IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tiu/tiucen/81ca5cc3-d384-4bc4-af82-d2c6969aee43.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Governance of Data Sharing : a Law & Economics Proposal

Author

Listed:
  • Graef, Inge

    (Tilburg University, Center For Economic Research)

  • Prüfer, Jens

    (Tilburg University, Center For Economic Research)

Abstract

To prevent market tipping, which inhibits innovation, there is an urgent need to mandate sharing of user information in data-driven markets. Existing legal mechanisms to impose data sharing under EU competition law and data portability under the GDPR are not sufficient to tackle this problem. Mandated data sharing requires the design of a governance structure that combines elements of economically efficient centralization with legally necessary decentralization. We identify three feasible options. One is to centralize investigations and enforcement in a European Data Sharing Agency (EDSA), while decision-making power lies with National Competition Authorities in a Board of Supervisors. The second option is to set up a Data Sharing Cooperation Network coordinated through a European Data Sharing Board, with the National Competition Authority best placed to run the investigation adjudicating and enforcing the mandatory data-sharing decision across the EU. A third option is to mix both governance structures and to task national authorities to investigate and adjudicate and the EU-level EDSA with enforcement of data sharing.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Graef, Inge & Prüfer, Jens, 2021. "Governance of Data Sharing : a Law & Economics Proposal," Discussion Paper 2021-004, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:tiu:tiucen:81ca5cc3-d384-4bc4-af82-d2c6969aee43
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://pure.uvt.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/47589361/2021_004.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dirk Bergemann & Alessandro Bonatti & Tan Gan, 2022. "The economics of social data," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(2), pages 263-296, June.
    2. Jullien, Bruno & Sand-Zantman, Wilfried, 2021. "The Economics of Platforms: A Theory Guide for Competition Policy," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    3. Cédric Argenton & Jens Prüfer, 2012. "Search Engine Competition With Network Externalities," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 73-105.
    4. Oliver E. Williamson, 2005. "The Economics of Governance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(2), pages 1-18, May.
    5. Schaefer, Maximilian & Sapi, Geza & Lorincz, Szabolcs, 2018. "The effect of big data on recommendation quality: The example of internet search," DICE Discussion Papers 284, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    6. Gary Biglaiser & Emilio Calvano & Jacques Crémer, 2019. "Incumbency advantage and its value," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 41-48, January.
    7. Patrick Bajari & Victor Chernozhukov & Ali Hortaçsu & Junichi Suzuki, 2019. "The Impact of Big Data on Firm Performance: An Empirical Investigation," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 109, pages 33-37, May.
    8. Avinash Dixit, 2009. "Governance Institutions and Economic Activity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 5-24, March.
    9. Prüfer, Jens, 2018. "Trusting privacy in the cloud," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 52-67.
    10. Jin, Ginger Zhe & Wagman, Liad, 2021. "Big data at the crossroads of antitrust and consumer protection," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    11. Aldashev, Gani & Zanarone, Giorgio, 2017. "Endogenous enforcement institutions," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 49-64.
    12. Benjamin Edelman, 2015. "Does Google Leverage Market Power Through Tying And Bundling?," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 365-400.
    13. Scott E. Masten & Jens Prüfer, 2014. "On the Evolution of Collective Enforcement Institutions: Communities and Courts," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(2), pages 359-400.
    14. Xuelin Li & Andrew W. Lo & Richard T. Thakor, 2021. "Paying off the Competition: Contracting, Market Power, and Innovation Incentives," NBER Working Papers 28964, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Calvano, Emilio & Polo, Michele, 2021. "Market power, competition and innovation in digital markets: A survey," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    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. Ken Polin & Tan Yigitcanlar & Tracy Washington & Mark Limb, 2024. "Unpacking Smart Campus Assessment: Developing a Framework via Narrative Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-24, March.
    2. Soltanzadeh, Javad & Blind, Knut & Elyasi, Mehdi, 2023. "Exploring how regulators face platform business issues in the lifecycle stages: Evidence of iranian ride-hailing platform business," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7).
    3. Fossen, Frank M. & McLemore, Trevor & Sorgner, Alina, 2024. "Artificial Intelligence and Entrepreneurship," IZA Discussion Papers 17055, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Christian Peukert & Margaritha Windisch, 2023. "The Economics of Copyright in the Digital Age," CESifo Working Paper Series 10687, CESifo.

    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. Argentesi, Elena & Buccirossi, Paolo & Calvano, Emilio & Duso, Tomaso & Marrazzo, Alessia & Nava, Salvatore, 2021. "Merger Policy in Digital Markets: An Ex Post Assessment," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 17(1), pages 95-140.
    2. Schaefer, Maximilian & Sapi, Geza, 2023. "Complementarities in learning from data: Insights from general search," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    3. Ehsan Valavi & Joel Hestness & Newsha Ardalani & Marco Iansiti, 2022. "Time and the Value of Data," Papers 2203.09118, arXiv.org.
    4. Zhijun Chen & Chongwoo Choe & Jiajia Cong & Noriaki Matsushima, 2022. "Data‐driven mergers and personalization," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(1), pages 3-31, March.
    5. Calvano, Emilio & Polo, Michele, 2021. "Market power, competition and innovation in digital markets: A survey," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    6. Catherine Locatelli & Sylvain Rossiaud, 2011. "A neoinstitutionalist interpretation of the changes in the Russian oil model," Post-Print halshs-00631115, HAL.
    7. Zhijun Chen & pch346 & Chongwoo Choe & Jiajia Cong & Noriaki Matsushima, 2020. "Data-Driven Mergers and Personalization," Monash Economics Working Papers 16-20, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    8. Shan Huang & Michael Allan Ribers & Hannes Ullrich, 2021. "The Value of Data for Prediction Policy Problems: Evidence from Antibiotic Prescribing," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1939, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    9. Sedlacek, Sabine & Maier, Gunther, 2012. "Can green building councils serve as third party governance institutions? An economic and institutional analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 479-487.
    10. Hemant Bhargava & Antoine Dubus & David Ronayne & Shiva Shekhar, 2024. "The Strategic Value of Data Sharing in Interdependent Markets," CESifo Working Paper Series 10963, CESifo.
    11. Jens Prüfer & Christoph Schottmüller, 2021. "Competing with Big Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(4), pages 967-1008, December.
    12. Srivastava, Vatsalya, 2017. "The Sorry Clause (Revision of TILEC DP 2016-004)," Other publications TiSEM 5925920e-05c6-4ae0-8e76-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Katz, Michael L., 2021. "Big Tech mergers: Innovation, competition for the market, and the acquisition of emerging competitors," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    14. Sabine Sedlacek & Gunther Maier, 2012. "Green Building Councils: Their Economic Role as Governance Institutions," SRE-Disc sre-disc-2012_02, Institute for Multilevel Governance and Development, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    15. Yiquan Gu & Leonardo Madio & Carlo Reggiani, 2022. "Data brokers co-opetition [The impact of big data on firm performance: an empirical investigation]," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(3), pages 820-839.
    16. Alexandre Chirat, 2022. "Consumer sovereignty in the digital society," EconomiX Working Papers 2022-25, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    17. Catherine Locatelli, 2015. "Les échanges gaziers entre la Russie et la Chine à l’ aune de leur sécurité énergétique," Post-Print hal-01206226, HAL.
    18. Srivastava, Vatsalya, 2017. "The Sorry Clause (revision of CentER DP 2016-008)," Discussion Paper 2017-002, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    19. Locatelli, Catherine & Rossiaud, Sylvain, 2011. "A neoinstitutionalist interpretation of the changes in the Russian oil model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5588-5597, September.
    20. Srivastava, Vatsalya, 2016. "The Sorry Clause," Discussion Paper 2016-008, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Data sharing; data-driven markets; economic governance; competition law; data protection; regulation;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:tiu:tiucen:81ca5cc3-d384-4bc4-af82-d2c6969aee43. 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: Richard Broekman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://center.uvt.nl .

    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.