Search

Begin New Search Topic Digital Economy Publication Year within 5 Years

81. Introducing Third Way’s US-China Digital World Order Initiative

Author:
Valerie Shen and Jayson Browder
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
If it wasn’t clear three months ago, it is clear now: the next global era will be defined by democracy versus autocracy. In this competition, a new and decisive divide pits America’s approach of “digital democracy” against China’s approach of “digital autocracy.” This great divide places the US and allies on one side and China's unfettered access to sensitive data on the other. China’s digital authoritarianism has been described as "one giant QAnon" and is ubiquitous among the 1.4 billion inhabitants of the country. Moreover, one of the greatest threats to American national security interests is if China prevails in exporting and normalizing its model of digital supremacy. China’s global network of surveillance systems is antithetical to liberal democratic values, as it monitors, punishes, and conditions citizens, as well as influences them through automated disinformation campaigns. China’s ambition for global digital supremacy is real and supported by aggressive diplomatic efforts and massive financial investments. The effort by the United States and like nations to maintain a peaceful and prosperous world order will require a level of sophistication and commitment unrivaled in our history. China is not only an adversary. It is sometimes a partner whose massive economy is deeply entwined with that of the US and other friendly nations. This is not the zero-sum game of the Cold War conflict, and the hope is that it never becomes so. Will liberal democracies strengthen and proliferate or weaken and dwindle in the 21st century? The Chinese state intends to shape the global digital order in its image by redrawing technological norms and standards. Ultimately, the US-China national security competition may hinge on who sets the digital world order.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Authoritarianism, Democracy, Digital Economy, Innovation, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

82. Breaking Through the Digital Ceiling: ICT Skills and Labour Market Opportunities

Author:
David Pichler and Robert Stehrer
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
This paper analyses the impact of ICT-skills on individuals’ labour market mobility patterns, in particular job-to-job, employment- to-unemployment and unemployment-to-employment transitions. Based on the OECD’s Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC) and longitudinal EU-SILC data, individuals’ labour market outcomes are examined over the period 2011-2017 in nine EU countries and the UK. Our results indicate that individuals with strong ICT skills have better opportunities and are therefore not only more likely to change jobs more frequently but are also less likely to face unemployment. Furthermore, ICT skills support unemployment exit towards medium and high digital occupations. A certain minimum level of ICT skills also supports unemployment exit towards low digital occupations but seems to make employment in such occupations less likely once this threshold is crossed. Overall, ICT skills have less predictive power for transition towards medium digital occupations. Thus, while ICT skills appear to improve labour market opportunities significantly, it seems that there are still jobs that require relatively few ICT skills.
Topic:
Economics, International Political Economy, Science and Technology, Digital Economy, Labor Market, Information Technology, and Skilled Labor
Political Geography:
Global Focus

83. Platform mergers and antitrust

Author:
Geoffrey Parker, Georgios Petropoulos, and Marshall Van Alstyne
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Platform ecosystems rely on economies of scale, data-driven economies of scope, high quality algorithmic systems, and strong network effects that frequently promote winner-takes-most markets. Some platform firms have grown rapidly and their merger and acquisition strategies have been very important factors in their growth. Big platforms’ market dominance has generated competition concerns that are difficult to assess with current merger policy tools. We examine the acquisition strategies of the five major US firms—Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft—since their inception. We discuss the main merger and acquisition theories of harm that can restrict market competition and reduce consumer welfare. To address competition concerns about acquisitions in big platform ecosystems we develop a four step proposal that incorporates: (1) a new ex-ante regulatory framework, (2) an update of the conditions under which the notification of mergers should be compulsory and the burden of proof should be reversed, (3) differential regulatory priorities in investigating horizontal versus vertical acquisitions, and (4) an update of competition enforcement tools to increase visibility into market data and trends.
Topic:
Markets, Digital Economy, Internet, Economy, and Innovation
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

84. Platform mergers and antitrust

Author:
Geoffrey Parker, Georgios Petropoulos, and Marshall Van Alstyne
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Platform ecosystems rely on economies of scale, data-driven economies of scope, high-quality algorithmic systems and strong network effects that typically promote winner-take-most markets. Some platform firms have grown rapidly and their merger and acquisition strategies have been very important factors in their growth. Market dominance by big platforms has led to competition concerns that are difficult to assess with current merger policy tools. In this paper, we examine the acquisition strategies since their inception of the five major US firms – Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft. We discuss the main merger and acquisition theories of harm that can restrict market competition and reduce consumer welfare. To address competition concerns arising from acquisitions in big platform ecosystems this paper sets out a four-step proposal that incorporates: (1) a new ex-ante regulatory framework, (2) an updating of the conditions under which the notification of mergers should be compulsory and the burden of proof should be reversed, (3) differential regulatory priorities in investigating horizontal versus vertical acquisitions, and (4) an updating of competition enforcement tools to increase visibility of market data and trends.
Topic:
Markets, Regulation, Digital Economy, Economy, Business, and Innovation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

85. Gen Z's Role in Shaping the Digital Economy

Author:
Oxford Economics
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Oxford Economics
Abstract:
A new report by Oxford Economics for Snap Inc. shows how members of Generation Z are poised to play a major role in the economy and labour market over the coming decade across six leading markets: Australia, France, Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, and the US. While the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic and the deep global recession triggered by measures to contain its spread have impacted younger workers, the accelerated shift towards a more digital economy will serve to the long-term advantage of Gen Z. Gen Z’s income from work will balloon from $440 billion to more than $3.5 trillion by 2030. We estimate their total consumer spending will be $3.0 trillion - equivalent to 11% of total household spending across the six economies. We developed a digital competence index measure. Pooling responses across our survey, Gen Z’s average competence score was 2.5% higher than Millennials and over 8% higher than Gen X. Beyond digital aptitude, our research has highlighted three Gen Z traits that we think are likely to serve them well in the future workplace
Topic:
Digital Economy, Youth, Digital Policy, Consumerism, and Generation Z
Political Geography:
Global Focus

86. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: Taking Stock of Europe’s New Trade Policy Strategy

Author:
Fredrik Erixon
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
This Policy Brief takes stock of the EU Trade Policy Review – the Commission’s proposed strategy for trade. Despite appearances, the Review doesn’t come close to its billing as a strategy for the new geopolitics of trade. In fact, the Review is weak on key geopolitical developments and rather gives the impression that the EU doesn’t have an ambition to shape outcomes. Obviously, the Review is anchored in Europe’s general economic climate: defensiveness on globalization, competition and digitalization. It follows that Europe is getting increasingly detached from world developments. There are several good parts in the Review. The Commission wants to revive and reform the World Trade Organisation, and it’s clear about what factors that have made the Geneva-based trade body dysfunctional. The Review also acknowledges that the EU will seek a closer alliance with the United States and use that for constructive purposes. Finally, it is welcome that the Commission proposes some new instruments for dealing with market distortions caused by foreign subsidies and protectionism in government procurement. All these initiatives can achieve good outcomes. However, they all require that Europe makes changes in its own policies and positions. The bad parts in the Review are Europe’s weak agenda for getting better market access in the growth regions in the world and its continued passivity on matters related to China. Europe’s main trade-policy challenge in the next decade is to ensure that businesses and consumers in Europe get better integrated with a world-market dynamism that predominantly will come from the Asian region. Absent a realistic and medium-term strategy for dealing with challenges connected to the rise of China, Europe will have difficulties getting the EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment approved. Europe needs an actionable agenda for addressing bilateral frictions with China and problems that occur outside bilateral trade. Finally, the ugly part of the trade strategy are all the commercial policies in the EU – with strong effects on trade – that aren’t recognized or only casually mentioned in the Review. The latter category includes the ambition to introduce an autonomous carbon border tax on imports. Such a policy comes at a high political and economic cost, and the measure’s effect on reducing global carbon emissions is at best very negligible.
Topic:
Globalization, International Political Economy, International Trade and Finance, Treaties and Agreements, European Union, Geopolitics, Digital Economy, and Trade
Political Geography:
Europe

87. “Too Big to Care” or “Too Big to Share”: The Digital Services Act and the Consequences of Reforming Intermediary Liability Rules

Author:
Fredrik Erixon
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
This paper reviews the Digital Services Act (DSA), a package of new rules for platforms proposed by the European Commission late last year. The paper takes stock of current and future situations for rules on content moderation and takedowns, and discusses how the DSA addresses the balance between the desired culture of openness online, on the one hand, and more pressures to take down not just illegal but harmful and objectionable content, on the other hand. The DSA introduces a few new transparency rules that follow previous codes of conduct: they are straightforward and desirable. However, it also brings in new know-your-customer rules and exacerbate the ambiguity surrounding the definition of illegal content. These types of rules will most likely have the effect that platforms will minimize risk even more by taking down more content that is legal. Moreover, there is a risk that the DSA will create new access barriers to platforms – with the result of making it difficult for smaller sellers to engage in contracts on platforms. New regulatory demands to monitor and address “systemic risks” will likely have the same effect: platforms will reduce their exposure to penalty risks by taking down and denying access for content that is legal but associated with risks. The DSA’s differentiation between large platforms and very large platforms is disingenuous and contradicts the purpose of many DSA rules. Obviously, exposing some platforms to harder rules will lead to content offshoring – a trend that is already big. Objectionable content – not to mention illegal content – will move from some platforms to others and lead extremists and others to build online environments where there is much mess content moderation. Furthermore, the new regulatory risks that come with being a very large platform will likely become an incentive for some large platforms to stay large – and not become very large. While the DSA is often billed as a package of regulations that will reduce the power of big platforms, it is more likely to lead to the exact opposite. Very large platforms have all the resources needed to comply with the new regulation while many other platforms don’t. As a result, the incumbency advantages of very large platforms are likely to get stronger.
Topic:
Culture, Digital Economy, Internet, and Digital Policy
Political Geography:
Europe

88. Digital Futures for Europe

Author:
Meelis Kitsing
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
There isn’t one model for success in the digital future; there are many. Europe is now debating what policies that could help to power entrepreneurship and growth in Europe’s economy, and some are arguing that Europe should make itself technologically sovereign – independent from the big platforms from the US. This is not the right approach – partly because there cannot be just one model applied in Europe if it is to become more successful in technology and competitiveness. This briefing paper argues that is far more important for Europe to create a better environment for companies to experiment and discover with new business models, and to learn from the past platform success while they do so. That requires a much greater space for entrepreneurship and that the EU and national governments stay away from excessive regulations that strain new business growth. Europe can be a powerful region that shapes rules and standards globally – “the Brussels effect”. But that isn’t the future for Europe if it ensnares entrepreneurs in red tape – “the Brussels defect”.
Topic:
International Political Economy, Digital Economy, Entrepreneurship, Economic Growth, and Digital Policy
Political Geography:
United States and Europe

89. Digital Manufacturing in India

Author:
Amrut Godbole, Sagnik Chakraborty, and Manjeet Kripalani
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations
Abstract:
Covid-19 has accelerated the process of digital manufacturing, already under way globally, and in India. Companies that saw it as an option, now understand it as an imperative. Within India, digital adoption by companies has outpaced their global peers on several criteria including new business and workforce models. A rush of foreign investment into India’s digital space, will expand this trend. This is a significant shift for India, as Covid’s geopolitical and economic fallout is the realignment of supply chains, largely away from China. India, with its size, market and tech capability, is seen as an alternative site – though it has not been an immediate beneficiary. That has been Vietnam, with its Asian proximity and favourable regulatory environment. However, India is cognizant of the opportunity, and the government has enacted some enabling policies. In November 2020, the Production Linked Incentive scheme (PLI) was extended to over a dozen sectors in which India is already competitive, like pharmaceuticals, automobile, telecom, textiles, electronic tech consumer products. These subsidies encourage products to be made in India, for the home and export market. Just prior to this, in September 2020, the government addressed a core problem in India – labour. It replaced 29 old legislations by four, simplified labour codes, to modernize labour regulations. Meanwhile, those companies in India, largely Indian and foreign multinationals, already on the digital manufacturing path, used the year to fast-track their digital adoption.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Digital Economy, Leadership, and Manufacturing
Political Geography:
South Asia and India

90. Updating the European industrial strategy for the post-pandemic world

Author:
Marta Pilati and Frederico Mollet
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Policy Centre (EPC)
Abstract:
On 27 April, the European Commission is expected to publish an update to their 2020 Industrial Strategy, a blueprint for an assertive European industrial policy that drives the digital and green transitions. While the current strategy’s broad principles continue to hold, it must now adapt to the post-pandemic world’s challenges. Furthermore, the original strategy only provided a high-level roadmap, with many areas requiring further development. Frederico Mollet and Marta Pilati break down European industry’s weaknesses and potential areas of success, the effects of COVID-19 this past year, key points of the 2020 Industrial Strategy and its relevance for Europe and beyond. They outline 16 recommendations which would strengthen the design and implementation of the programmes outlined in the current strategy, across four themes: finance, industrial ecosystems and alliances, technology transfer, and strategic autonomy.
Topic:
Development, Political Economy, European Union, Digital Economy, Green Technology, Industry, COVID-19, Strategic Autonomy, and European Commission
Political Geography:
Europe