The development of formal ICT standards is a loose form of collaborative innovation: Firms first develop rival technologies, some of which are then eventually selected in the standard. Against this background, firms often use informal consortia to define a clearer technology roadmap ahead of the formal standard setting process. The paper aims to assess how such consortia influence the volume of patents filed around standards, and whether this is efficient. We show that their effect actually depends on the strength of firms’ incentives to develop the standard. Consortium membership triggers a higher number of patent files when insufficient re wards for essential patents induce underinvestment in the standard. This effect is necessarily pro-efficient. In situations where excessive rewards induce patent races, consortium membership only moderately increases or even reduces their volume of patents. At least in the latter case, the effect of consortia membership is also pro-efficient.

We claim that a reason for why unregulated investor-owned local monopolies do not always charge the monopoly price is that they are threatened by customer complaints that may lead to retaliations from local elected officials. When investor-owned monopolies are exposed to this threat they will mimic the price(s) of their neighbour(s); the stronger the threat, the higher the spatial price correlation. The threat increases when elected officials have pro-consumer preferences and neighbours are geographically close. The empirical analysis, based on a complete cross-sectional data set from the Swedish district heating sector in 2007, confirms the theoretical predictions.

This paper examines the evolution of innovation innuclear power reactors between 1974 and 2008 in twelve OECD countries and assesses to what extent nuclear innovation has been driven by economic incentives, political decisions and safety regulation considerations. We use priority patent applications related to Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs)as a proxy for innovating activity. Our results highlight that nuclear innovation is partly driven by the conventional paradigm where both demand-pull, measured by NPPs constructions in the innovating country and in the rest of the world, and technology-push, measured by Research and Development (R&D) expenditures specific to NPPs, have a positive and significant impact on innovation. Our results also evidence that the impact of public R&D expenditures and national NPPs construction on innovation is stronger when the quality of innovation, measured by forward patent citations, is taken into account, and have a long run positive impact on innovation through the stock of knowledge available to innovators. In contrast, we show that political decisions following the Three Miles Island and Chernobyl nuclear accidents, measured by NPPs cancellations, have a negative impact on nuclear innovation. Finally, we find that the nuclearsafety authority has an ambivalent effect on innovation. On one hand, regulatory inspections have a positive impact on innovation, one the other hand, regulatory decisions to temporarily close a NPP have an adverse impact on innovation.