ArticleFundamental research2025
Technology outage risk and independent research and development investment decision in global supply chains.
Article in Fundamental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Managing supply-chain resilience and security.Fundamental research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Under the new global situation of the world pattern, the global industrial chain and supply chain are being reconstructed, and the safe and stable operation is facing a large number of risks and challenges. As the internal driving force of the reconstruction of the global supply chain, key core technologies have become an important part of world economic competition. This paper addresses the issue that what product manufacturer should do to prevent the risk of key core technology outage in the context of international competition. This paper first constructs a duopoly Hotelling model of two competitive products from two countries and the game models under different circumstances where enterprises in the core technology outage whether or not implement the independent research and development (IR&D). We establish four scenarios: non-IR&D benchmark before and after technology outage, IR&D before and after technology outage. Furthermore, outage risk is evaluated by comparing the impact of outage initiated by the government on the profit change of the initiator country firms and the firm in which supply is cut off. When the enterprises in technology outage implement IR&D, we compare the scale of profit changes of enterprises between the two countries and analyze the effectiveness of IR&D investment of enterprises in the country suffering from technology outage to cope with the technology outage risk. Our analysis indicates that: outage maybe make the country that initiates the core technology outage lose more profits and the core technology country's profit change may be bigger than the country investing IR&D. Moreover, the enterprise's IR&D investment can establish certain game space and rights for their country. When the country can reduce technological disadvantages, IR&D strategy, to some extent, can reduce the urgency due to the technology outage risk and weaken the absolute control from the rival country that initiates the technology outage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.