Appropriated relational rent

Based on the ERBV (Lavie 2006), collaborative advantage can be understood as a function of the combined value and rarity of all shared resources among supply chain partners (i.e., relational rents) while competitive advantage of a firm depends on the total value and rarity of the firm s own shared and non-shared resources (i.e., internal rents) and resources interactions with partners (i.e., appropriated relational rents and spillover rents). When collaboration is formed, each partner endows a subset of its resources to the collaboration with the expectation of generating common benefits from the shared resources of both hrms (Lavie 2006). 

According to the relational view and the ERBV (Dyer and Singh 1998 Lavie 2006), the link of SCC CA (i.e., H5) focuses on the joint value creation process. Firms generate common benefits (i.e., relational rents) through supply chain collaboration. The link of CA->FP (i.e., H7) focuses on the value appropriation process. Firms improve their performance by appropriating relational rents. The direct link of SCC FP (i.e., Hs) focuses on the spillover rents (and internal rents) that generate private benefits to the focal firm, which is not related to collaborative advantage. Such private benefits directly impact firms performance. 

These observations from the history of technology are fascinating, in particular the reference to the attempt of the German nobility to appropriate the wind as private property. They do not, however, add up to a theoretical account of the feudal relations of production and their impact on the productive forces. Nor does Marx in any other work discuss or even mention this issue. He never refers to the agricultural technology of the Middle Ages, nor to the subtle varieties of serfdom discussed by Marc Bloch and others. Nor is there any hint of a dynamic mechanism internal to serfdom that could explain the commutation of rent into labour or kind into money rent. 

---