IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/recjxx/v18y2022i3p468-500.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ensuring contestability and fairness in digital markets through regulation: a comparative analysis of the EU, UK and US approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Tombal

Abstract

In a society where individuals increasingly spend time on the internet, large online platforms have become, for many, unavoidable actors. As it is increasingly argued that competition policy alone cannot address all the systemic problems that they create in digital markets where quick reactions are indispensable, there seems to be a consensus across the globe that legislative action must be taken against a specific sub-set of these large online platforms in order to foster contestability and fairness. This contribution aims to analyse how the EU, UK and US legislators intend to do so through regulation. First, the scope of the digital platforms that would be subject to these regulatory initiatives, and the potential discrepancies in this regard, will be clarified. Then, the general approach and options taken in each of these jurisdictions to address this dependence issue will be outlined. Finally, the main discrepancies between these different approaches will be summarized.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Tombal, 2022. "Ensuring contestability and fairness in digital markets through regulation: a comparative analysis of the EU, UK and US approaches," European Competition Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 468-500, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:recjxx:v:18:y:2022:i:3:p:468-500
    DOI: 10.1080/17441056.2022.2034331
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17441056.2022.2034331
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17441056.2022.2034331?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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:recjxx:v:18:y:2022:i:3:p:468-500. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/recj .

    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.