ICLE Comments, The Current Landscape of Competition and Consumer Protection Law and Policy

Dirk Auer, J. Hurwitz, Geoffrey A. Manne, Julian Morris, Kristian Stout
{"title":"ICLE Comments, The Current Landscape of Competition and Consumer Protection Law and Policy","authors":"Dirk Auer, J. Hurwitz, Geoffrey A. Manne, Julian Morris, Kristian Stout","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3384403","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"These comments were submitted to the FTC as part of its hearings on “Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century.” As part of our comments, we note the timeliness of the hearings, given that, despite the vast social benefits generated by companies operating in the digital economy, the ongoing economic transformation has stoked fears amongst members of the general public, the press, and policymakers. This transformation has led to calls for interventionist policies such as heightened antitrust enforcement, sector-specific regulation, and direct intervention against industry concentration.<br><br>We further note that there is insufficient evidence and, at best, ambivalent theory to support any of these proposed policies—and in the absence of a strong basis for adopting them, the proposed policies would do more harm than good. Among other things, economies of scale, economies of scope, net- work effects, and the like may bring about larger firms and more concentrated markets along with considerable consumer benefits. And new markets necessarily imply the consolidation of some firms and the exit of others, as competitors vie to come up with the winning paradigm. Against the backdrop of this evolutionary process, it is critical that authorities avoid knee-jerk reactions that may impair the long-term welfare of consumers and firms alike.<br><br>Our comment reviews some of the important findings which law and economics scholarship can bring to bear on competition and consumer protection enforcement in this space.","PeriodicalId":252599,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Administrative Enforcement (Sub-Topic)","volume":"296 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Administrative Enforcement (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3384403","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

These comments were submitted to the FTC as part of its hearings on “Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century.” As part of our comments, we note the timeliness of the hearings, given that, despite the vast social benefits generated by companies operating in the digital economy, the ongoing economic transformation has stoked fears amongst members of the general public, the press, and policymakers. This transformation has led to calls for interventionist policies such as heightened antitrust enforcement, sector-specific regulation, and direct intervention against industry concentration.

We further note that there is insufficient evidence and, at best, ambivalent theory to support any of these proposed policies—and in the absence of a strong basis for adopting them, the proposed policies would do more harm than good. Among other things, economies of scale, economies of scope, net- work effects, and the like may bring about larger firms and more concentrated markets along with considerable consumer benefits. And new markets necessarily imply the consolidation of some firms and the exit of others, as competitors vie to come up with the winning paradigm. Against the backdrop of this evolutionary process, it is critical that authorities avoid knee-jerk reactions that may impair the long-term welfare of consumers and firms alike.

Our comment reviews some of the important findings which law and economics scholarship can bring to bear on competition and consumer protection enforcement in this space.
竞争与消费者保护法律和政策的现状
这些评论是作为“21世纪竞争与消费者保护”听证会的一部分提交给联邦贸易委员会的。作为我们评论的一部分,我们注意到听证会的及时性,因为尽管在数字经济中运营的公司产生了巨大的社会效益,但正在进行的经济转型引发了公众、媒体和政策制定者的担忧。这种转变导致了对干预主义政策的呼吁,如加强反垄断执法、针对特定行业的监管,以及对行业集中的直接干预。我们进一步指出,没有足够的证据,充其量也就是矛盾的理论来支持任何这些拟议的政策,并且在缺乏采取这些政策的强有力基础的情况下,拟议的政策弊大于利。在其他方面,规模经济、范围经济、网络效应等可能带来更大的公司和更集中的市场,同时给消费者带来可观的利益。新的市场必然意味着一些公司的整合和其他公司的退出,因为竞争对手竞相提出获胜的模式。在这一进化过程的背景下,至关重要的是,当局要避免可能损害消费者和企业长期福利的条件反射式反应。我们的评论回顾了法律和经济学研究在这一领域的竞争和消费者保护执法方面可能带来的一些重要发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信