Li,Tianhui You

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11518-012-5204-3

2012-01-01

Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering

Abstract:Capacity acquisition and pricing decisions are a company’s long-term strategic decisions. However, demand uncertainty and substitutability of multiple products cause the difficulty to solve capacity and pricing decision problems. In this paper, we address a multiple product pricing and multiple resource capacity acquisition problem with demand uncertainties and competition. The company needs to determine capacity commitment for each resource and product prices before demands are realized so that the total profit is maximized. If the demand exceeds the committed capacity, extra amounts can be purchased from the spot market. Variable unit production costs, capacity acquisition and maintenance costs are considered. We first analyze a single company basic problem and find the optimal solutions on prices and capacity. Based on the single company model, we address the two-product, two-firm capacity commitment and pricing problem considering across product and across company price competition factors. The existence and uniqueness of equilibrium on price and capacity commitment are proved, and then we extended the results to the multiple product, multiple company case.
A Capacity Cost-Sharing Contract for a Two-Stage Supply Chain with a Risk-Averse Supplier under a Bargaining Power

Pyung-Hoi Koo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042279

IF: 3.9

2022-02-17

Sustainability

Abstract:This study considers a two-stage supply chain (SC) consisting of a single supplier and a manufacturer. When the manufacturer introduces a new product to the market, both the manufacturer and supplier should install production capacity in advance. Since capacity building often takes a long time, the demand is uncertain at the time of capacity decision making. The supplier often makes a conservative decision on capacity building to avoid possible capital risks due to excess capacity, which leads to the so-called double marginalization problem. Various risk-sharing supply contracts have recently been studied in academia to overcome the double marginalization problem. However, most existing studies ignore the bargaining power of each SC member and capacity investment. This study aims to fill the research gap by including capacity investment and bargaining power in the supply contract process. A capacity cost-sharing (CCS) contract is introduced in which the manufacturer shares the supplier’s capacity investment risk. We investigate how to set the contract parameters in the CCS contract to coordinate the supply chain. It is found that the wholesale price and manufacturer’s CCS ratio are negatively proportional to each other, and the manufacturer’s expected profit increases as the CCS ratio (wholesale price) increases (decreases) in the coordinated CCS contract. We show that there exists a CCS contract leading to a coordinated supply chain for a specific range of bargaining power. We also present a new CCS contract for a supply chain with a risk-averse supplier. A numerical illustration is provided to clarify how the contract parameters are determined and to examine the effect of the contract parameters on SC performance. Managerial implications and possible future work are discussed.

environmental sciences,environmental studies,green & sustainable science & technology
Contract Design for Technology Sharing Between Two Farmers

Zhang Qing,Li Juan,Xiao Tiaojun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-022-04576-9

IF: 4.82

2022-01-01

Annals of Operations Research

Abstract:Technology sharing among farmers has become common but controversial in recent years. To address it, we consider two farmers engaged in Cournot competition to investigate motivations of technology sharing and provide suggestions on contract design. One farmer (a licensor) has developed some technology and decides whether to share technology with the other farmer (a licensee). The licensee chooses whether to buy technology under a fixed-rate contract or a royalty-fee contract. We propose a technology sharing ratio between two farmers to characterize the degree of technology sharing. We find a win–win outcome for both farmers when the technology sharing ratio is higher than a threshold under the fixed-fee contract. While under the royalty-fee contract, the licensor only shares technology with an additional constraint that they have similar production costs. When the licensor can design contracts, he prefers the royalty-fee contract to the fixed-fee contract. We further interpret why the licensor may not benefit more under the two-part tariff contract than the fixed-fee or the royalty-fee contract. Moreover, we find that in supply chain settings, a win–win outcome for both farmers exists if and only if the technology sharing ratio is smaller than a threshold under the fixed-fee contract while technology sharing will not be realized under the royalty-fee contract. Finally, we show that the strategy of whether to share technology is robust to yield uncertainty, and both the licensor and licensee may benefit more from technology sharing because of yield uncertainty.
Three Revenue-Sharing Variants: Their Significant Performance Differences under System-Parameter Uncertainties

Y-Y Wang,H-S Lau,Z-S Hua

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2011.131

IF: 3.6

2012-01-01

Journal of the Operational Research Society

Abstract:In the widely studied ‘revenue sharing’ (hereafter [RS]) contract format, the manufacturer of a product not only charges the retailer a unit wholesale price w , but also requires the retailer to share part of the product's revenue (ie, the unit retail price p ) with him. For a product with price-dependent demand, it is well known that if a dominant manufacturer knows the system parameters deterministically, then [RS] gives him the perfect power of simultaneously coordinating the channel and allocating profit arbitrarily. Unfortunately, [RS]'s power deteriorates as the manufacturer's knowledge of the system parameters becomes increasingly uncertain. This paper shows that this deterioration can be substantially reduced by using slightly modified versions of [RS]; these modifications roughly amount to sharing a retailer's gross profit instead of revenue. In other words, this paper presents simple modifications to the classical [RS], leading to contract formats that perform substantially better under system-parameter uncertainty.
Revenue‐Sharing Contracts Under Quality Uncertainty in Remanufacturing

Aditya Vedantam,Ananth Iyer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13370

IF: 4.638

2021-02-18

Production and Operations Management

Abstract:Business users (suppliers) of information technology (IT) equipment often contract with third party remanufacturers (3PRs) for the end‐of‐use disposition of their used electronic equipment. Our goal in this research is to develop a model to analyze contracts consisting of an upfront payment (t) and a revenue share (r) between a supplier and 3PR, study their impact on disposition decisions, and explore the impact of 3PR risk‐aversion and quality uncertainty on optimum contracts. We model a Stackelberg game where the supplier offers risk protection from quality uncertainty to a 3PR. The 3PR faces a convex increasing remanufacturing cost and a sales revenue that is increasing and concave in the volume resold. We show general conditions under which a unique contract exists and can be expressed in closed form. We calibrate our model using a dataset on supplier contracts and equipment conditions provided by a 3PR. Our managerial insights are derived from the data and summarized as follows. First, there is a benefit to suppliers from characterizing the quality of used assets. Therefore, they should consider adjusting contracts to reflect asset quality. Second, suppliers can increase profit by contracting based on quality grade and using a portfolio of contracts. Third, we show that the asset age impacts contract terms, with suppliers with assets at a lower age keeping a higher revenue share and observing a greater fraction of equipment remanufactured. This suggests that suppliers should consider the benefits of disposition contracts when making equipment replacement decisions.

operations research & management science,engineering, manufacturing
Coordination contracts for a supply chain with yield uncertainty and low-carbon preference

Hongjun Peng,Tao Pang,Jing Cong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.038

IF: 11.1

2018-12-01

Journal of Cleaner Production

Abstract:We consider a supply chain consisting of a supplier and a manufacturer under the carbon emission cap-and-trade scheme, where the manufacturer faces yield uncertainty. A Stackelberg model is adopted to investigate the production, price and carbon emission reduction decisions for the decentralized and centralized supply chain. We analyze the popular quantity discount contract and the revenue sharing contract for the supply chain. Our results indicate that the quantity discount contract can efficiently coordinate the low-carbon supply chain, but the revenue-sharing contract cannot. We then design a new contract of revenue-sharing with subsidy on emission reduction (RSS) to coordinate the supply chain. We have showed that the proposed RSS contract can coordinate the low-carbon supply chain with yield uncertainty perfectly and the carbon emission reduction level can achieve the level under the centralized case.

environmental sciences,green & sustainable science & technology,engineering, environmental
Design of risk sharing and coordination mechanism in supply chain under demand and supply uncertainty

Chunyi Ji,Xiangxiang Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/ro/2021186

2022-01-01

Abstract:Perishable and short-life products can be seen everywhere in life. Due to the particularity of these products, they are more complicated in supply chain management. This paper studies whether the two-part tariff and ZRS contract can achieve the purpose of reducing risks and coordinating supply chain. We assume that market demand and supplier yield are uncertain, and we use game theory and probability distribution for research. The research results show that when the information is asymmetric, the manufacturer always ignore the demand forecast information provided by the retailer under the wholesale price contract. When the demand is uncertain, regardless of whether the information is symmetric or asymmetric, the two-part tariff contract and the ZRS contract can coordinate the supply chain and achieve maximum profit. When the retailer’s degree of risk aversion is high, the ZRS contract is better than the two-part tariff, which can reduce the risk of retailers and achieve the purpose of coordinating the supply chain. When the supply is uncertain, the manufacturer can provide the supplier with a risk-sharing contract, including the return price and the sharing ratio that meet certain constraints. Such a contract can effectively reduce the supplier’s risk and realize supply chain coordination.
Horizontal Capacity Coordination for Risk Management and Flexibility: Pay Ex Ante or Commit a Fraction of Ex Post Demand?

Xiaole Wu,Panos Kouvelis,Hirofumi Matsuo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2013.0435

2013-01-01

Manufacturing & Service Operations Management

Abstract:Motivated by the dual-sourcing and contracting practices in the semiconductor industry, we study two prevailing types of contracts that deal with horizontal-capacity-coordination issues between two possible sources: an integrated device manufacturer (IDM) and a foundry. IDMs both design and manufacture semiconductor devices, whereas foundries concentrate only on manufacturing. Because production capacity is capital intensive, IDMs often make decisions on whether to manufacture each device internally or subcontract to foundries. Two types of contracts are most frequently used in such settings. Under α-contracts, a fixed fraction α of ex post realized demand is committed to subcontract to the foundry and serves as an incentive for the foundry to build capacity. Under reservation contracts, an ex ante capacity reservation fee is paid to the foundry as an incentive to build capacity. Because of the different nature of incentives under these contracts, it is unclear which type of contract maximizes the IDM's expected profit. Furthermore, IDMs and their customers often prefer dual sourcing to sole sourcing for risk-management purposes. This paper studies the relationship between the two types of contracts, both with and without dual-sourcing constraints and shows the effect of a dual-sourcing preference on contract selection. Our analysis offers supporting rationale for the coexistence of α-contracts and reservation contracts in practice and provides insights on horizontal capacity coordination beyond the semiconductor industry.
Choosing proper contract type for R&D outsourcing: Fixed-price or Cost-plus

Wang Anyu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.19445/j.cnki.15-1103/g3.2008.04.009

2008-01-01

Abstract:The paper argues that different types of contracts for R&D outsourcing are effective differently in dealing with ex ante asymmetric information,ex post asymmetric information,renegotiation friction and project uncertainty.Fixed-Price contracts can pick out potential more efficient sellers and can improve the possibility of accepting the invitation of renegotiation and make sellers reduce costs during implementation,but possibly can't fund important projects in time.Adversely,cost-plus contracts can ensure the projects have full budget,but perhaps induces adverse selection and decreases sellers' interests to engage in renegotiation and results in soft budget.In addition,project investment amounts,expecting results and potential number of sellers can't be neglected during contract-type selection.
Independence of Capacity Ordering and Financial Subsidies to Risky Suppliers

Volodymyr Babich

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.1090.0284

2010-10-01

Manufacturing and Service Operations Management

Abstract:The risk of supply disruptions because of suppliers' financial problems plays a prominent role in manufacturers' risk portfolios. Even large suppliers (e.g., Delphi) could file for bankruptcy, and manufacturers' actions, such as financial subsidies to suppliers, profoundly affect suppliers' financial health. Using a dynamic, stochastic, periodic-review model of the manufacturer's joint capacity reservation and financial subsidy decisions and a general firm-value model of the supplier's financial state, this paper addresses the following questions: What is the optimal joint capacity ordering and financial subsidy policy for the manufacturer? Must subsidy and capacity ordering decisions be made jointly? How good are the recommendations from the traditional procurement models, which ignore the benefits of controlling the supplier's financial state through subsidies? The paper presents general assumptions that allow the manufacturer to make ordering decisions independent of subsidy decisions and investigates interactions between ordering and subsidy decisions when these assumptions are violated. Conditions are presented for the optimal subsidy policy to have a “subsidize-up-to” structure and for the optimal ordering decisions to be newsvendor fractiles.

Capacity Sharing Contracts and Subsidy Policies under R&D Uncertainty

Open or Closed? Technology Sharing, Supplier Investment, and Competition

Uncertainty and Corporate R&D Investment: Evidence from Chinese Listed Firms

Capacity Sharing Between Competitors.

Supplier Behavior in Capacity Investment Competition: an Experimental Study

How do firms design R&D cooperation contracts with innovation institutes by considering the impacts of selective subsidy?

The Distribution of Residual Controls and Risk Sharing: A Case Study of Farmland Transfer in China

Defining the Optimal Space of China Industrial Policy——Subsidy Effect, Competition Compatible and Overcapacity Solution

Government subsidy design: knowledge transfer in R&D networks considering risk attitudes and reputation effects

Supply chain coordination through capacity reservation contract and quantity flexibility contract

Financing Mechanisms and R&D Investment

CAPACITY COMMITMENT AND PRICING FOR SUBSTITUTABLE PRODUCTS UNDER COMPETITION

A Capacity Cost-Sharing Contract for a Two-Stage Supply Chain with a Risk-Averse Supplier under a Bargaining Power

Contract Design for Technology Sharing Between Two Farmers

Three Revenue-Sharing Variants: Their Significant Performance Differences under System-Parameter Uncertainties

Revenue‐Sharing Contracts Under Quality Uncertainty in Remanufacturing

Coordination contracts for a supply chain with yield uncertainty and low-carbon preference

Design of risk sharing and coordination mechanism in supply chain under demand and supply uncertainty

Horizontal Capacity Coordination for Risk Management and Flexibility: Pay Ex Ante or Commit a Fraction of Ex Post Demand?

Choosing proper contract type for R&D outsourcing: Fixed-price or Cost-plus

Independence of Capacity Ordering and Financial Subsidies to Risky Suppliers