IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/iptwpa/jrc53035.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Web 2.0: Where does Europe stand?

Author

Listed:
  • Sven Lindmark

Abstract

This report provides a techno-economic analysis of Web 2.0 and an assessment of Europe's position in Web 2.0 applications. Firstly, it introduces the phenomenon of Web 2.0 and its main characteristics: technologies, applications, and user roles. It then provides an overview of its adoption, value chain and business models, before moving to an analysis of its drivers, industrial impact and disruptive potential. Finally, the report assesses the position of the European Web 2.0 applications industry and its prospects for growth. "Web 2.0" is defined as a set of applications (blogs, wikis, social tagging, social gaming etc.), technologies (including AJAX, syndication feeds, mash-ups, and wiki engines) and user roles. The most pertinent characteristic of Web 2.0, as compared to the previous "version" of the Web, is that it enables users to become, with little effort, a co-provider of content. The available figures about recent Web 2.0 diffusion deliver two messages. Firstly, its spread is extremely rapid by any standards, although not uniform for all its applications. Secondly, the intensity with which users participate differs a lot. At the centre of the Web 2.0 value chain are the providers of Web 2.0 applications who may be pure Web 2.0 players or traditional players from related industries such as the media and Web 1.0 industry. They provide opportunities for users to network and/or to create content. As yet, no dominant revenue model for Web 2.0 content-hosting sites has been established, although advertising is the most common one. The content hosting platforms may in turn choose to remunerate content creators through different revenue-sharing schemes, or simply rely on their voluntary contributions. We discuss four aspects of Web 2.0 which may have a disruptive impact on industry: (1) Providers of Web 2.0 applications are becoming increasingly numerous and large, and contribute to growth and employment. (2) They already constitute an important threat to other industries, in particular content industries. The content industry is responding by diversifying into Web 2.0. (3) Web 2.0 applications and software are being increasingly adopted by the enterprise and public sectors as tools for improving internal work processes, managing customer and public relations, innovation, recruitment and networking. (4) The growth of Web 2.0 leads to a derived demand in the supply of ICT hardware and software. Europe's current position in the supply and development of Web 2.0 applications is rather weak. Although Web 2.0 is used almost as much in Europe as it is in Asia and the US, Web 2.0 applications are largely provided by US companies, while Europe and all other regions are left behind. About two thirds of the major Web 2.0 applications are provided by US companies, with similar shares for revenues, employees, and even higher shares for innovation indicators such as patents, venture capital and R&D expenditures. The corresponding shares for the EU are around 10%. Nevertheless, Europe could have the advantage in some areas of the Web 2.0 landscape, for example social gaming, social networking, and Mobile 2.0.

Suggested Citation

  • Sven Lindmark, 2009. "Web 2.0: Where does Europe stand?," JRC Research Reports JRC53035, Joint Research Centre.
  • Handle: RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc53035
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC53035
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mowery,David C. & Nelson,Richard R. (ed.), 1999. "Sources of Industrial Leadership," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521645201, January.
    2. M. Rusydi & Sardar M. N. Islam, 2007. "Market Models and Applications," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Quantitative Exchange Rate Economics in Developing Countries, chapter 4, pages 45-62, Palgrave Macmillan.
    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. Casper, Steven & Whitley, Richard, 2004. "Managing competences in entrepreneurial technology firms: a comparative institutional analysis of Germany, Sweden and the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 89-106, January.
    2. Hao Tan, 2017. "Making impact through industry-focused research: An Asia Pacific perspective," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 487-503, September.
    3. Gersbach, Hans & Sorger, Gerhard & Amon, Christian, 2018. "Hierarchical growth: Basic and applied research," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 434-459.
    4. Magerman, Tom & Looy, Bart Van & Debackere, Koenraad, 2015. "Does involvement in patenting jeopardize one’s academic footprint? An analysis of patent-paper pairs in biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 1702-1713.
    5. Nathan Rosenberg, 2009. "Some Critical Episodes in the Progress of Medical Innovation: An Anglo-American Perspective," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 14, pages 275-301, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Oyelaran-Oyeyinka, Banji & Gehl Sampath, Padmashree, 2006. "Rough Road to Market: Institutional Barriers to Innovations in Africa," MERIT Working Papers 2006-026, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    7. Christensen, Kim & Kinnebrock, Silja & Podolskij, Mark, 2010. "Pre-averaging estimators of the ex-post covariance matrix in noisy diffusion models with non-synchronous data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 159(1), pages 116-133, November.
    8. Moaniba, Igam M. & Su, Hsin-Ning & Lee, Pei-Chun, 2019. "On the drivers of innovation: Does the co-evolution of technological diversification and international collaboration matter?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    9. Antonelli, Cristiano & Krafft, Jackie & Quatraro, Francesco, 2010. "Recombinant knowledge and growth: The case of ICTs," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 50-69, March.
    10. Marian Beise, 2004. "Lead Markets, Innovation Differentials and Growth," Discussion Paper Series 157, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
    11. Dolata, Ulrich & Schrape, Jan-Felix, 2022. "Platform architectures: The structuration of platform companies on the Internet," Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies, SOI Discussion Papers 2022-01, University of Stuttgart, Institute for Social Sciences, Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies.
    12. Attila Havas, 2016. "Social and Business Innovations: Are Common Measurement Approaches Possible?," Foresight-Russia Форсайт, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 10(2 (eng)), pages 58-80.
    13. Fulvio Castellacci, 2007. "Technological regimes and sectoral differences in productivity growth ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(6), pages 1105-1145, December.
    14. Anna Grandori, 2013. "Models of rationality in economic organization: ‘economic’, ‘experiential’ and ‘epistemic’," Chapters, in: Anna Grandori (ed.), Handbook of Economic Organization, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Mario Coccia, 2017. "The relation between typologies of executive and technological performances of nations," IRCrES Working Paper 201701, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY.
    16. Malerba, Franco & Nelson, Richard & Orsenigo, Luigi & Winter, Sidney, 2001. "Competition and industrial policies in a 'history friendly' model of the evolution of the computer industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 635-664, April.
    17. Giovanni Dosi & Patrick Llerena & Mauro Sylos Labin, 2005. "Science-Technology-Industry Links and the ”European Paradox”: Some Notes on the Dynamics of Scientific and Technological Research in Europe," Working Papers of BETA 2005-11, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    18. Gholz, Eugene & James, Andrew D. & Speller, Thomas H., 2018. "The second face of systems integration: An empirical analysis of supply chains to complex product systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1478-1494.
    19. Lynn K. Mytelka, 2006. "Divides and rules: the impact of new wave technologies on learning and innovation in the South," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(6), pages 861-876.
    20. Vanhaverbeke, W.P.M. & Beerkens, B.E. & Duysters, G.M., 2003. "Explorative and exploitative learning strategies in technology-based alliance networks," Working Papers 03.22, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    EU; web; 2.0;
    All these keywords.

    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:ipt:iptwpa:jrc53035. 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: Publication Officer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipjrces.html .

    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.