全部版块 我的主页
论坛 经济学人 二区 学术道德监督
3935 4
2008-10-27

QJE发表的时候脚注写明了"Measuring the social return to R&D " 's previous version was circulated under the title "Too much of a good thing? The economics of investment in R&D "

这两家伙算不算抄袭?

Title: Measuring the social return to R&D
Author(s): Jones CI, Williams JC
Source: QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS   Volume: 113   Issue: 4   Pages: 1119-1135   Published: NOV 1998
Times Cited: 75
Abstract: Is there too much or too little research and development (R&D)? In this paper we bridge the gap between the recent growth literature and the empirical productivity literature. We derive in a growth model the relationship between the social rate of return to R&D and the coefficient estimates of the empirical literature and show that these estimates represent a lower bound. Furthermore, our analytic framework provides a direct mapping from the rate of return to the degree of underinvestment in research. Conservative estimates suggest that optimal R&D investment is at least two to four times actual investment.

Title: Too much of a good thing? The economics of investment in R&D
Author(s): Jones CI, Williams JC
Source: JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC GROWTH   Volume: 5   Issue: 1   Pages: 65-85   Published: MAR 2000
Times Cited: 39

Abstract: Research and development is a key determinant of long-run productivity and welfare. A central issue is whether a decentralized economy undertakes too little or too much R&D. We develop an endogenous growth model that incorporates parametrically four important distortions to R&D: the surplus appropriability problem, knowledge spillovers, creative destruction, and duplication externalities. Calibrating the model, we find that the decentralized economy typically underinvests in R&D relative to what is socially optimal. The only exceptions to this conclusion occur when the duplication externality is strong and the equilibrium real interest rate is simultaneously high.

二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

全部回复
2010-9-6 12:16:38
楼主不是开玩笑就是太蠢。明明是完全相同的作者,何来抄袭之说,只是文章名字做了修改。 1# zerana
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

2011-4-7 15:01:52
所谓的“一稿多发”
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

2011-4-7 15:17:12
09年《比较》转了一篇外国的文章,谁写的记不太清了,就记得注脚里有一句“本文稍早的一个版本已发表于XXXXXX”。也不知道两个版本的文章到此相差多少。
结合楼主这个问题看,可能这种情况在某个期刊还是允许的,毕竟各大期刊隶属不同的学校、国家,期刊投稿的政策上可能不一样也在清理中吧。
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

2011-4-9 16:52:29
呵呵,一稿多发
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

相关推荐
栏目导航
热门文章
推荐文章

说点什么

分享

加微信,拉你入群
微信外可尝试点击本链接进入