Search

Begin New Search Topic Regulation Publication Year within 5 Years

11. Regulating after Brexit

Author:
Joël Reland
Publication Date:
05-2025
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
Deregulation was at the heart of the Conservative vision of Brexit. Boris Johnson negotiated a Brexit deal which gave Great Britain significant freedom to diverge from EU rules and regulations, promising to make the UK ‘the best regulated economy in the world’. This report examines the extent to which the UK has made use of its ‘Brexit freedoms’, finding that there has been very little meaningful divergence from the EU. It identifies the key reasons for this lack of divergence: trade frictions, political complexities, limited state capacity and a lack of strategy. The report then analyses the change in regulatory approach under the current government. It finds that, unlike its predecessors, this government is willing to align with EU rules to remove existing trade barriers and to avoid new ‘passive divergence’ where EU rule changes create divergence by default. Yet, at the same time, the government is keen to use deregulation to boost growth and to build trade ties with the United States. This report identifies a potential conflict between these aims and its EU regulatory agenda, and argues that the UK needs a clear strategy to ensure its multiple regulatory objectives do not undermine one another.
Topic:
European Union, Regulation, Economy, Brexit, and Deregulation
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

12. Assessing ASEAN Economic Integration Progress and South Korea’s Approach Focusing on TBT and SPS

Author:
Sungil Kwak
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
TBT (Technical Barriers to Trade) and SPS (Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures) have two attributes. They act as barriers to trade expansion by protecting producers, but their importance has grown in terms of consumer protection measures after the COVID-19 pandemic. Rather than eliminating related regulations, achieving harmonization within the ASEAN region can simultaneously serve two objectives: expanding trade between South Korea and ASEAN and improving consumer protection. We assess the level of regional economic integration by measuring regulatory distances among ASEAN member states. We also measure regulatory distances between South Korea and ASEAN, and between Japan and ASEAN. We estimate the impact of ASEAN's TBT and SPS on the export performance of countries exporting goods to the ASEAN region.
Topic:
Regulation, Exports, Trade, ASEAN, COVID-19, and Economic Integration
Political Geography:
Asia and South Korea

13. Protecting Freedom of Thought: Mitigating Technological Enablers of Disinformation

Author:
Alexa Raad
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI)
Abstract:
It has been said that a lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes. Social media and internet ad-supported business models that capitalize on capturing attention have introduced powerful technological enablers that are supercharging the targeting, dissemination and amplification of false information online. Influence operations have been quick to use these tools to manipulate and compromise freedom of thought. Assuming these ad-based business models are here to stay, at least for now, steps must be taken to address the problematic elements that influence operators are leveraging. Remediation efforts must both prevent amplification of harmful content, and increase the risk, cost and complexity to the influence operator. Alexa Raad describes frameworks that can be used to analyze the stages, tactics, techniques and procedures used in influence operations, and outlines the need in the United States for regulation in four areas — actions which, alongside effective public-private collaboration and increased media literacy, would help to “mitigate the pollution of our information ecosystem and protect our freedom of thought.”
Topic:
Security, Governance, Regulation, Internet, Disinformation, and Emerging Technology
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

14. When Life Gives You Lemons: How EU Citrus Standards Can Limit Trade

Author:
Trinity Johnson
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Public and International Affairs (JPIA)
Institution:
School of Public and International Affairs (SPIA), Princeton University
Abstract:
In the early 2000s, the European Union (EU) created multiple standards on agricultural imports. This paper focuses on the effect of stricter maximum residue limits (MRLs) for pesticides on citrus fruit exports to the EU after the limits went into effect in 2005. Using a regression model on overall citrus fruit exports and an interaction term for country-level income, the data shows that the EU’s stricter MRLs hurt exports from high-income, lower-middle-income, and low-income countries. Exports from low-income countries declined the most after 2005, while only upper-middle-income countries saw an increase in exports. For product-specific models, low-income countries saw a reduction in exports to the EU for all citrus fruits, while results varied by fruit for other income classifications. The results of these models demonstrate that the EU’s tightened pesticide regulation hurt low-income countries the most. While the regulation is meant to maintain a standard of food quality in the EU, its impact on low-income countries raises important questions about the unintended effects of import regulations. The EU could maintain its quality of food while alleviating the burden on low-income countries by relaxing its MRL standards or by providing more assistance to developing nations to meet its standards.
Topic:
Agriculture, European Union, Regulation, and Imports
Political Geography:
Europe

15. Tracing the Roots of China’s AI Regulations

Author:
Matt Sheehan
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
In 2021 and 2022, China became the first country to implement detailed, binding regulations on some of the most common applications of artificial intelligence (AI). These rules formed the foundation of China’s emerging AI governance regime, an evolving policy architecture that will affect everything from frontier AI research to the functioning of the world’s second-largest economy, from large language models in Africa to autonomous vehicles in Europe. U.S. political leaders often warn against letting China “write the rules of the road” in AI governance. But if the United States is serious about competing for global leadership in AI governance, then it needs to actually understand what it is competing against. That requires examining the nuts and bolts of both China’s AI regulations and the policy process that shaped them. This paper is the second in a series breaking down China’s AI regulations and pulling back the curtain on the policymaking process shaping them. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Chinese government started that process with the 2021 rules on recommendation algorithms, an omnipresent use of the technology that is often overlooked in international AI governance discourse. Those rules imposed new obligations on companies to intervene in content recommendations, granted new rights to users being recommended content, and offered protections to gig workers subject to algorithmic scheduling. The Chinese party-state quickly followed up with a new regulation on “deep synthesis,” the use of AI to generate synthetic media such as deepfakes. Those rules required AI providers to watermark AI-generated content and ensure that content does not violate people’s “likeness rights” or harm the “nation’s image.” Together, these two regulations also created and amended China’s algorithm registry, a regulatory tool that would evolve into a cornerstone of the country’s AI governance regime. Contrary to popular conception in the rest of the world, China’s AI governance regime has not been created by top-down edicts from CCP leadership. President Xi Jinping and other top CCP leaders will sometimes give high-level guidance on policy priorities, but they have not been the key players when it comes to shaping China’s AI regulations. Instead, those regulations have been the product of a dynamic and iterative policymaking process driven by a mix of actors from both inside and outside the Chinese party-state. Those actors include mid-level bureaucrats, academics, technologists, journalists, and policy researchers at platform tech companies. Through a mix of public advocacy, intellectual debate, technical workshopping, and bureaucratic wrangling, these actors laid the foundations for China’s present and future AI regulations. This paper traces the progression of these regulations through the “policy funnel” (see figure 1) of Chinese AI governance. For both recommendation algorithms and deep synthesis rules, the initial spark for the regulation came from long-standing CCP concerns about the creation and dissemination of online content. For the former, the rise of the algorithmically driven news app Toutiao threatened the CCP’s ability to set a unified narrative and choose which stories are pushed to readers. In the case of deep synthesis, online face swap videos grabbed the attention of the Chinese public and led government regulators to consider the threat of deepfakes. Over the course of 2017–2020, these concerns made their way through China’s bureaucracy. Regulators took a series of stopgap measures in specific applications, while also tasking policy analysts and government-adjacent technical organizations with exploring different regulatory interventions.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Governance, Regulation, and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
China, East Asia, and Asia

16. Regulating the Working Conditions of Platform Work: What Can We Learn from EU Member States?

Author:
Oscar Guinea, Elena Sisto, and Oscar du Roy
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
Policymakers in Estonia, France, Greece, and Spain share the common objective of enhancing the working conditions of platform workers. However, variations in their labour markets, legal frameworks, and political landscapes have led to four distinct approaches in achieving this goal. Predominantly, the Spanish regulation has been geared towards attempting to reclassify platform workers from self-employed to employees. In contrast, the regulatory strategies in France and Greece have focused on retaining the sector within the realm of independent work, while simultaneously improving the working conditions of platform workers. Estonia adopted a broader perspective, emphasising the enhancement of working conditions for all freelancers, not exclusively those categorised as platform workers. This Policy Brief offers a comprehensive evaluation and comparison of the regulatory frameworks governing platform work in four European countries. The comparative analysis draws upon research conducted by the OECD and the World Economic Forum (WEF) on the principles of good regulation. Adapting this research to the context of digital platforms, three key principles for assessing the regulation of working conditions on these platforms were identified: (i) the consistency with the policy objective of improving the working conditions of platform workers; (ii) the feasibility of implementing the regulatory requirements; (iii) the presence of regulatory dialogue and appeal mechanisms. The evaluation of the four countries’ regulations against the three outlined principles offers valuable insights into the regulation of platform work. In Spain, the primary aim of the regulation regarding platform workers was not solely the improvement of working conditions but predominantly the reclassification of platform workers from self-employed to employees. This distinction is crucial, as platform workers highly value the benefits of self-employment, such as access to work, income opportunities, flexibility, and autonomy. Evidence presented in this study suggests that a majority of Spanish delivery workers preferred to maintain their self-employed status, while only about one-third expressed a desire to be classified as employees. Moreover, the Spanish regulation is characterised by a broad formulation of the conditions defining employment for digital delivery workers. This lack of specificity has led to an uncertain application of the regulation, with digital platforms adopting diverse strategies to achieve compliance. Ultimately, the Spanish regulatory framework has been marred by a profound disregard for the interests of, and a notable lack of communication with, those directly impacted by the regulation: the digital platforms and the platform workers. Greece has demonstrated that it is possible to enhance working conditions for platform workers while preserving the advantages of self-employment. The Greek regulation mandates that digital platforms adhere to the same welfare, health, and safety obligations for platform workers as they would for employees. Additionally, Greece has established clear criteria to define the presumption of self-employment for platform workers. This clarity offers legal certainty and enabled platform workers to accurately assess their employment status. Consequently, there has been a notable reduction in court cases regarding the classification of platform workers. France has progressively developed a comprehensive legal framework that has systematically enhanced the rights of platform workers. This development culminated in six pivotal agreements, addressing some of the most challenging aspects of working conditions on digital platforms, such as account deactivation and minimum revenue. These agreements were reached under the auspices of the Autorité des Relations Sociales des Plateformes d’Emploi (ARPE), a public entity instrumental in facilitating effective social dialogue between digital platforms and trade unions. The establishment of clear administrative procedures governing the negotiations within ARPE has been crucial in formulating measures that digital platforms can effectively implement. Estonia’s primary focus is on ensuring adequate working conditions for all freelancers, including platform workers. A considerable number of platform workers in Estonia engage in a contract-for-services (töövõtuleping) with digital platforms. This contract offers a social safety net, including unemployment benefits, sick pay, and healthcare services, while retaining the self-employed status of platform workers. Moreover, this framework provides clarity regarding the rights and responsibilities of both platform workers and digital platforms, facilitating the implementation of a clear and unambiguous regulatory system.
Topic:
Labor Issues, European Union, Regulation, Digital Economy, and Labor Market
Political Geography:
Europe

17. Time to Rethink Export Controls for Strengthened US-EU Cooperation and Global Trade Rules

Author:
Matthias Bauer and Dyuti Pandya
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
The escalation of broad export controls by the US, under the guise of national security and the aim to curb technological transfers to potential adversaries,[1] marks a new epoch of bureaucratic oversight. The US push for broad export controls also underscores a critical juncture in US-EU relations and global trade rules. Broad export restrictions not only challenge the very foundation of free trade but also contribute to the erosion of Western technology leadership.[2] Unilateral export controls may start strong but eventually lose effectiveness and become counterproductive,[3] pushing non-US companies, particularly in the semiconductor sector, to find alternatives to US components.
Topic:
International Cooperation, European Union, Regulation, Exports, Trade, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
Europe and United States of America

18. The Sky Is Not the Limit. Geopolitics and Economics of the New Space Race

Author:
Alessandro Gili
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI)
Abstract:
Space is a contested domain for its very nature and today it is evidently becoming an increasingly important enabler of economic and military power. An increasing number of actors, infrastructures and technologies deployed in space also raises concerns for safety and security, especially in cyberspace. Many countries are striving to achieve space capabilities and autonomous access to space, and this is having a tremendous geopolitical impact, especially since space is emerging as an increasingly critical military and strategic domain. The development of the new space economy, which is increasingly involving the private sector and many industrial actors and services, will also be a game changer for the international economy. The space race likewise implies disruptive technologies that could contribute massively to the energy and digital transitions, accelerating solutions that could benefit humanity. A new international governance system for space is therefore needed urgently, considering that the current rules are no longer able to respond to a sector evolving at such a rapid pace. Which actors are leading the race? Which economic sectors could benefit the most and what could the new space economy mean for the world? How is space emerging as a military domain against a backdrop of increasing international tensions? What would a new system of global governance for space look like?
Topic:
Economics, Politics, Infrastructure, Geopolitics, Regulation, and Energy Security
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, India, Italy, Global Focus, United States of America, and Space

19. Economic arguments in favour of reducing copyright protection for generative AI inputs and outputs

Author:
Bertin Martens
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) models have stirred considerable controversy about copyright protection for AI training inputs and model outputs. The European Union’s AI Act will require model developers to be transparent about their use of training inputs such as text, images and music. The EU Copyright Directive allows free text and data mining of these media inputs unless copyright holders have opted out and want license payments. The right to opt-out amounts to economically inefficient overprotection of copyright. Free use of media content for GenAI training does not affect media sales to consumers. Optouts only strengthen the bargaining position of copyright holders, who decide depending on their private interests. That generates windfall profits without any increase in consumer surplus or social welfare. The licensing of training inputs reduces the quantity of data and the quality of GenAI models, creates transaction costs and reduces competition between GenAI firms. This slows down GenAI-induced innovation in media products and production processes, and productivity gains in all service sectors that apply GenAI. Ultimately, it slows down economic growth compared to what it could be with competitive and high-quality GenAI. Bargaining over license pricing is arbitrary as there is no objective revenue benchmark to start from. Defenders of the moral right to remuneration argue that any arbitrary remuneration is better than no remuneration. But this private moral right comes at the expense of social welfare. The ongoing bargaining and court cases between media producers and GenAI developers risk entrenching this market failure in jurisprudence. Early regulatory intervention and elimination of opt-outs for GenAI training, or weakening them in AI Act implementation guidelines, would solve this. There is no need for copyright on GenAI outputs either. GenAI reduces the marginal cost of machine-production of media outputs to close to zero, on par with the marginal cost of reproduction. That eliminates incentives for piracy. Moreover, composite human-machine outputs benefit from a de-facto extension of copyright on the human component.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Intellectual Property/Copyright, European Union, Regulation, Economic Growth, and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
Europe

20. Entry and competition in mobile app stores

Author:
Fiona Scott Morton
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Entry by rival app stores on the two currently available mobile operating systems is an exciting potential benefit of the European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA). Apple and Google will need to share the technical specifications of their interfaces with developers and offer them the same functionalities they give to their own stores. The DMA also allows developers to disintermediate the legacy stores entirely by mandating downloads from the web to handsets. These changes should stimulate price competition – resulting in fees falling from the current 30 percent – and competition in variety and features. Privacy and security will be important issues, with the question of who is permitted to offer rival stores being critical. Good enforcement by the European Commission will be necessary to balance gatekeeper rules restricting dangerous services with the need for contestability. The paper concludes with examples of rival app stores that can be expected to enter. Stores will differentiate through curation, such as stores for children, for those trying to reduce their carbon footprints or for those seeking to use public services in a particular country. Some stores will innovate through alternative payment schemes – for example, a newspaper store that enables per-article pricing and pioneers innovative data-sharing policies. Lastly, developers such as Epic have long stated their desire to offer stores with innovative technology.
Topic:
European Union, Regulation, Mobile Applications, Digital Markets Act (DMA), and Competition
Political Geography:
Europe