Opportunities for self-preferencing in international online marketplaces

IF 4.8 3区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Lukas Jürgensmeier, Jan Bischoff, Bernd Skiera
{"title":"Opportunities for self-preferencing in international online marketplaces","authors":"Lukas Jürgensmeier, Jan Bischoff, Bernd Skiera","doi":"10.1108/imr-03-2024-0094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>Large digital platforms face intense scrutiny over self-preferencing, which involves a platform provider favoring its own offers over those of competitors. In online marketplaces, also called retail or e-commerce platforms, much of the academic and regulatory debate focuses on determining whether the marketplace provider gives preference to its own private labels, such as “Amazon Basics” or Walmart’s “Great Value” products. However, we outline, both conceptually and empirically, that self-preferencing can also occur through other dimensions of vertical integration – namely, retailing and fulfillment.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>This article contributes by conceptualizing three dimensions of vertical integration in online marketplaces – private labels, retailing and fulfillment. Then, two studies empirically assess (1) which of the 20 most-visited global online marketplaces vertically integrates which dimension and (2) which share of 600 m available offers is vertically integrated to which degree in eleven international Amazon marketplaces.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The majority of the leading marketplaces vertically integrate all three dimensions, implying ample opportunities for self-preferencing. Across international Amazon marketplaces, only 0.02% of available offers consist of an Amazon private-label product. However, Amazon is a retailer for around 31% and fulfills around 38% of all available offers in its marketplaces. Hence, self-preferencing on Amazon can occur most frequently through retailing and fulfillment but comparatively infrequently through private-label offers. Still, these shares differ substantially by country – every second offer is vertically integrated in the USA, but only one in ten in India.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>Most of the self-preferencing debate often focuses on private-label products. Instead, we present large-scale empirical results showing that self-preferencing on Amazon could occur most often through retailing and fulfillment because these channels affect much larger shares of offers. We also measure the variation of these shares across countries and relate them to regulatory environments.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":14456,"journal":{"name":"International Marketing Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Marketing Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/imr-03-2024-0094","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Large digital platforms face intense scrutiny over self-preferencing, which involves a platform provider favoring its own offers over those of competitors. In online marketplaces, also called retail or e-commerce platforms, much of the academic and regulatory debate focuses on determining whether the marketplace provider gives preference to its own private labels, such as “Amazon Basics” or Walmart’s “Great Value” products. However, we outline, both conceptually and empirically, that self-preferencing can also occur through other dimensions of vertical integration – namely, retailing and fulfillment.

Design/methodology/approach

This article contributes by conceptualizing three dimensions of vertical integration in online marketplaces – private labels, retailing and fulfillment. Then, two studies empirically assess (1) which of the 20 most-visited global online marketplaces vertically integrates which dimension and (2) which share of 600 m available offers is vertically integrated to which degree in eleven international Amazon marketplaces.

Findings

The majority of the leading marketplaces vertically integrate all three dimensions, implying ample opportunities for self-preferencing. Across international Amazon marketplaces, only 0.02% of available offers consist of an Amazon private-label product. However, Amazon is a retailer for around 31% and fulfills around 38% of all available offers in its marketplaces. Hence, self-preferencing on Amazon can occur most frequently through retailing and fulfillment but comparatively infrequently through private-label offers. Still, these shares differ substantially by country – every second offer is vertically integrated in the USA, but only one in ten in India.

Originality/value

Most of the self-preferencing debate often focuses on private-label products. Instead, we present large-scale empirical results showing that self-preferencing on Amazon could occur most often through retailing and fulfillment because these channels affect much larger shares of offers. We also measure the variation of these shares across countries and relate them to regulatory environments.

国际在线市场自我推荐的机遇
目的大型数字平台在自我推荐问题上面临着严格的审查,这涉及到平台提供商偏袒自己的产品而非竞争对手的产品。在在线市场(也称为零售或电子商务平台)中,学术界和监管部门的大部分争论都集中在确定市场提供商是否优先考虑自己的自有品牌,如 "亚马逊基本款 "或沃尔玛的 "超值 "产品。然而,我们从概念和实证两方面概述了自我优选也可以通过纵向一体化的其他维度--即零售和履约--来实现。本文通过对在线市场中纵向一体化的三个维度--自有品牌、零售和履约--进行概念化,对这三者做出了贡献。然后,两项研究对以下两个方面进行了实证评估:(1) 在全球访问量最大的 20 个在线市场中,哪个市场在哪个维度上进行了垂直整合;(2) 在亚马逊的 11 个国际市场中,在 600 万个可用报价中,哪个份额在多大程度上进行了垂直整合。在亚马逊国际市场上,仅有 0.02% 的可用报价包含亚马逊自有品牌产品。然而,亚马逊是约 31% 的零售商,并在其市场平台上完成了约 38% 的可用报价。因此,在亚马逊上,自我推荐最常见的方式是零售和履约,而自有品牌产品则相对较少。尽管如此,这些份额在不同国家仍有很大差异--在美国,每两个报价中就有一个是垂直整合的,而在印度,每十个报价中只有一个是垂直整合的。相反,我们提出的大规模实证结果表明,亚马逊上的自我推荐可能最常发生在零售和履约环节,因为这些渠道影响了更大份额的报价。我们还测量了这些份额在不同国家的差异,并将其与监管环境联系起来。
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
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
12.00%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: International Marketing Review (IMR) is a journal that has, as its core remit, the goal of publishing research that pushes back the boundaries of international marketing knowledge. IMR does this by publishing novel research ideas, and by publishing papers that add substance to, question the basic assumptions of, reframe, or otherwise shape what we think we know within in the international marketing field. IMR is pluralistic, publishing papers that are conceptual, quantitative-empirical, or qualitative-empirical. At IMR, we aim to be a journal that recognizes great papers and great research ideas, and works hard with authors to nurture those ideas through to publication. We aim to be a journal that is proactive in developing the research agenda in international marketing, by identifying critical research issues, and promoting research within those areas. Finally, IMR is a journal that is comfortable exploring, and that fosters the exploration of, the interfaces and overlaps between international marketing and other business disciplines. Where no interfaces or overlaps exist, IMR will be a journal that is ready to create them. IMR’s definition of international marketing is purposefully broad and includes, although is not restricted to: -International market entry decisions and relationships; -Export marketing and supply chain issues; -International retailing; -International channel management; -Consumer ethnocentrism, country and product image and origin effects; -Cultural considerations in international marketing; -International marketing strategy; -Aspects of international marketing management such as international branding, advertising and new product development.
×
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