The Experts below are selected from a list of 75888 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jeroen P J De Jong - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Market Failure in the diffusion of clinician developed innovations the case of off label drug discoveries
Science and Public Policy, 2016Co-Authors: Eric Von Hippel, Harold J Demonaco, Jeroen P J De JongAbstract:Medical doctors occasionally discover potentially valuable new off-label uses for drugs during their clinical practice. They apply these to help their own patients, but often have minimal incentives to invest in diffusing them further. Thus, the benefits that other clinicians might obtain are to some extent an externality from the perspective of the discoverer. This represents a form of Market Failure: effort invested in diffusion could lower adoption costs for many, but few innovators will invest that effort and social welfare will be accordingly reduced. In this study we explore for empirical evidence for the Market Failure just described, and do find evidence for it. In a sample of US clinicians, diffusion efforts increase the diffusion of generally valuable discoveries, but innovating clinicians typically invest little to support diffusion. We conclude with a discussion of how such a Market Failure could be addressed.
-
Market Failure in the diffusion of consumer developed innovations patterns in finland
Research Policy, 2015Co-Authors: Jeroen P J De Jong, Eric Von Hippel, Fred Gault, Jari Kuusisto, Christina RaaschAbstract:Empirical studies have shown that millions of individual users develop new products and services to serve their own needs. The economic impact of this phenomenon increases if and as adopters in addition to the initial innovators also gain benefits from those user-developed innovations. It has been argued that the diffusion of user-developed innovations is negatively affected by a new type of Market Failure: value that others may gain from a user-developed product can often be an externality to consumer-developers. As a result, consumer innovators may not invest in supporting diffusion to the extent that would be socially optimal. In this paper, we utilize a broad sample of consumers in Finland to explore the extent to which innovations developed by individual users are deemed of potential value to others, and the extent to which they diffuse as a function of perceived general value. Our empirical analysis supports the hypothesis that a Market Failure is affecting the diffusion of user innovations developed by consumers for their own use. Implications and possible remedies are discussed.
-
Market Failure in the diffusion of clinician developed innovations the case of off label drug discoveries
2014Co-Authors: Eric Von Hippel, Harold J Demonaco, Jeroen P J De JongAbstract:Medical doctors occasionally discover potentially valuable new off-label uses for drugs during their clinical practice. They apply these to help their own patients, but often have minimal incentives to invest in diffusing them further. If the clinicians do not intend to patent and sell their discoveries – generally difficult and costly to do - the benefits that other clinicians might obtain from adopting the new off-label discoveries are to some extent an externality from the perspective of the discoverer. In other words, absent a Market link between potential (free) adopters and the innovator, innovating clinicians incentives to invest in efforts to diffuse are likely to be low. This represents a form of Market Failure: effort invested in diffusion could lower adoption costs for many, but few innovators will invest that effort – and social welfare will be accordingly reduced. In this study we explore for empirical evidence for the Market Failure just described, and do find evidence for it. We find that clinicians’ diffusion efforts, when made, do increase the diffusion of generally valuable discoveries, but that innovating clinicians typically invest little to support diffusion. We therefore conclude with a discussion of how such a Market Failure could be addressed.
Joonhwan Choi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Repairing the R&D Market Failure: Public R&D subsidy and the composition of private R&D
Research Policy, 2017Co-Authors: Joonhwan ChoiAbstract:We examine the role of government subsidy in addressing Market Failure in research and development (R&D). Prior studies have shown that allocating Market resources for R&D is not socially optimal due to the expected Market Failure in private R&D investment. Using Korean pharmaceutical industry data, we analyze the relationship between public R&D subsidy and private R&D investment. We also investigate the impact that public R&D subsidy has on the composition of private R&D expenditures. We find that the government’s R&D subsidy stimulates rather than crowds out private R&D activities of small biotechnology venture firms. This finding provides additional empirical evidence that government R&D subsidy can successfully address Market Failure in private R&D investment. Yet, the empirical evidence that the R&D subsidy program stimulated the biotechnology venture firms to expand their new product R&D activities is found to be rather weak. Consequently, the idea that the Korean government’s R&D subsidy program successfully addressed the underinvestment in R&D below the socially optimal level by inducing small venture firms to expand their R&D activities in new product R&D areas is only partially supported. Limitations of this study, the extent to which the test results can be generalized in other industries, qualitative assessments in a broader context, and areas for further study are also discussed.
Joe Wallis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Economic theories of the voluntary sector: a survey of government Failure and Market Failure approaches
2002Co-Authors: Brian Dollery, Joe WallisAbstract:This paper attempts to survey the economic literature on demand-based theories of the voluntary sector, which derive from theory of government Failure and the Market Failure paradigm. We discuss scholarly attempts to define the voluntary sector and establish various criteria which characterise voluntary organisations as well as the ways in which different economists have sought to classify the theories of the voluntary sector. Moreover, we examine theories which invoke government Failure to explain the genesis of the voluntary sector and review theories premised on Market Failure, including asymmetric information models, customer control models, principalagent problems and private philanthropy, and disadvantaged consumers. The paper ends with some tentative extensions and criticisms of the literature on demand-based theories of the voluntary sector.
-
Market Failure government Failure leadership and public policy
1999Co-Authors: Brian Dollery, Joe WallisAbstract:List of Tables List of Figures Introduction Market Failure and Government Intervention Government Failure and Government Intervention New Institutional Economics, New Public Management and Government Failure The Political Economy of Paradigmatic Policy Change Economics and Leadership Theory An Economic Theory of Hope and Leadership The Rhetorical Patterns in Paradigmatic Policy Change Conclusion References Index
-
Market Failure and Government Intervention
Market Failure Government Failure Leadership and Public Policy, 1999Co-Authors: Joe Wallis, Brian DolleryAbstract:The appropriate role of government in contemporary advanced industrial democracies is a complex and controversial question which remains unsettled. A vast research effort has been devoted to resolving this question. Social scientists, including anthropologists, economists, policy analysts, political scientists, public administration specialists, and sociologists, have devised numerous approaches to the study of the nature and role of government, with varying degrees of success. One of the more successful approaches to the analysis of the state has been developed by welfare economists in the form of the theory of Market Failure. In essence, the Market Failure paradigm examines the operation of the economy and prescribes government intervention when Markets ‘fail’ on the grounds of either economic efficiency or equity.
George S. Ford - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Nineteenth Century Urban Market Failure?: Chadwick on Funeral Industry Regulation
Journal of Regulatory Economics, 1997Co-Authors: Robert B Ekelund, George S. FordAbstract:This essay analyzes the regulatory theory and policy preceptions of Edwin Chadwick (1800-1890), the premier Benthamite utilitarian reformer. We focus on and analyze Chadwick‘s economic diagnosis of the London funeral Market in the first half of the nineteenth century. In his view, externalities and Market Failure in both the burial and funeral service Markets demanded socialization of property rights and implementation of a franchise bidding scheme. Chadwick‘s rationales for government intervention, including high taxes and information costs—unique, we believe, for his time—provide the basis for numerous forms of contemporary regulations at all levels in the United States today.
-
Nineteenth Century Urban Market Failure?: Chadwick on Funeral Industry Regulation
Journal of Regulatory Economics, 1997Co-Authors: Robert B Ekelund, George S. FordAbstract:This essay analyzes the regulatory theory and policy perceptions of Edwin Chadwick (1800-1890), the premier Benthamite utilitarian reformer. We focus on and analyze Chadwick's economic diagnosis of the London funeral Market in the first half of the nineteenth century. In his view, externalities and Market Failure in both the burial and funeral service Markets demanded socialization of property rights and implementation of a franchise bidding scheme. Chadwick's rationales for government intervention, including high taxes and information costs--unique, we believe, for his time--provide the basis for numerous forms of contemporary regulations at all levels in the United States today. Copyright 1997 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
Howard E. Mccurdy - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The End of Market Failure
2000Co-Authors: Richard O. Zerbe, Howard E. MccurdyAbstract:The question of the proper role of government in the Marketplace is an old and fundamental one. In the search for objective standards by which such decisions can be made, public officials increasingly have turned to the concept of Market Failure. Use of the Market-Failure concept is widespread in academia, government, and the law. But Market Failure is a fatally flawed concept. A better conceptual framework for understanding issues of government intervention is one that takes transactions costs into account. The authors describe such a framework and demonstrate its applicability.
-
the Failure of Market Failure
1999Co-Authors: Richard O. Zerbe, Howard E. MccurdyAbstract:The concept of Market Failure was originally presented by economists as a normative explanation of why the need for government expenditures might arise. Gradually, the concept has taken on the form of a full-scale diagnostic tool frequently employed by policy analysts to determine the exact scope and nature of government intervention. For some time, economists have known that the Market Failure idea is conceptually flawed. The authors of this article demonstrate why this is so, employing concepts drawn from the perspective of transaction costs. In a review of empirical studies, they further show how the Market Failure diagnostic leads analysts to make generalizations that are not supported by facts. Transaction cost analysis helps to explain the underlying processes involved.
-
The Failure of Market Failure
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 1999Co-Authors: Richard O. Zerbe, Howard E. MccurdyAbstract:The concept of Market Failure was originally presented by economists as a normative explanation of why the need for government expenditures might arise. Gradually, the concept has taken on the form of a full-scale diagnostic tool frequently employed by policy analysts to determine the exact scope and nature of government intervention. For some time, economists have known that the Market Failure idea is conceptually flawed. The authors of this article demonstrate why this is so, employing concepts drawn from the perspective of transaction costs. In a review of empirical studies, they further show how the Market Failure diagnostic leads analysts to make generalizations that are not supported by facts. Transaction cost analysis helps to explain the underlying processes involved. © 1999 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.
