Atlantic Economic Journal

, Volume 46, Issue 1, pp 27–42 | Cite as

Product Reliability, R&D, and Manufacturing Cost Shocks

  • Jannett Highfill
  • Michael McAsey


Suppose a firm’s research and development (R&D) improves product reliability which in turn decreases the cost of product failure for both the firm and its customers. The primary research question of the paper is how a firm with market power optimally adjusts its R&D if it experiences a manufacturing cost shock. Our model suggests that a manufacturing cost shock prompts the firm to do less R&D in the cases where the replacement cost is low or the marginal manufacturing cost is high. Conversely, if the replacement cost is high and the marginal manufacturing cost is low, then the firm increases R&D, mitigating some of the increase in the manufacturing cost. The paper also compares the outcomes for reliability, profits, consumer surplus, and social surplus for the optimal R&D case as compared to the case of doing no R&D, paying particular attention to how exogenous changes in the marginal manufacturing cost affect this comparison.


Research and development Innovation competition Product reliability Replacement cost 


D21 O31 F12 

Supplementary material

11293_2017_9565_MOESM1_ESM.tex (2 kb)
ESM 1 (TEX 1 kb)
11293_2017_9565_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (83 kb)
ESM 2 (PDF 83 kb)
11293_2017_9565_MOESM3_ESM.docx (30 kb)
ESM 3 (DOCX 30 kb)
11293_2017_9565_MOESM4_ESM.nb (251 kb)
ESM 4 (NB 251 kb)


  1. d'Aspremont, C., & Jacquemin, A. (1988). Cooperative and noncooperative R&D in duopoly with spillovers. American Economic Review, 78(5), 1133–1137.Google Scholar
  2. d'Aspremont, C., & Jacquemin, A. (1990). Cooperative and noncooperative R\&D in duopoly with spillovers: erratum. American Economic Review, 80(3), 641–642.Google Scholar
  3. Daughety, A. F., & Reinganum, J. F. (1995). Product safety: liability, R&D, and signaling. American Economic Review, 85(5), 1187–1206.Google Scholar
  4. DeCourcy, J. (2005). Cooperative R&D and strategic trade policy. Canadian Journal of Economics, 38(2), 546–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. El Ouardighi, F., Shnaiderman, M., & Pasin, F. (2014). Research and development with stock-dependent spillovers and price competition in a duopoly. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 161(2), 626–647. Scholar
  6. Gretz, R. T., Highfill, J., & Scott, R. C. (2009). Strategic research and development policy: societal objectives and the corporate welfare argument. Contemporary Economic Policy, 27(1), 28–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Haaland, J., & Kind, H. J. (2006). Cooperative and non-cooperative R&D policy in an economic union. Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 142(4), 720–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Haaland, J. I., & Kind, H. J. (2008). R&D policies, trade and process innovation. Journal of International Economics, 74(1), 170–187. Scholar
  9. Highfill, J., & McAsey, M. (2010). Dynamic product reliability management for a firm with a complacent competitor vs. a lockstep competitor. Journal of Economics (MVEA), 36(1), 29–54.Google Scholar
  10. Jinji, N., & Toshimitsu, T. (2006). Optimal policy for product R&D with endogenous quality ordering: asymmetric duopoly. Australian Economic Papers, 45(2), 127–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ma, Y. (2015). The product cycle hypothesis: the role of quality upgrading and market size. International Review of Economics and Finance, 39, 326–336. Scholar
  12. Saha, S. (2007). Consumer preferences and product and process R&D. RAND Journal of Economics, 38(1), 250–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Atlantic Economic Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsBradley UniversityPeoriaUSA
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsBradley UniversityPeoriaUSA

Personalised recommendations