IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/lus/reveco/v59y2008i3p226-243.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Zwischen Marktabgrenzung und Wettbewerbsanalyse: Der „Drei-Kriterien-Test” der Europäischen Kommission

Author

Listed:
  • Briglauer Wolfgang

    (Forschungsinstitut für Regulierungsokonomie, Research Institute for Regulary Economics, Heiligenstädter Straße 46–48, A-1090 Wien)

Abstract

The European Commission introduced the so-called „three criteria test” which was designed to serve as an analytical filtering tool when considering whether electronic communications markets should be regulated by competition law alone, or whether the markets are susceptible to ex ante regulation. This paper gives a critical appraisal on the theoretical justification of the three criteria test in conjunction with the market analyses carried out periodically by national regulators. From a conceptual point of view our analysis finds that the three criteria test is already part of a proper and in-depth market analysis. In other words, the three criteria test appears to be a rather reduced form and redundant with regard to a full scale analysis. Apart from that, the test gives rise to misunderstandings and factually creates a built-in bias for national regulators to adopt the Commissions definition on relevant communications markets (susceptible to ex ante regulation). But, seen pragmatically and interpreted in positive terms, the three criteria test might be also regarded as an effective harmonization strategy at the European level.

Suggested Citation

  • Briglauer Wolfgang, 2008. "Zwischen Marktabgrenzung und Wettbewerbsanalyse: Der „Drei-Kriterien-Test” der Europäischen Kommission," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 59(3), pages 226-243, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:lus:reveco:v:59:y:2008:i:3:p:226-243
    DOI: 10.1515/roe-2008-0304
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/roe-2008-0304
    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/roe-2008-0304?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:lus:reveco:v:59:y:2008:i:3:p:226-243. 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: 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.