管理工程学报
管理工程學報
관리공정학보
Journal of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management
2014年
1期
131~137
,共null页
公共产品技术创新 社会福利 政府偏袒 技术获取
公共產品技術創新 社會福利 政府偏袒 技術穫取
공공산품기술창신 사회복리 정부편단 기술획취
pubic goods technological innovation; social welfare; public discrimination; technology acquisition
政府部门通过招标采购的方式从公共科研机构或企业获取所需技术推动公共产品技术创新.以买方决定的逆向拍卖理论和寻租竞争理论为基础,分析了投标者之间信息完全与信息不完全条件下,政府部门为实现既定福利目标所确定的最优偏袒规则问题以及具体实施偏袒规则的条件.研究表明,当投标者之间信息完全时,最优偏袒规则主要由投标者获得租金的差异程度,政府部门的偏好以及产品技术优势提高对获得租金可能性的影响程度所决定;当投标者信息不完全时,最优偏袒规则应该在公平竞争与完全偏袒技术能力较高的投标商之间确定.
政府部門通過招標採購的方式從公共科研機構或企業穫取所需技術推動公共產品技術創新.以買方決定的逆嚮拍賣理論和尋租競爭理論為基礎,分析瞭投標者之間信息完全與信息不完全條件下,政府部門為實現既定福利目標所確定的最優偏袒規則問題以及具體實施偏袒規則的條件.研究錶明,噹投標者之間信息完全時,最優偏袒規則主要由投標者穫得租金的差異程度,政府部門的偏好以及產品技術優勢提高對穫得租金可能性的影響程度所決定;噹投標者信息不完全時,最優偏袒規則應該在公平競爭與完全偏袒技術能力較高的投標商之間確定.
정부부문통과초표채구적방식종공공과연궤구혹기업획취소수기술추동공공산품기술창신.이매방결정적역향박매이론화심조경쟁이론위기출,분석료투표자지간신식완전여신식불완전조건하,정부부문위실현기정복리목표소학정적최우편단규칙문제이급구체실시편단규칙적조건.연구표명,당투표자지간신식완전시,최우편단규칙주요유투표자획득조금적차이정도,정부부문적편호이급산품기술우세제고대획득조금가능성적영향정도소결정;당투표자신식불완전시,최우편단규칙응해재공평경쟁여완전편단기술능력교고적투표상지간학정.
Technological innovation of public goods is defined as the process of developing new products to meet social public needs and generating social economic benefits through the applied research,technological development,transformation and application.Few researches have studied the relationship between public goods and innovation process by considering public discrimination.We add the factor of public discrimination to public sector's tool box containing the possible means (control variables) to analyze the effect of political culture and valuation asymmetry on optimal discrimination rules during the process of public product technological innovation.Many economic and political decisions are the outcome of strategic contests for a given rent.For instance,governments procure innovational products from private enterprises and public R&D organizations to efficiently provide non-excludable public goods.Public discrimination often occurs and is controlled by contest designers.Our initial task is to clarify why this is indeed the case in the complex institutional environment based on buyer-determined reverse auction and rent-seeking theories.We consider situations under which equilibrium strategies exist and rent-seeking expenditures heterogeneous players choose in both imperfectly discriminating contest and perfect discriminating competition.We analyze the case in which players may have different values for the rent and their values are complete information.Under the perfect discrimination competition,the contest designer chooses the optimal value of discrimination based on the ratio of contestants' prize valuations.For low values of λ,where the parameter λ is the weight assigned to bidders' expected payoff,the designer wishes to extract buyer‘s surplus from the contestants so that the optimal bias accomplishes the designer's attempt to maximize the extent of competition between the contestants.For high values of λ,the designer wishes to maximize the total utilities of contestants and sets the optimal bias in order for high ability contestants to receive the rent.Under the impedect discrimination competition,for some intermediate weight λ,public sectors create actual equality between competitors.When λ is smaller than λ,the equilibrium bias is in favor of contestant with the lower prize valuation.We compare the cases in which contestants have different values for the rent and their values are contestants' private information.Under perfect discrimination competition,the bias in favor of contestant who has high value for renting is complete and no efforts are made by the other contestant.Under imperfect discrimination competition,for some low values of λ,there is no discrimination and the designer creates equality between competitors.In summary,in the real complex contest environment discrimination is often administrated by public sectors and the objective of these contest designers reflects its political culture.This paper contributes new insights into the political economy of discrimination in public product technological innovation and demonstrates that political preference and asymmetry in the contested prize valuations are useful explanatory factors to understand diversity and discrimination in different societies.