Skip to main content

Dynamically Stable Cost-Saving Joint Venture

  • Chapter
Subgame Consistent Economic Optimization

Abstract

In this chapter, we consider a common economic activity involving cooperative optimization—joint venture. However, it is often observed that after a certain time of cooperation some firms in a joint venture may gain sufficient skills and technology that they would do better by breaking away from the joint operation. Analysis on time (optimal-trajectory subgame) consistent joint ventures are presented in the following sections.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bleeke, J., Ernst, D.: Collaborating to Compete. Wiley, New York (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  • Blodgett, L.L.: Factors in the instability of international joint ventures: an event history analysis. Strateg. Manag. J. 13, 475–481 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cellini, R., Lambertini, L.: A differential game approach to investment product differentiation. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 27, 51–62 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cellini, R., Lambertini, L.: Private and social incentives towards investment in product differentiation. Int. Game Theory Rev. 6(4), 493–508 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • D’Aspremont, C., Jacquemin, A.: Cooperative and noncooperative R&D in duopoly with spillovers. Am. Econ. Rev. 78(5), 1133–1137 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomes-Casseres, B.: Joint venture instability: is it a problem? Columbia J. World Bus. XXII(2), 97–102 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, G., Doz, Y., Prahalad, C.K.: Collaborate with your competitors—and win. Harv. Bus. Rev. 67(1), 133–139 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamien, M.I., Muller, E., Zang, I.: Research joint ventures and R&D cartels. Am. Econ. Rev. 82(5), 1293–1306 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, A.I., Siehl, C.: Joint Venture and Other Alliances: Creating a Successful Cooperative Linkage. Financial Executive Research Foundation, Morristown (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkhe, A.: Messy research, methodological predispositions and theory development in international joint ventures. Acad. Manag. Rev. 18(2), 227–268 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrosyan, L.A., Zaccour, G.: Time-consistent Shapley value allocation of pollution cost reduction. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 27(3), 381–398 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Shapley, L.S.: A value for N-person games. In: Kuhn, H.W., Tucker, A.W. (eds.) Contributions to the Theory of Games, pp. 307–317. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1953)

    Google Scholar 

  • Suzumura, K.: Cooperative and noncooperative R&D in an oligopoly with spillovers. Am. Econ. Rev. 82(5), 1307–1320 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeung, D.W.K.: Time consistent Shapley value imputation for cost-saving joint ventures. Math. Game Theory Appl. 2(3), 137–149 (2010)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yeung, D.W.K., Petrosyan, L.A.: Dynamically stable corporate joint ventures. Automatica 42, 365–370 (2006b)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David W. K. Yeung .

Appendix: Proof of Proposition 5.2

Appendix: Proof of Proposition 5.2

To prove Proposition 5.2 we first use \(\hat{x}^{j(L)}\), for jL, to denote the optimal trajectory of the optimal control problem \(\varpi [L;\tau,x_{\tau} ^{L}]\), which maximizes

subject to

$$\dot{x}^{j}(s) = f^{j}\bigl[s,x^{j}(s),u_{j}(s)\bigr],\quad x^{j}(\tau) = x_{\tau} ^{j}, \mbox{ for }j \in L.$$

Note that

(5.98)

Similarly, for the optimal control problem \(\varpi [K\backslash L;\tau,x_{\tau} ^{K\backslash L}]\), we have

(5.99)

Now consider the optimal control problem \(\varpi [K;\tau,x_{\tau} ^{K}]\) that maximizes

subject to

$$\dot{x}^{j}(s) = f^{j}\bigl[s,x^{j}(s),u_{j}(s)\bigr],\quad x^{j}(\tau) = x_{\tau} ^{j}, \mbox{ for }j \in K.$$

Since \(\psi_{j}^{(\tau )K*}(s,\hat{x}^{K(K)}(s))\) and \(\hat{x}^{K(K)}(s)\) are, respectively, the optimal control and optimal state trajectory of the control problem \(\varpi [K;\tau,x_{\tau} ^{K}]\),

(5.100)

Invoking (5.98), (5.99), and (5.100), we have

$$W^{(\tau )K}\bigl(\tau,x_{\tau} ^{K}\bigr)\geq W^{(\tau )L}\bigl(\tau,x_{\tau} ^{L}\bigr)+W^{(\tau )K\backslash L}\bigl(\tau,x_{\tau} ^{K\backslash L}\bigr).$$

Hence Proposition 5.2 follows.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Yeung, D.W.K., Petrosyan, L.A. (2012). Dynamically Stable Cost-Saving Joint Venture. In: Subgame Consistent Economic Optimization. Static & Dynamic Game Theory: Foundations & Applications. Birkhäuser, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-8176-8262-0_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics