In the tech industry, first-movers often come to occupy large market shares, potentially leading to a natural monopoly in the given market. Firms might also vertically and horizontally integrate, acquiring other businesses in pursuit of efficiency gains or a competitive edge. Though maybe a red flag for competition regulators, whether such efforts by digital platforms cause measureable harms to consumers is not always easy to determine. At its heart, competition regulation seeks to limit the harms of monopoly – limited choice, high prices, and lack of innovation. This is done with the aim of maximizing consumer welfare. Regulators, in pursuing digital platforms, believe that they are doing just that. But platforms, even those that are very large, rarely fit neatly into the monopoly box. Platforms might offer unpriced services to users, and competitors are just a click away. Further, the pace of innovation is often break-neck. Firms that do not change with the times quickly lose market share – evidenced by the fact that the tech landscape of today is vastly different from even five years ago. Despite the unique nature of tech markets, competition regulation is generally pursued with traditional regulatory tools. But this leads to insufficiently dissuasive enforcement actions, with litigation processes that move slowly compared to the pace of change in the digital economy. Whether these efforts to rein in digital platforms actually boost consumer welfare – which should be a guiding question for regulators – is unclear. This is especially true where digital platforms ‘disrupt’ traditional markets with low prices, efficiency gains, and innovation.

Digital Trade in the Asia-Pacific: 8 Issues for 2021 and Beyond

In the earliest days, the digital economy flourished with extremely limited regulatory oversight. While this might sound like an ideal environment for companies, most prefer to operate within a set of clearly defined basic rules. The alternative can be sudden and unanticipated regulatory and legal changes that can upend business models overnight. As the portions of the economy driven by digital technology have continued to expand and as digital connectivity has increased, governments have increasingly been grappling with the appropriate ways to allow digital trade to grow while restraining harms that might flow to consumers and businesses. Effective management of the regulatory and policy environment to facilitate digital trade will become one of the most important aspects of trade policy in 2021 and beyond. The Covid-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns and trade disruption have up-ended many longstanding business models. Firms are rapidly shifting to develop or expand digital capabilities to manage highly altered supply and demand pressures. The adjustment to digital tools applies to both large and small firms and has increasingly filtered to include citizens around the globe. An online presence can make the difference for companies between survival and extinction. Despite the growing importance of digital trade, the ability of governments to tackle a range of issues of relevance to managing the online environment still lags behind the speed of innovation for firms. Domestic-level regulatory and legal adjustments to better accommodate digital trade can be complicated. Negotiations between governments to ensure greater consistency in policy frameworks are often time-consuming to complete. By the time policy settings adjust, the commercial environment could appear quite different. Headed into 2021 and beyond, there are at least eight topics that are likely to be on the radar for government officials working on digital trade. The Asian Trade Centre, with generous support from the Hinrich Foundation, has launched a series of papers, Asia in the Digital Economy, to more carefully examine new and emerging issues in digital trade in 2021.