数字市场、竞争制度和资本主义模式:欧洲和美国应对bb0的比较制度分析

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q2 BUSINESS
Andreas Kornelakis, P. Hublart
{"title":"数字市场、竞争制度和资本主义模式:欧洲和美国应对bb0的比较制度分析","authors":"Andreas Kornelakis, P. Hublart","doi":"10.1177/10245294211011295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The comparative capitalism literature examined how institutions vary on a national or societal level and how these differences affect multinational companies’ strategies. Yet, little attention has been devoted to cross-national or regional differences in the governance of competition, especially in the context of digitalization of markets. The article seeks to fill this gap by looking at the case of Google. It traces the process of the stark US–EU disagreement over Google’s abuse of dominant position in digital markets, which resulted in one of the largest fines in the EU history. It is argued that the variation in the response to the company’s market and nonmarket strategies are traced back to differences between Ordoliberal and Chicago School ideas, which are embedded in the ‘competition regimes’ of European and US capitalist models. The article concludes by discussing the implications of these findings for varieties of capitalism frameworks.","PeriodicalId":46999,"journal":{"name":"Competition & Change","volume":"26 1","pages":"334 - 356"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/10245294211011295","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Digital markets, competition regimes and models of capitalism: A comparative institutional analysis of European and US responses to Google\",\"authors\":\"Andreas Kornelakis, P. Hublart\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10245294211011295\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The comparative capitalism literature examined how institutions vary on a national or societal level and how these differences affect multinational companies’ strategies. Yet, little attention has been devoted to cross-national or regional differences in the governance of competition, especially in the context of digitalization of markets. The article seeks to fill this gap by looking at the case of Google. It traces the process of the stark US–EU disagreement over Google’s abuse of dominant position in digital markets, which resulted in one of the largest fines in the EU history. It is argued that the variation in the response to the company’s market and nonmarket strategies are traced back to differences between Ordoliberal and Chicago School ideas, which are embedded in the ‘competition regimes’ of European and US capitalist models. The article concludes by discussing the implications of these findings for varieties of capitalism frameworks.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46999,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Competition & Change\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"334 - 356\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/10245294211011295\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Competition & Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10245294211011295\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Competition & Change","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10245294211011295","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

比较资本主义的文献研究了制度在国家或社会层面上的差异,以及这些差异如何影响跨国公司的战略。然而,很少有人关注竞争治理的跨国或地区差异,特别是在市场数字化的背景下。本文试图通过研究b谷歌的案例来填补这一空白。这本书追溯了美国和欧盟在谷歌滥用数字市场主导地位问题上的严重分歧,这导致了欧盟历史上最大的罚款之一。有人认为,对公司的市场和非市场战略的反应的差异可以追溯到奥尔自由主义和芝加哥学派思想之间的差异,这些思想根植于欧洲和美国资本主义模式的“竞争制度”中。文章最后讨论了这些发现对各种资本主义框架的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Digital markets, competition regimes and models of capitalism: A comparative institutional analysis of European and US responses to Google
The comparative capitalism literature examined how institutions vary on a national or societal level and how these differences affect multinational companies’ strategies. Yet, little attention has been devoted to cross-national or regional differences in the governance of competition, especially in the context of digitalization of markets. The article seeks to fill this gap by looking at the case of Google. It traces the process of the stark US–EU disagreement over Google’s abuse of dominant position in digital markets, which resulted in one of the largest fines in the EU history. It is argued that the variation in the response to the company’s market and nonmarket strategies are traced back to differences between Ordoliberal and Chicago School ideas, which are embedded in the ‘competition regimes’ of European and US capitalist models. The article concludes by discussing the implications of these findings for varieties of capitalism frameworks.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
7.70%
发文量
37
×
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