IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tuiedp/335046.html

Regulating recommender systems? Effects of data-based individualization (and its limits) on competition in the digital world

Author

Listed:
  • Budzinski, Oliver
  • Stöhr, Annika

Abstract

Algorithm- and data-based recommendation systems (DARS) have become a central component of the digital economy, shaping how users access, evaluate, and consume information and goods. These systems encompass both search rankings tailored to estimated user preferences and direct recommendations such as "watch next" or "users also bought". Their growing influence has prompted regulatory interest worldwide, with debates centering on their economic, social, and cultural implications. Drawing on attention economics and behavioral insights, the paper highlights the functional necessity of pre-selection mechanisms in information-overload environments. Personalized DARS improve preference matching, expand the diversity of content receiving attention, and tend to intensify competition - particularly in comparison to one-size-fits-all or editorially curated systems. However, DARS also carry significant risks: they may reinforce biases through self-preferencing, amplify echo chambers, limit exposure to diverse viewpoints, and raise privacy concerns due to their reliance on granular behavioral data. Based on these challenges, this paper provides a comparative institutional analysis of regulatory options for DARS, evaluated through a modern, economicsbased framework. It examines regulatory effects across three key dimensions: (i) preference fit, (ii) information transparency, and (iii) competition intensity. The paper evaluates a range of regulatory strategies, such as transparency obligations, interoperability obligations, randomized rankings, editorial curation, and structural interventions. While each option addresses specific risks, the analysis shows that more interventionist regimes often come at the cost of reduced competition and diminished content diversity. The paper concludes that effective regulation should avoid substituting personalized DARS altogether and instead focus on addressing core pitfalls - particularly those arising from vertical integration and opacity - without eroding the systems' welfare-enhancing functions.

Suggested Citation

  • Budzinski, Oliver & Stöhr, Annika, 2025. "Regulating recommender systems? Effects of data-based individualization (and its limits) on competition in the digital world," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 204, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuiedp:335046
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/335046/1/1949327671.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    2. Martin Peitz, 2023. "How to Apply the Self-Preferencing Prohibition in the DMA," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2023_422, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    3. Yeon-Koo Che & Konrad Mierendorff, 2019. "Optimal Dynamic Allocation of Attention," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(8), pages 2993-3029, August.
    4. Schlott, Fabian & Gänßle, Sophia, 2025. "The invisible algorithm: The impact of search and recommender systems on the digital creative industries," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 199, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    5. Andrei Hagiu & Tat‐How Teh & Julian Wright, 2022. "Should platforms be allowed to sell on their own marketplaces?," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(2), pages 297-327, June.
    6. Schnellenbach Jan, 2018. "On the behavioral political economy of regulating fake news," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 68(1), pages 159-178, March.
    7. Mark Armstrong, 2006. "Competition in two‐sided markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, September.
    8. Patrice Bougette & Oliver Budzinski & Frédéric Marty, 2022. "Self-Preferencing and Competitive Damages: A Focus on Exploitative Abuses," GREDEG Working Papers 2022-01, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    9. Jean‐Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2006. "Two‐sided markets: a progress report," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 645-667, September.
    10. Alexandre de Cornière & Greg Taylor, 2019. "A model of biased intermediation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 50(4), pages 854-882, December.
    11. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean & Daniel Martin, 2011. "Search and Satisficing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(7), pages 2899-2922, December.
    12. Budzinski Oliver & Mendelsohn Juliane, 2023. "Regulating Big Tech: From Competition Policy to Sector Regulation?," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 72(1), pages 215-255, December.
    13. Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2003. "Chicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(2), pages 309-328, Summer.
    14. 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.
    15. Jan Schnellenbach, 2016. "A Constitutional Economics Perspective on Soft Paternalism," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(1), pages 135-156, February.
    16. Lancieri, Filippo Maria & Valleti, Tommaso, 2024. "Towards an effective merger review policy: A defence of rebuttable structural presumptions," Working Papers 345, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    17. Stöhr, Annika & Budzinski, Oliver, 2025. "The dynamics of market boundaries and the role of systemic market power," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 198, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    18. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    19. Wolfgang Kerber & Heike Schweitzer, 2017. "Interoperability in the digital economy," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201712, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    20. Werner Güth & Maria Vittoria Levati & Matteo Ploner, 2012. "Satisficing And Prior‐Free Optimality In Price Competition," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 50(2), pages 470-483, April.
    21. Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro, 2011. "Ideological Segregation Online and Offline," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(4), pages 1799-1839.
    22. Jorge Padilla & Joe Perkins & Salvatore Piccolo, 2022. "Self‐Preferencing in Markets with Vertically Integrated Gatekeeper Platforms," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 371-395, June.
    23. Choi, Jay Pil & Yang, Sangwoo, 2021. "Investigative journalism and media capture in the digital age," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    24. Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro, 2006. "Media Bias and Reputation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(2), pages 280-316, April.
    25. Amelia Fletcher & Peter L Ormosi & Rahul Savani, 2023. "Recommender Systems and Supplier Competition on Platforms," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(3), pages 397-426.
    26. Stefano DellaVigna & Ethan Kaplan, 2007. "The Fox News Effect: Media Bias and Voting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(3), pages 1187-1234.
    27. John Kwoka & Tommaso Valletti, 2021. "Unscrambling the eggs: breaking up consummated mergers and dominant firms [Too much data: prices and inefficiencies in data markets]," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 30(5), pages 1286-1306.
    28. Marc Bourreau & Germain Gaudin, 2022. "Streaming platform and strategic recommendation bias," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 25-47, February.
    29. Simon P. Anderson & John McLaren, 2012. "Media Mergers And Media Bias With Rational Consumers," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 10(4), pages 831-859, August.
    30. Filippo Lancieri & Tommaso Valletti, 2024. "Towards an effective merger review policy: a defence of rebuttable structural presumptions," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 40(4), pages 763-775.
    31. Buchanan, James M. & Vanberg, Viktor J., 1991. "The Market as a Creative Process," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 167-186, October.
    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. Stöhr, Annika & Budzinski, Oliver & Schmid, Jessica, 2024. "Zur Regulierung des ökonomischen Wettbewerbs auf Medienmärkten: Eine Einführung und Übersicht," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 191, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    2. Budzinski, Oliver, 2021. "Wettbewerbsordnung und digitale Medienmärkte," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 153, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    3. Stöhr, Annika & Rösch, Jürgen & Kuchinke, Björn A. & Budzinski, Oliver, 2025. "Twitter/X, Fake News und Demokratie: Ein ökonomischer Blick auf Media Bias und den Markt für Fehlinformationen im digitalen Zeitalter," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 203, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    4. Marco Antonielli & Lapo Filistrucchi, 2011. "Collusion and the political differentiation of newspapers," Working Papers 11-26, NET Institute, revised Nov 2011.
    5. Martin Peitz, 2025. "Governance and Regulation of Platforms," Springer Books, in: Claude Ménard & Mary M. Shirley (ed.), Handbook of New Institutional Economics, edition 0, chapter 23, pages 565-593, Springer.
    6. Calvano, Emilio & Polo, Michele, 2021. "Market power, competition and innovation in digital markets: A survey," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    7. Jan Frederic Nerbel & Markus Kreutzer, 2023. "Digital platform ecosystems in flux: From proprietary digital platforms to wide-spanning ecosystems," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-20, December.
    8. Jonathan Levin, 2011. "The Economics of Internet Markets," Discussion Papers 10-018, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    9. Budzinski, Oliver, 2016. "Aktuelle Herausforderungen der Wettbewerbspolitik durch Marktplätze im Internet," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 103, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    10. Jabbour, Chady & Rey-Valette, Hélène & Maurel, Pierre & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2019. "Spatial data infrastructure management: A two-sided market approach for strategic reflections," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 69-82.
    11. Justus Haucap & Torben Stühmeier, 2016. "Competition and antitrust in Internet markets," Chapters, in: Johannes M. Bauer & Michael Latzer (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of the Internet, chapter 9, pages 183-210, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Jingtao Yi & Jinqiu He & Lihong Yang, 2019. "Platform heterogeneity, platform governance and complementors’ product performance: an empirical study of the mobile application industry," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Shigeo Morita & Yukihiro Nishimura, 2025. "VAT Reform via Monopolistic Platformer in Borderless Economy: Price Pass-Though and Efficiency Consequences," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 25-02-Rev2., Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics, revised Jul 2025.
    14. Iñigo Herguera, 2021. "Competencia y regulación de (algunas) plataformas digitales en la UE," Working Papers 2021-10, FEDEA.
    15. Bruno Jullien & Alessandro Pavan & Marc Rysman, 2021. "Two-sided markets, pricing, and network effects," Post-Print hal-03828345, HAL.
    16. Behringer, Stefan & Filistrucchi, Lapo, 2015. "Hotelling competition and political differentiation with more than two newspapers," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 36-49.
    17. Federico Etro, 2024. "e‐Commerce platforms and self‐preferencing," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 1516-1543, September.
    18. Xie, Jiaping & Zhu, Weijun & Wei, Lihong & Liang, Ling, 2021. "Platform competition with partial multi-homing: When both same-side and cross-side network effects exist," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    19. Jürgen Rösch, 2024. "Market entry as a marketplace owner: when and why should you sell on your marketplace?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 525-541, April.
    20. Yukihiro Nishimura, 2025. "A Novel Argument on Regulating Prices in Two-sided Markets: Finding Win-Win Policy Correctly," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 25-05, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • B52 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Historical; Institutional; Evolutionary; Modern Monetary Theory;
    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General
    • K20 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - General
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • L81 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Retail and Wholesale Trade; e-Commerce
    • L82 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Entertainment; Media
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:tuiedp:335046. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ivtuide.html .

    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.