Abstract

This article investigates the fixed-fee licensing contract in a mixed duopoly where public and private firms may purchase eco-technology from a foreign innovator. We show that the foreign innovator chooses either an exclusive or a non-exclusive licensing contract, depending on (i) the cost gap between the two firms, (ii) the environmental damage caused by pollutants, and (iii) whether a public firm is privatized or not. We further examine the welfare consequences of non-exclusive licensing, exclusive licensing and discriminatory fixed-fee licensing contracts, respectively, and show that privatization improves social welfare when both cost gap and environmental damage are large.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.