[Acs, Z., Audretsch, D. (1988), Testing the Schumpeterian Hypothesis, Eastern Economic Journal, 2, pp. 129–140.]Search in Google Scholar
[Acs, Z., Audretsch, D. (1990), Innovation and Small Firms, The MIT Press, Cambridge.]Search in Google Scholar
[Acs, Z., Audretsch, D. (1991), R&D firm size, and innovative activity, in: Z. Acs, D. Audretsch, (eds.), Innovation and Technological Change: An International Comparison, Harvester Wheatsheaf, New York.10.3998/mpub.12958]Search in Google Scholar
[Amir, R., Evstigneev, I., Wooders, J. (2000), Noncooperative versus cooperative R&D with endogenous spillover rates, Games and Economic Behavior, 42, pp. 183–207.]Search in Google Scholar
[Arrow, K. (1962), Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Inventions, in: R. Nelson, (ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, Princeton University Press, Princeton.10.1515/9781400879762-024]Search in Google Scholar
[Baldwin, W., Scott, J. (1987), Market Structure and Technological Change, Harwood Academic Publishers, Chur.]Search in Google Scholar
[Beath, J., Katsoulacos, Y., Ulph, D. (1997), Sequential product innovation and industry evolution, Economic Journal, 97, pp. 32–43.]Search in Google Scholar
[Becker, W., Dietz, J. (2004), R&D cooperation and innovation activities of firms – evidence for the German manufacturing industry, Research Policy, 33, pp. 209–223.]Search in Google Scholar
[Becker, W., Peters, J. (1998), R&D-competition between vertical corporate networks: structure, efficiency and R&D spillovers, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 6, pp. 51–71.]Search in Google Scholar
[Belderbos, R., Carree, M., Diederen, B., Lokshin, B., Veugelers, R. (2004a), Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 22, pp. 1237–1263.10.1016/j.ijindorg.2004.08.001]Search in Google Scholar
[Belderbos, R., Carree, M., Lokshin, B. (2004b), Cooperative R&D and Firm Performance, Research Policy, 33, pp. 1477–1492.10.1016/j.respol.2004.07.003]Search in Google Scholar
[Belleflamme, P., Peitz, M. (2010), Industrial Organization: Markets and Strategies, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9780511757808]Search in Google Scholar
[Bound, J., Cummins, C., Griliches, Z., Hall, B., Jaffe, A. (1984), Who does R&D and who patents?, in: Z. Griliches, (ed.), R&D, Patents, and Productivity, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.]Search in Google Scholar
[Brander, J., Spencer, B. (1983), Strategic commitment with R&D: the symmetric case, Bell Journal of Economics, 14, pp. 225–235.]Search in Google Scholar
[Brod, A., Shivakumar, R. (1997), Domestic versus international R&D spillovers, Economics Letters, 56, pp. 229–233.]Search in Google Scholar
[Camagni, R. (1993), Inter-firm industrial network: The cost and benefits of cooperative behaviour, Journal of Industry Studies, 1, pp. 1–15.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cohen, W., Klepper, S. (1996), A reprise of size and R&D, Economic Journal, 106, pp. 925–951.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cohen, W., Levin, R. (1989), Empirical Studies of Innovation and Market Structure, in: R. Schmalensee, R. Willig, (eds.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier Science Publishers B. V., Amsterdam.10.1016/S1573-448X(89)02006-6]Search in Google Scholar
[Cohen, W., Levinthal, D. (1989), Innovation and learning: the two faces of R&D, Economic Journal, 94, pp. 569–596.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cohen, W., Levinthal, D. (1990), Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, pp. 128–152.]Search in Google Scholar
[Comanor, W. (1967), Market Structure, Product Differentiation and Industrial Research, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 81, pp. 639–657.]Search in Google Scholar
[d’Aspremont, C., Jacquemin, A. (1988), Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers, American Economic Review, 78, pp. 1133–1137.]Search in Google Scholar
[Erickson, G., Bayus, B. (2001), R&D Productivity in the Personal Computer Industry, Working Paper.10.2139/ssrn.296228]Search in Google Scholar
[Fisher, F., Temin, P. (1973), Returns to Scale in Research and Development: What Does the Schumpeterian Hypothesis Imply?, Journal of Political Economy, 81, pp. 56–70.]Search in Google Scholar
[Fishman, A., Rob, R. (2000), Product innovation by a durable – good monopoly, RAND Journal of Economics, 31, pp. 237–252.]Search in Google Scholar
[Galbraith, J. (1952), American Capitalism, The Concept of Countervailing Power, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.]Search in Google Scholar
[Garbicz, M. (2005), Niedorozwój a korzyści skali, in: W. Pacho, (ed.), Szkice ze współczesnej teorii ekonomii, SGH, Warszawa.]Search in Google Scholar
[Griliches, Z. (1998), R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.10.7208/chicago/9780226308906.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Hausman, J., Hall, B., Griliches, Z. (1984), Econometric models for count data with an application to the patents-R&D relationship, Econometrica, 52, pp. 909–938.]Search in Google Scholar
[Inkmann, J. (2000), Horizontal and vertical R&D cooperation, Center of Finance and Econometrics at the University of Konstanz, Discussion Paper.]Search in Google Scholar
[Janasz, W., Janasz, K., Prozorowicz, M., Świadek, A., Wiśniewska, J. (2002), Determinanty innowacyjności przedsiębiorstw, Rozprawy i Studia, No. 406, Uniwersytet Szczeciński, Szczecin.]Search in Google Scholar
[Janasz, W., Kozioł, K. (2007), Determinanty działalności innowacyjnej przedsiębiorstw, PWE, Warszawa.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kaiser, U., Licht, G. (1998), R&D cooperation and R&D intensity: theory and micro-econometric evidence for German manufacturing industries, ZEW Discussion Paper.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kamien, M., Schwartz, N. (1982), Market Structure and Innovation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kamien, M., Muller, E., Zang, I. (1992), Research Joint Ventures and R&D Cartels, American Economic Review, 82, pp. 1293–1306.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kamien, M., Zang, I. (2000), Meet me halfway: research joint ventures and absorptive capacity, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 18, pp. 995–1012.]Search in Google Scholar
[Katz, M. (1986), An Analysis of Cooperative Research and Development, RAND Journal of Economics, 17, pp. 527–543.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kesteloot, K., De Bondt, R. (1993), Demand-creating R&D in an symmetric oligopoly, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 2, pp. 171–183.]Search in Google Scholar
[Klepper, S. (1996), Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle, American Economic Review, 86, pp. 562–583.]Search in Google Scholar
[Knudsen, M. (2005), Patterns of technological competence accumulation: a proposition for empirical measurement, Industrial and Corporate Change, 14, pp. 1075–1108.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lee, C., Sung, T. (2005), Schumpeter’s legacy: A new perspective on the relationship between firm size and R&D, Research Policy, 34, pp. 914–931.]Search in Google Scholar
[Levin, R., Klevorick, A., Nelson, R., Winter, S. (1987), Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3, pp. 783–820.]Search in Google Scholar
[Levin, R. (1988), Appropriability, R&D spending, and technological performance, American Economic Review, 78, pp. 424–428.]Search in Google Scholar
[Levin, R., Reiss, P. (1988), Cost-reducing and demand-creating R&D with spillovers, RAND Journal of Economics, 19, pp. 538–556.]Search in Google Scholar
[Mansfield, E. (1964), Industrial Research and Development Expenditures: Determinants, Prospects, and Relation of Size of Firm and Inventive Output, Journal of Political Economy, 72, pp. 319–340.]Search in Google Scholar
[Morck, R., Yeung, B. (2000), The Economic Determinants of Innovation, Industry Canada Research Publications, Occasional paper.]Search in Google Scholar
[Motta, M. (1992), Cooperative R&D and vertical product differentiation, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 10, pp. 643–661.]Search in Google Scholar
[Mukhopadhyay, A. (1985), Returns to Scale in R&D and the Schumpeterian Hypothesis: A Comment, The Journal of Industrial Economics, 33, pp. 359–361.]Search in Google Scholar
[Nelson, R., Winter, S. (1982), The Schumpeterian Tradeoff Revisited, American Economic Review, 72, pp. 114–132.]Search in Google Scholar
[Pavitt, K., Robson, M., Townsend, J. (1987), The size distribution of innovating firms in the UK: 1945–1983, The Journal of Industrial Economics, 35, pp. 291–316.]Search in Google Scholar
[Peneder, M. (2008), The problem of private under-investment in innovation: a policy mind map, WIFO Working Paper.10.1016/j.technovation.2008.02.006]Search in Google Scholar
[Prokop, J., Karbowski, A. (2013), Współpraca badawczo-rozwojowa przedsiębiorstw a kartelizacja gałęzi, Przegląd Zachodniopomorski, XXVIII (LVII), pp. 259–272.]Search in Google Scholar
[Qiu, L. (1997), On the dynamic efficiency of Bertrand and Cournot equilibria, Journal of Economic Theory, 75, pp. 213–229.]Search in Google Scholar
[Robertson, P., Langlois, R. (1995), Innovation, networks, and vertical integration, Research Policy, 24, pp. 543–562.]Search in Google Scholar
[Romer, P. (1986), Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth, Journal of Political Economy, 94, pp. 1002–1037.]Search in Google Scholar
[Saha, S. (2007), Consumer preferences and product and process R&D, RAND Journal of Economics, 38, pp. 250–268.]Search in Google Scholar
[Salant, S., Shaffer, G. (1998), Optimal asymmetric strategies in research joint ventures, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 16, pp. 195–208.]Search in Google Scholar
[Salant, S., Shaffer, G. (1999), Unequal treatment of identical agents in Cournot equilibrium, American Economic Review, 89, pp. 585–604.]Search in Google Scholar
[Scherer, F. (1965), Firm Size, Market Structure, Opportunity, and the Output of Patented Inventions, American Economic Review, 55, pp. 1097–1125.]Search in Google Scholar
[Scherer, F. (1980), Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance, Rand McNally College Publishing Company, Chicago.]Search in Google Scholar
[Schmookler, J. (1959), Bigness, Fewness, and Research, Journal of Political Economy, 67, pp. 628–635.]Search in Google Scholar
[Schumpeter, J. (1934), The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.]Search in Google Scholar
[Schumpeter, J. (1942), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Harper and Row, New York.]Search in Google Scholar
[Spence, M. (1984), Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance, Econometrica, 52, pp. 101–121.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sutton, J. (1996), Technology and Market Structure, European Economic Review, 40, pp. 511–530.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sutton, J. (1998), Technology and Market Structure: Theory and History, MIT Press, Cambridge.]Search in Google Scholar
[Symeonidis, G. (1996), Innovation, Firm Size and Market Structure: Schumpeterian Hypotheses and Some New Themes, Working Paper 161, OECD.]Search in Google Scholar
[Tirole, J. (1988), The Theory of Industrial Organization, MIT Press, Cambridge.]Search in Google Scholar
[Tsai, K., Wang, J. (2005), Does R&D Performance Decline with Firm Size? A Reexamination in Terms of Elasticity, Research Policy, 34, pp. 966–976.]Search in Google Scholar
[Tsai, K. (2009), Collaborative networks and product innovation performance: Toward a contingency perspective, Research Policy, 38, pp. 765–778.]Search in Google Scholar
[Villard, H. (1958), Competition, Oligopoly and Research, Journal of Political Economy, 66, pp. 483–497.]Search in Google Scholar
[Wölfl, A. (1998), Spillover Effects – an Incentive to Cooperate in R&D?, Halle Institute for Economic Research, Discussion Paper.10.2139/ssrn.1690556]Search in Google Scholar
[Worley, J. (1961), Industrial Research and the New Competition, Journal of Political Economy, 69, pp. 183–186.]Search in Google Scholar
[Ziss, S. (1994), Strategic R&D with spillovers, collusion and welfare, The Journal of Industrial Economics, 17, pp. 375–393.]Search in Google Scholar
