IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/rneart/v17y2018i3p207-224n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Net Neutrality and Mobile App Innovation in Denmark and Netherlands 2010–2016

Author

Listed:
  • Layton Roslyn

    (Aalborg University, Center for Communication, Media and Information Technologies, Copenhagen, Denmark)

Abstract

Net neutrality or “Open Internet” rulemaking has been ongoing for more than a decade. Some 50 nations have adopted formal rules including the US (then repealed), the European Union, India, and many countries in Latin America. Among other arguments, it is asserted that net neutrality rules are necessary for application innovation. While the focus for policymakers has largely been to make rules, there is less attention on how to measure the impact of such rules and how well they achieve their innovation goals. The article summaries a specific research investigation to what degree the introduction of rules in a given country stimulates innovation in that country’s mobile app ecosystem. The focus in on mobile networks because it allowed the most consistent data across countries. The study covered 53 countries, their net neutrality policies (or lack thereof), and the results to the respective mobile application ecosystems of the countries adopting rules between the period of 2010–2016. This investigation tests the proposition that countries which adopt net neutrality rules should experience an increase in mobile app development innovation within their national economy. To test this, a statistical methodology was developed based upon measuring the number of locally developed mobile apps in the country for relevant periods before and after rules are imposed and the corresponding app downloads, usage, and revenue. Measurement was conducted with two independent toolsets and adjusted for the sophistication and penetration of advanced mobile networks in the country. To make more meaningful comparisons and avoid inevitable heterogeneity across the countries, the investigation focuses on two similar countries with different rules, Denmark with soft rules (self-regulation) and Netherlands with hard rules (legislation). The study reviewed the leading theories of innovation as well as the foundational papers in net neutrality to explain the observed discrepancies. The research finds significant statistical support for “soft” net neutrality measures adopted on a voluntary basis. Hard rules adopted through legislation and regulation were not associated with greater mobile app development for the given country. Denmark increased in local mobile app development while Netherlands decreased. Additionally, the explosion of mobile apps from countries with no net neutrality rules and the general dearth of mobile apps from countries which have had hard rules for years runs counter to expected results. This suggests that policymakers revisit their assumptions and expectations for net neutrality policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Layton Roslyn, 2018. "Net Neutrality and Mobile App Innovation in Denmark and Netherlands 2010–2016," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(3), pages 207-224, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:rneart:v:17:y:2018:i:3:p:207-224:n:4
    DOI: 10.1515/rne-2019-0012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/rne-2019-0012
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/rne-2019-0012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 990-1029, June.
    2. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. repec:aei:rpaper:35845 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:aei:rpaper:19286 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Davide Consoli & Pier Paolo Patrucco, 2011. "Complexity and the Coordination of Technological Knowledge: The Case of Innovation Platforms," Chapters, in: Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Eric K. Clemons & Maximilian Schreieck & Sebastian Hermes & Frantz Rowe & Helmut Krcmar, 2022. "The Cooperation Paradox," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(2), pages 459-471, June.
    3. Rong, Ke & Xiao, Fei & Zhang, Xiaoyu & Wang, Jingjing, 2019. "Platform strategies and user stickiness in the online video industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 249-259.
    4. Tianyu Deng & Limeng Qiao & Xun Yao & Shuangying Chen & Xiaowo Tang, 2022. "A Profit Framework Model for Digital Platforms Based on Value Sharing and Resource Complementarity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.
    5. Reinhilde Veugelers, 2018. "Eco-systems for young digital innovators," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(6), pages 1449-1465, December.
    6. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    7. Ryan Rumble & Vincent Mangematin, 2015. "Business Model Implementation: The Antecedents of Multi-Sidedness," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01183388, HAL.
    8. Feng Zhu & Qihong Liu, 2018. "Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 2618-2642, October.
    9. Andreas Hein & Maximilian Schreieck & Tobias Riasanow & David Soto Setzke & Manuel Wiesche & Markus Böhm & Helmut Krcmar, 2020. "Digital platform ecosystems," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(1), pages 87-98, March.
    10. Papachristos, George, 2017. "Diversity in technology competition: The link between platforms and sociotechnical transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 291-306.
    11. Knudsen, Eirik Sjåholm & Lien, Lasse B. & Timmermans, Bram & Belik, Ivan & Pandey, Sujit, 2021. "Stability in turbulent times? The effect of digitalization on the sustainability of competitive advantage," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 360-369.
    12. repec:hal:gemwpa:hal-01183388 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Peng Huang & Marco Ceccagnoli & Chris Forman & D.J. Wu, 2009. "Participation in a Platform Ecosystem: Appropriability, Competition, and Access to the Installed Base," Working Papers 09-14, NET Institute, revised Sep 2009.
    14. Ryan Rumble & Vincent Mangematin, 2015. "Business Model Implementation: The Antecedents of Multi-Sidedness," Post-Print hal-01183388, HAL.
    15. Ansari, Shahzad (Shaz) & Krop, Pieter, 2012. "Incumbent performance in the face of a radical innovation: Towards a framework for incumbent challenger dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1357-1374.
    16. Satish Nambisan & Shaker A. Zahra & Yadong Luo, 2019. "Global platforms and ecosystems: Implications for international business theories," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(9), pages 1464-1486, December.
    17. Bryan Pon & Timo Seppälä & Martin Kenney, 2015. "One Ring to Unite Them All: Convergence, the Smartphone, and the Cloud," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 21-33, March.
    18. Tim COWEN & Annabelle GAWER, 2012. "Competition in the Cloud: Unleashing Investment and Innovation Within and Across Platforms," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(85), pages 45-62, 1st quart.
    19. Davide Consoli & Pier Paolo Patrucco, 2011. "Complexity and the Coordination of Technological Knowledge: The Case of Innovation Platforms," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Kevin Boudreau, 2005. "The Boundaries of the Platform: Vertical Integration and Economic Incentives in Mobile Computing," Working Papers hal-00597767, HAL.
    21. Pujadas, Roser & Valderrama, Erika & Venters, Will, 2024. "The value and structuring role of web APIs in digital innovation ecosystems: the case of the online travel ecosystem," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121118, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:rneart:v:17:y:2018:i:3:p:207-224:n:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.