Journal of Evolutionary Economics

, Volume 27, Issue 5, pp 963–988 | Cite as

A characterisation of duopoly dynamics with frictions in production adjustments

Regular Article
  • 107 Downloads

Abstract

This article revisits the classical work of Puu (Chaos Soliton Fract 1(6):573–581, 1991) on duopoly dynamics by gathering two distinct aspects of the functioning of markets: production of goods requires time and is subject to some gestation lags, but trading takes place continuously. Dynamics are characterized by a two-dimensional system of delay differential equations. The main aim of this work is to show that regular and non-regular fluctuations may emerge endogenously because of the existence of heterogeneous interacting agents that choose production over time in a myopic way. Chaotic dynamics in the discrete-time model of Puu (Chaos Soliton Fract 1(6):573–581, 1991) appear to be close enough to the origin of axes (implying that quantities produced by both firms are close to zero). In contrast, in our continuous-time version of the model with discrete delays, the dynamic system is more suitable of generating complex dynamics far enough from the origin when marginal costs vary. This is because of the role played by time delays and inertia. From a mathematical point of view, we show the existence of Hopf bifurcations and detect how time delays and inertia affect the stability of the system by using the recent techniques of stability crossing curves introduced by Gu et al. (J Math Anal Appl 311(1):231–253, 2005) and generalized by Lin and Wang (Can Appl Math Quart 20(4):519–533, 2012). The article also provides some findings about global bifurcations and chaotic dynamics by combining analytical studies and simulation exercises.

Keywords

Chaos Cournot duopoly Stability crossing curves Time delays 

JEL Classification

C61 C62 D43 L13 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge Tönu Puu, Ferenc Szidarovszky and participants at NED 2015 held at Chuo University, Tokyo (Japan), and AMASES 2015 held at University of Padova, Italy, for insightful comments and suggestions on an earlier draft. The authors are also indebted to two anonymous reviewers for valuable comments that have contributed to improve the work. The usual disclaimer applies.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interests

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Berezowski M (2001) Effect of delay time on the generation of chaos in continuous systems. One-dimensional model. Two-dimensional model-tubular chemical reactor with recycle. Chaos Soliton Fract 12(1):83–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bertola G, Caballero RJ (1990) Kinked adjustment costs and aggregate dynamics. NBER Macroecon Annu 5:237–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bischi GI, Cerboni Baiardi L (2015) A dynamic marketing model with best reply and inertia. Chaos Soliton Fract 79:145–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bischi GI, Stefanini L, Gardini L (1998) Synchronization, intermittency and critical curves in a duopoly game. Math Comput Simulat 44(6):559–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cánovas J S, Puu T, Ruíz M (2008) The Cournot–Theocharis problem reconsidered. Chaos Soliton Fract 37(4):1025–1039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen L, Chen F (2011) Dynamic behaviors of the periodic predator–prey system with distributed time delays and impulsive effect. Nonlinear Anal Real 12 (4):2467–2473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen S, Shi J (2013) Global attractivity of equilibrium in Gierer–Meinhardt system with activator production saturation and gene expression time delays. Nonlinear Anal Real 14(4):1871–1886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gori L, Guerrini L, Sodini M (2015a) A continuous time Cournot duopoly with delays. Chaos Soliton Fract 79:166–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gori L, Guerrini L, Sodini M (2015b) Equilibrium and disequilibrium dynamics in cobweb models with time delays. Int J Bifurcat Chaos 25(6):1550088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gori L, Guerrini L, Sodini M (2015c) Hopf bifurcation and stability crossing curves in a cobweb model with heterogeneous producers and time delays. Nonlinear Anal Hybrid Syst 18:117–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gu K, Niculescu S I, Chen J (2005) On stability crossing curves for general systems with two delays. J Math Anal Appl 311(1):231–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harrison A, Van Hoek R (2008) Logistics management and strategy. Competing through the supply chain, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  13. Lampart M (2012) Stability of the Cournot equilibrium for a Cournot oligopoly model with n competitors. Chaos Soliton Fract 45(9-10):1081–1085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lin X, Wang H (2012) Stability analysis of delay differential equations with two discrete delays. Can Appl Math Quart 20(4):519–533Google Scholar
  15. Matsumoto A, Szidarovszky F (2010a) Delay differential nonlinear economic models. In: Bischi GI, Chiarella C, Gardini L (eds) Nonlinear dynamics in economics, finance and the social sciences. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 195–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Matsumoto A, Szidarovszky F (2010b) Delayed dynamics in heterogeneous competition with product differentiation. Nonlinear Anal Real 11(2):601–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Matsumoto A, Szidarovszky F (2014) Discrete and continuous dynamics in nonlinear monopolies. Appl Math Comput 232:632–642Google Scholar
  18. Matsumoto A, Szidarovszky F (2015) Nonlinear Cournot duopoly with implementation delays. Chaos Soliton Fract 79:157–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Matsumoto A, Szidarovszky F, Yoshida H (2011) Dynamics in linear Cournot duopolies with two time delays. Comput Econ 38:311–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Monica C, Pitchaimani M (2016) Analysis of stability and Hopf bifurcation for HIV-1 dynamics with PI and three intracellular delays. Nonlinear Anal Real 27:55–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Onozaki T, Sieg G, Yokoo M (2003) Stability, chaos and multiple attractors: a single agent makes a difference. J Econ Dyn Control 27(10):1917–1938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Puu T (1991) Chaos in duopoly pricing. Chaos Soliton Fract 1(6):573–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Puu T (1998) The chaotic duopolists revisited. J Econ Behav Organ 33 (3-4):385–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rand D (1978) Exotic phenomena in games and duopoly models. J Math Econ 5(2):173–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of GenoaGenoaItaly
  2. 2.Department of ManagementPolytechnic University of MarcheAnconaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Economics and ManagementUniversity of PisaPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations