IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/ecstat/estat_0336-1454_2000_num_339_1_7483.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Commerce électronique : ce que disent les chiffres et ce qu'il faudrait savoir

Author

Listed:
  • Éric Brousseau

Abstract

[fre] Le recensement des études quantitatives sur le commerce électronique et ses effets débouche sur un constat d'importantes lacunes dans la connaissance des mutations en cours. La nouveauté de certaines applications liées à Internet et la rapidité des évolutions ne sont pas seules en cause. La focalisation sur le mythe de la réalisation d'un marché parfait sur les réseaux numériques - et, partant, sur la commande en ligne - explique plusieurs limites dans l'appréhension et la mesure du phénomène. . Or, trois phénomènes majeurs doivent être soulignés. D'abord, le commerce électronique ne procède pas de l'Internet. Il s'est développé à partir d'autres technologies et plusieurs de ses formes continueront de reposer sur d'autres réseaux que l'Internet. Ensuite, de nombreux systèmes électroniques ne sont pas destinés à prendre en charge l'intégralité des opérations composant une transaction. Les réseaux numériques sont l'un des canaux par lesquels certaines opérations commerciales sont réalisées en conjonction avec le recours à d'autres canaux. En fonction des opérations prises en charge, différents types de commerce électronique aux effets contrastés se développent. Enfin, dans de très nombreuses situations, les réseaux numériques sont utilisés pour différencier les services et discriminer les consommateurs, plus que pour construire des marchés plus transparents. . Les observatoires du commerce électronique gagneraient donc à mettre au point des évaluations plus fines des usages concernés par l'électronisation et des logiques des systèmes mis en place. Ces évaluations renseigneraient sur les modalités contrastées d'électronisation du commerce dans les différentes composantes de l'économie. [spa] El censo de los estudios cuantitativos sobre el comercio electrónico y sus efectos pone de manifiesto grandes vacíos en cuanto al conocimiento de las mutaciones actuales. La novedad de ciertas aplicaciones relacionadas con Internet y la rapidez de las evoluciones no son las únicas causantes de esta situación. La creencia en el mito de la realización de un mercado perfecto en las redes numéricas - y, por tanto, en el pedido en línea - explica varios límites en la aprensión y la medición del fenómeno. . Ahora bien, tres fenómenos mayores deben señalarse. Primero, el comercio electrónico no procede de Internet. Se ha desarrollado basándose en otras tecnologías y muchas de sus formas seguirán descansando sobre otras redes que Internet. Luego, numerosos sistemas electrónicos no están destinados a hacerse cargo de la integralidad de las operaciones que constituyen una transacción. Las redes numéricas son uno de los canales por los cuales ciertas operaciones comerciales se realizan con el recurso a otros canales. Según las operaciones llevadas a cabo, se desarrollan diferentes tipos de comercio electrónico de efectos contrastados. En fin, en muchísimas situaciones, se usan las redes numéricas para diferenciar los servicios y discriminar los consumidores, antes que para construir unos mercados más transparentes. . Los observatorios del comercio electrónico se beneficiarían mucho de la elaboración de unas evaluaciones más finas de aquellos usos a los que la electronización concierne y de las lógicas de los sistemas ya en marcha. Estas evaluaciones podrían proporcionar datos sobre las modalidades contrastadas de electronización del comercio en los diferentes componentes de la economía. [eng] A survey of quantitative studies of e-commerce and its effects finds large gaps in the knowledge of the changes underway. New Internet applications and the speed of change are not the only reasons for this. The focus on the myth of creating a perfect market from digital networks - and on-line sales - explains some of the limitations in understanding and measuring the phenomenon. . Yet three major phenomena merit mention. First of all, e-commerce does not derive from the Internet. It was developed using other technologies and many of its forms continue to be based on networks other than the Internet. Secondly, many electronic systems are not meant to handle all the operations in a transaction. Digital networks are just one of the channels by which certain commercial transactions are carried out in conjunction with other channels. Different types of e-commerce are developing with different effects depending on the operations carried out. Thirdly, in a great many situations, digital networks are used more to differentiate services and customers than to build more transparent markets.. E-commerce observatories would therefore do better to develop more detailed evaluations of the uses to which electronisation is put and the reasoning behind the systems set up. These evaluations would provide information on the different commercial electronisation methods in the different components of the economy. [ger] Die Auswertung der quantitativen Studien über den elektronischen Handel und seine Auswirkungen ergibt, dass hinsichtlich der Kenntnis der derzeit vonstatten gehenden Umwälzungen erhebliche Lücken bestehen. Zurückzuführen ist dies nicht nur auf die Neuheit bestimmter Internet-Anwendungen und die Schnelligkeit der Entwicklungen. Die Konzentration auf den Mythos der Schaffung eines vollkommenen Marktes mittels Digitalnetzen -und davon ausgehend auf die Online-Bestellungen -erklärt, weshalb Bewertung und Messung dieses Phänomens auf mehrere Grenzen stoßen. . Drei wichtige Phänomene sind hier jedoch besonders herauszustellen. Zunächst ist der elektronische Handel keine Errungenschaft des Internet. Er entwickelte sich auf der Grundlage anderer Technologien, wobei mehrere Formen davon auch weiterhin über andere Netze als das Internet abgewickelt werden. Zweitens sind zahl- reiche elektronische Systeme nicht für alle Operationen einer Transaktion ausgelegt. Die Digitalnetze stellen einen der Kanäle dar, über die bestimmte Handelsgeschäfte bei gleichzeitiger Hinzuziehung anderer Kanäle getätigt werden. Je nach den Operationsformen haben sich verschiedene Arten des elektronischen Handels mit entgegensetzten Auswirkungen entwickelt. In sehr vielen Situationen werden die Digitalnetze eher zur Unterscheidung der Dienste und der Verbraucher als zur Schaffung transparenterer Märkte benutzt. . Die Beobachtungsstellen des elektronischen Handels sollten deshalb feinere Verfahren zur Bewertung der verschiedenen elektronischen Anwendungen und der Logiken der geschaffenen Systeme entwickeln. Diese Bewertungen würden darüber Auskunft geben, wie kontrastreich die Modalitäten der Elektronisierung des Handels in sämtlichen Wirtschaftszweigen sind.

Suggested Citation

  • Éric Brousseau, 2000. "Commerce électronique : ce que disent les chiffres et ce qu'il faudrait savoir," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 339(1), pages 147-170.
  • Handle: RePEc:prs:ecstat:estat_0336-1454_2000_num_339_1_7483
    DOI: 10.3406/estat.2000.7483
    Note: DOI:10.3406/estat.2000.7483
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/estat.2000.7483
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/estat_0336-1454_2000_num_339_1_7483
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3406/estat.2000.7483?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erik Brynjolfsson & Michael D. Smith, 2000. "Frictionless Commerce? A Comparison of Internet and Conventional Retailers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(4), pages 563-585, April.
    2. David Lucking-Reiley & Daniel F. Spulber, 2001. "Business-to-Business Electronic Commerce," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 55-68, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eric Brousseau, 2002. "The Governance of Transactions by Commercial Intermediaries: An Analysis of the Re-engineering of Intermediation by Electronic Commerce," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 353-374.
    2. Jérôme FONCEL & Marianne GUYOT & Frédéric JOUNEAU - SION, 2011. "The shop around the corner in the Internet age," Discussion Papers (REL - Recherches Economiques de Louvain) 2011025, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    3. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13244 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ouaida, Fadila & El Hajjar, Samer, 2018. "Assessing e-commerce productivity for French micro firms using propensity score matching," Economics Discussion Papers 2018-66, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    5. repec:dau:papers:123456789/12502 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Claire Chambolle & Marie-Elise Dumans, 2002. "Internet et la grande distribution alimentaire française," Économie rurale, Programme National Persée, vol. 272(1), pages 42-56.
    7. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13246 is not listed on IDEAS

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arup Daripa & Sandeep Kapur, 2001. "Pricing on the Internet," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 17(2), pages 202-216, Summer.
    2. James V. Koch & Richard J. Cebula, 2002. "Price, Quality, And Service On The Internet: Sense And Nonsense," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 20(1), pages 25-37, January.
    3. Emin M. Dinlersoz & Ruben Hernandez-Murillo, 2004. "The diffusion of electronic business in the U.S," Working Papers 2004-009, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
    4. Michael Thompson & Steve Thompson, 2006. "Pricing in a market without apparent horizontal differentiation: Evidence from web hosting services," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(7), pages 649-663.
    5. Anindya Ghose & Avi Goldfarb & Sang Pil Han, 2013. "How Is the Mobile Internet Different? Search Costs and Local Activities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 613-631, September.
    6. Babur De los Santos & Sergei Koulayev, 2017. "Optimizing Click-Through in Online Rankings with Endogenous Search Refinement," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(4), pages 542-564, July.
    7. Zhu, Hongwei & Madnick, Stuart & Siegel, Michael, 2003. "Global Comparison Aggregation Services," Working papers 4410-02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    8. Guido Fioretti, 2004. "Will industrial districts exploit B2B? A local experience and a general assessment," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 221-242, December.
    9. Moraga-González, José L. & Sándor, Zsolt & Wildenbeest, Matthijs R., 2014. "Prices, Product Differentiation, And Heterogeneous Search Costs," IESE Research Papers D/1097, IESE Business School.
    10. Edgardo Arturo Ayala Gaytán, 2009. "Social network externalities and price dispersion in online markets," Ensayos Revista de Economia, Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon, Facultad de Economia, vol. 0(2), pages 1-28, November.
    11. Brett Danaher & Michael D. Smith & Rahul Telang, 2014. "Piracy and Copyright Enforcement Mechanisms," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(1), pages 25-61.
    12. Peter L. Stenberg & Mitchell Morehart, 2012. "The existence of pent-up demand for rural broadband services: an exploration," Chapters, in: Charlie Karlsson & Börje Johansson & Roger R. Stough (ed.), Entrepreneurship, Social Capital and Governance, chapter 9, pages 221-240, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Gandal, Neil, 2001. "The dynamics of competition in the internet search engine market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(7), pages 1103-1117, July.
    14. Renato Gomes & Alessandro Pavan, 2013. "Cross-Subsidization and Matching Design," Discussion Papers 1559, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    15. Nitin Walia & Mark Srite & Wendy Huddleston, 2016. "Eyeing the web interface: the influence of price, product, and personal involvement," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 297-333, September.
    16. Gaurav Khatwani & Gopal Das, 2016. "Evaluating combination of individual pre-purchase internet information channels using hybrid fuzzy MCDM technique: demographics as moderators," International Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(1), pages 28-49.
    17. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Georg Kirchsteiger & Markus Walzl, 2010. "On the Evolution of Market Institutions: The Platform Design Paradox," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(543), pages 215-243, March.
    18. Patrick Bajari & Ali Hortaçsu, 2004. "Economic Insights from Internet Auctions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(2), pages 457-486, June.
    19. Gary E. Bolton & Elena Katok & Axel Ockenfels, 2004. "How Effective Are Electronic Reputation Mechanisms? An Experimental Investigation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1587-1602, November.
    20. Burdett, Ken & Smith, Eric, 2010. "Price distributions and competition," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 106(3), pages 180-183, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:prs:ecstat:estat_0336-1454_2000_num_339_1_7483. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Equipe PERSEE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/estat .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.