Digital Single Market: setting the stage

The European Commission's just-released Digital Single Market strategy paper is good news. However, the paper does not spell out how the proposals will be implemented, and thus is of little help in forecasting what will happen next.

By: Date: May 8, 2015 Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy

The paper does not spell out how the proposals will be implemented

The European Commission’s just-released Digital Single Market strategy paper is good news. The paper discusses key areas for action: e-commerce, geo-blocking and copyright, the VAT framework, telecoms infrastructure, online platforms, privacy, cyber security, data ownership and flow, ICT standards, e-government. It also provides a timeline for concrete follow-up proposals through to the end of 2016, by when the Commission intends to make proposals for all these areas. The paper lists principles that are hard to disagree with: moving towards less fragmentation in the EU regulatory framework; favouring investment and innovation; ensuring a “level playing field” for competition. However, the paper does not spell out how the proposals will be implemented, and thus is of little help in forecasting what will happen next.

More than in other sectors, the performance of digital markets is enhanced when market players can more easily anticipate how the underlying regulatory framework will be shaped in the future. Digital markets require significant investment in infrastructure and in innovation but they change fast, as do companies’ business models and customers’ preferences. A long-term regulatory strategy helps to address uncertainty by giving confidence to investors, who might be more concerned about their inability to assess the risk of their investment than about the size of the risk in itself. The Commission’s strategy does not yet provide a basis to perform that assessment.

It’s not clear which goals will be prioritised when trade-offs have to be considered

A successful strategy would dispel any ambiguity about goals. At this stage it is not clear which goals will be prioritised when trade-offs have to be considered: for example when different policy options will entail different distributions of rents between buyers and suppliers. There is ample economic evidence that pursuing the interests of users is normally the best way to improve economic performance. This is often translated into the maxim that Europe should protect competition not competitors. But on this the Commission has proved ambiguous in the past. In 2014, a merger between two mobile network operators in Germany – Telefonica and E-Plus – was cleared despite the Commission identifying a risk of potentially significant price increases post-merger. Clearance was granted on the basis of remedies that were arguably too weak to counteract the negative effects of the merger: the parties were required to divest up-front less than half of the market network capacity that was previously used by E-Plus to compete against Telefonica. The Financial Times spoke about a rare revolt by national regulators against a Commission decision.

Providing benefits for users should be the principal goal of the digital single market strategy

The Commission should unequivocally affirm that providing benefits for users is the principal goal of the digital single market strategy, and that competition is the main tool to achieve this. Competition allocates rewards efficiently, promotes investment and ensures that users receive a significant share of the created value. The Commission says it will propose new rules for telecoms markets, including potential measures affecting new businesses such as over-the-top operators (WhatsApp and the like), which are eroding operators profits’ downstream to ensure “a level playing field for all market players”. The Commission will also launch a “comprehensive assessment of the role of platforms” (such as Google, Apple, Booking.com, etc) and the “sharing economy” (Uber, Airbnb, etc) to identify potential regulatory issues in terms of transparency or data usage, for example. The Commission should reassure investors that any new regulation will be just about fixing market failures and not about introducing disguised protectionist measures. The reduction of profits in the EU industry is not an issue in itself, if it means cheaper products and a wider choice for European consumers.

The Commission needs to sticks to its strategy at least for the next 5 years

Once established, it is important that the Commission sticks to its strategy at least for the next five years. A major criticism of the Commission’s digital markets policy is that it has been inconsistent. For example, the Telecom Single Market ‘package’ adopted in September 2013 significantly undermined structural measures that were introduced by the Commission in 2012 to address high international mobile roaming fees. The 2012 measures required the unbundling of wholesale network access and retail services by mobile operators in order to foster competition in the roaming market. But with the 2013 package, the Commission made the unbundling provision softer, and ultimately no competition in the roaming market was created at all. Time consistency is crucial for investors and the Commission’s past record has undermined confidence.

Finally, the Commission will have to come up with a workable mechanism to ensure take-up by relevant stakeholders. This might require some thinking outside the box. On issues such spectrum, copyright and geo-blocking, the difficulty is not so much in identifying a need to move towards more EU and less fragmentation, but how to get there with the backing of the Council. Taking mobile spectrum as example: the Commission should be ambitious about moving from national towards centralised auctions that would facilitate the emergence of pan-European operators. That is feasible, to the extent that appropriate mechanisms for the re-allocation of the lost revenues amongst member states are envisaged.

The Commission’s Single Digital Market paper can make an impact if the Commission sends the right signals about the goals it is actually pursuing, and its determination to stick to a workable strategy to go after them.



This article was also published in Rzeczpospolita, and will be published in El Economista.

Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint.

Due to copyright agreements we ask that you kindly email request to republish opinions that have appeared in print to communication@bruegel.org.

View comments
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Trust in the EU? The key obstacle to reform

The challenges that Europe faces both from within and from outside require immediate, concerted counter-efforts. While efforts to advance the European economic architecture are desirable and useful, can Europe realistically attempt to integrate further on the basis of such little trust?

By: Maria Demertzis Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: February 9, 2018
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Can roaming be saved after Brexit?

The referendum where UK voters chose to exit the European Union has many unanticipated consequences. One that is gaining visibility in the UK just now is the impact of Brexit on mobile roaming arrangements. How might the UK maintain roaming arrangements with the EU in the event of a hard Brexit?

By: J. Scott Marcus and Robert G. Clarke Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: September 21, 2017
Read article

External Publication

Economic Implications of Further Harmonisation of Electronic Communications Regulation in the EU

One of the ways in which the European Commission has sought over the years to strengthen the European single market is by means of increased harmonisation of the regulation of electronic communications. To the extent that the European Union functions as a confederation of somewhat autonomous member states, however, there are both practical and political limits to the degree of harmonisation that is realistically desirable or achievable.

By: J. Scott Marcus and Christian Wernick Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: August 11, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author


The EU and the US: a relationship in motion

Europe’s post-crisis recovery has been disappointing in comparison with the USA. But lower rates of inequality are staving off populism and bolstering support for globalisation. With the USA an increasingly unpredictable partner, the EU must address internal imbalances and build alliances to defend the multilateral order.

By: Maria Demertzis Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 28, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Brexit and the future of the Irish border

The future of the Irish land border has been thrown into uncertainty by Brexit. The UK's confirmation that it will leave the EU's single market and customs union implies that customs checks will be needed. However, there is little desire for hard controls from any of the parties involved. This is especially true for Theresa May's potential partner, the DUP. Creative solutions are needed to reach a solution.

By: Filippo Biondi Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: June 19, 2017
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

Geo-blocking in the digital single market

Geo-blocking is a discriminatory practice that is wide-spread in EU. It prevents online customers from accessing and purchasing products or services from a website based in another member state

Speakers: Marine Elgrichi, J. Scott Marcus, Fabian Paagman, Bertin Martens, Georgios Petropoulos, Agustin Reyna, Gareth Shier, Werner Stengg and Roza von Thun Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: May 30, 2017
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

Working Paper

From start-up to scale-up: examining public policies for the financing of high-growth ventures

What are the challenges of financing scale-ups, and how can long-term public policies support the creation of a better scale-up environment?

By: Gilles Duruflé, Thomas Hellmann and Karen E. Wilson Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: April 10, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

High expectations for 5G confront practical realities

The next wave of mobile network innovation is provoking great excitement in the industry. And indeed, there is substantial potential for improvement. However, the exact form of the technology and the appropriate policy support are still far from clear. And we should beware of over-ambitious promises about the impact and uptake of new network technologies.

By: J. Scott Marcus Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: March 14, 2017
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

External Publication

Extending the scope of the geo-blocking prohibition: an economic assessment

This paper was prepared for the European Parliament at the request of the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection.

By: J. Scott Marcus and Georgios Petropoulos Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: February 27, 2017
Read article Download PDF More on this topic More by this author

Policy Contribution

An economic review of the collaborative economy

This Policy Contribution tackles the definition and benefits of collaborative economy, as well as the distinction between professional and non-professional services, recommendations on safety and transparency for users, and the way to approach regulatory concerns.

By: Georgios Petropoulos Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: February 27, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Big data and first-degree price discrimination

What’s at stake: first-degree price discrimination - or person-specific pricing, had until recently been considered a theoretical case with unlikely real-world application. Yet the increasing availability of big data could make this possible. We review recent contributions on this issue.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: February 20, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

How good a shield is Privacy Shield?

Privacy Shield was put in place in 2016 to ensure that transfers of personal data from the EU to the US would be in compliance with European Union privacy law, and thus permissible. The institutional framework of Privacy Shield was weak, and depended on the good will of the US administration. Recent actions by the new administration, including the famous executive order forbidding residents from 7 predominantly Muslim countries to enter the US, may have (presumably unintended) effects on Privacy Shield. To preserve the validity of Privacy Shield in European Courts, strong EU-US cooperation and potentially additional agreements may become necessary.

By: J. Scott Marcus Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: February 7, 2017
Load more posts