IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/bjeust/v3y2013i1p84-120n6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory Patterns of the Internet Development: Expanding the Role of Private Stakeholders through Mediatized “Self-regulation”

Author

Listed:
  • Solarte-Vasquez Maria Claudia

    (Department of Public Economy, Tallinn University of Technology Akadeemia tee 3, Tallinn 12618, Estonia)

Abstract

This article studies the Internet from an evolutionary point of view, based on historic analysis, to confirm institutional change predictions suggested by Utterback’s innovation development theory. It explores the appearance of rules and the consolidation of public and private initiatives that could enhance the capacity of the private sector to coregulate in the digital sphere, which is especially relevant to the field of electronic commerce-related transactions. This institutional review distinguishes between two distinct layers of the Internet. Also, formal and informal regulatory patterns are identified in their evolutionary stages, revealing the prevailing models: unregulated, self-regulated, co-regulated, or regulated. These conceptual associations aim to provide a framework scheme to further study specific topics in the fields of Internet governance, digital economy, and the information society. This primer should also induce interdisciplinary research, for better understanding on how rules influence digital innovation and behaviour, in practice. Implicit in this account is that most of the credit for the efficient development of these technologies, in their two layers, during their first stages, might be attributed to the availability of collective, collaborating, or independent self-regulatory capacity. The most immediate observations show a growing tendency towards over-prescriptive regulatory systems, promoted to control its use and content; incompatible with the needs and interests of the majority of stakeholders. A concluding claim is that the Internet and telecommunication technologies in general, considered as enabling mediums, would benefit from dynamic and mixed regulatory solutions, according to and depending on whether their object is their infrastructure or the surface layer of its applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Solarte-Vasquez Maria Claudia, 2013. "Regulatory Patterns of the Internet Development: Expanding the Role of Private Stakeholders through Mediatized “Self-regulation”," TalTech Journal of European Studies, Sciendo, vol. 3(1), pages 84-120, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:vrs:bjeust:v:3:y:2013:i:1:p:84-120:n:6
    DOI: 10.2478/bjes-2013-0006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/bjes-2013-0006
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/bjes-2013-0006?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. Franco Malerba, 2005. "Sectoral systems of innovation: a framework for linking innovation to the knowledge base, structure and dynamics of sectors," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1-2), pages 63-82.
    2. Abbate, Janet, 2001. "Government, Business, and the Making of the Internet," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(1), pages 147-176, April.
    3. Erik S. Reinert (ed.), 2004. "Globalization, Economic Development and Inequality," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1570.
    4. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    5. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13245 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Eric Brousseau, 2004. "Property rights on the internet: is a specific institutional framework needed?," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(5), pages 489-507.
    7. Keith E. Maskus, 2000. "Intellectual Property Rights in the Global Economy," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 99, April.
    8. Mowery, David C. & Simcoe, Timothy, 2002. "Is the Internet a US invention?--an economic and technological history of computer networking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1369-1387, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items 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. Chang, Yuan-Chieh & Chen, Min-Nan, 2016. "Service regime and innovation clusters: An empirical study from service firms in Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1845-1857.
    2. Horst Hanusch & Andreas Pyka, 2007. "Principles of Neo-Schumpeterian Economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 31(2), pages 275-289, March.
    3. Roffe, Pedro & Santa Cruz, Maximiliano, 2007. "Intellectual property rights and sustainable development: a survey of major issues," Documentos de Proyectos 3591, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    4. Lederman, Daniel & Saenz, Laura, 2005. "Innovation and development around the world, 1960-2000," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3774, The World Bank.
    5. Baldwin, Carliss Y. & Bogers, Marcel L.A.M. & Kapoor, Rahul & West, Joel, 2024. "Focusing the ecosystem lens on innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    6. Dilani Hirimuthugodage, 2011. "The Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Agreement and Agriculture in South Asia," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 12(2), pages 287-305, September.
    7. Alireza Naghavi & Chiara Strozzi, 2011. "Intellectual Property Rights, Migration, and Diaspora," Working Papers 2011.60, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    8. Roger Hayter & Klaus Edenhoffer, 2016. "Evolutionary Geography of a Mature Resource Sector: Shakeouts and Shakeins in British Columbia's Forest Industries 1980 to 2008," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 497-519, December.
    9. Tavassoli, Sam, 2015. "Innovation determinants over industry life cycle," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 18-32.
    10. Camelia Ilie & Gaston Fornes & Guillermo Cardoza & Juan Carlos Mondragón Quintana, 2020. "Development of Business Schools in Emerging Markets: Learning through Adoption and Adaptation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-28, October.
    11. Paolo E. Giordani & Francesco Rullani, 2020. "The Digital Revolution and COVID-19," Working Papers 06, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    12. Viktoria Kocsis & Victoria Shestalova & Henry van der Wiel & Nick Zubanov & Ruslan Lukach & Bert Minne, 2009. "Relation entry, exit and productivity: an overview of recent theoretical and empirical literature," CPB Document 180.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    13. Shiyuan Pan & Heng-fu Zou & Tailong Li, 2010. "Patent Protection, Technological Change and Wage Inequality," CEMA Working Papers 437, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
    14. Pietro Moncada-Paternò-Castello, 2022. "Top R&D investors, structural change and the R&D growth performance of young and old firms," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(1), pages 1-33, March.
    15. Cecere, Grazia & Corrocher, Nicoletta & Battaglia, Riccardo David, 2015. "Innovation and competition in the smartphone industry: Is there a dominant design?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 162-175.
    16. Ieda Margarete Oro & Carlos Eduardo Facin Lavarda, 2017. "Interaction Between Strategy and Organizational Performance: The Influence of Family Management," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 14(5), pages 493-509, September.
    17. Konstantinos Koasidis & Anastasios Karamaneas & Alexandros Nikas & Hera Neofytou & Erlend A. T. Hermansen & Kathleen Vaillancourt & Haris Doukas, 2020. "Many Miles to Paris: A Sectoral Innovation System Analysis of the Transport Sector in Norway and Canada in Light of the Paris Agreement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-37, July.
    18. Lee Branstetter & Raymond Fisman & C. Fritz Foley, 2005. "Do Stronger Intellectual Property Rights Increase International Technology Transfer? Empirical Evidence from U.S. Firm-Level Data," NBER Working Papers 11516, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    20. Albert, Till & Moehrle, Martin G. & Meyer, Stefan, 2015. "Technology maturity assessment based on blog analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 196-209.

    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:vrs:bjeust:v:3:y:2013:i:1:p:84-120:n:6. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    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.