Self-Assessment System: Detrimental Effects upon Entrepreneurial and Innovative Activity

  • Patricia KOTNIK University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Economics, Department of economic theory and policy, Slovenia
  • Mitja KOVAČ University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Economics, Department of economic theory and policy, Slovenia

Abstract

Efficient regulatory mechanisms that induce innovation, co-operation and deter competition law infringements have recently been the subject of growing attention. Competition is essential to the innovation process which in general terms enables entrepreneurship. But so too is co-operation between firms which requires an exchange of information and may lead to inefficient collusive behavior. The optimal trade-off between the provision of stable entrepreneurial incentives and the new European competition law’s reform with the self-assessment system has been largely missing from the current scholarly debate. This paper identifies the unintended horizontal side effects of this new self-assessment system upon the entrepreneurial activity, offers a legal evaluation of the optimal entrepreneurial incentive mechanisms and provides legal and Economics arguments for an improved regulatory response.

References

Acs, Z.J., and Audretsch, D.B. 2005. Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Technological Change. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 1(4).
[2] Aghion, P., and Griffith, R. 2005. Competition and Growth: Reconciling Theory and Evidence: Cambridge: MIT Press.
[3] Akerlof, G.A. 1970. The Market for’ Lemons’: Qualitative Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84, 488–500.
[4] Areeda, P., Kaplow, L., and Edlin, A.S. 2004. Antitrust analysis: problems, text, cases (6th ed.): Aspen Law and Business.
[5] Audretsch, D.B., Grilo, I., and Thurik, A.R. 2007. Explaining entrepreneurship and the role of policy: a framework. In D.B. Audretsch, I. Grilo and A.R. Thurik (Eds.), The handbook of research on entrepreneurship policy (pp. 1-17): Edward Elgar.
[6] Bartelsman, E., Scarpetta, S., and Schivardi, F. 2003. Comparative analysis of firm demographics and survival: micro-level evidence for the OECD countries: OECD.
[7] Bennett, M., and Collins, P. 2010. The Law and Economics of Information Sharing: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. European Competition Journal, 6(2), 311-337.
[8] Bergh, R.C., and Camesasca, P.D. 2006. European competition law and economics: A comparative perspective. London: Sweet and Maxwell.
[9] Bergman, M. (Ed.). 2006. The Pros and Cons of Information Sharing: Konkurrensverket, Swedish Competition Authority.
[10] Blair, R.D., and Kaserman, D.L. 1985. Antitrust Economics. Homewood, Ill.: Richard D. Irwin Inc.
[11] Box, S. 2009. OECD Work on Innovation–A Stocktaking of Existing Work. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers.
[12] Brouwer, M. 2000. Entrepreneurship and uncertainty: innovation and competition among the many. Small Business Economics, 15(2), 149-160.
[13] Buccirossi, P. 2008a. Facilitating Practices. In P. Buccirossi (Ed.), Handbook of Antitrust Economics (pp. 305-351). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
[14] Buccirossi, P. 2008b. Handbook of Antitrust Economics (Vol. 1): The MIT Press.
[15] Caballero, R.J., and Pindyck, R.S. 1996. Uncertainty, investment, and industry evolution. International Economic Review, 37(3).
[16] Capobianco, A. 2004. Information Exchange Under EC Competition Law. Common Market Law Review, 41(5), 1247-1276.
[17] Capobianco, A. 2010. Information Exchanges Between Competitors under Competition Law, DAF/COMP (2010)26: OECD.
[18] Carruth, A., Dickerson, A., and Henley, A. 2002. What do we know about investment under uncertainty? Journal of Economic Surveys, 14(2), 119-154.
[19] Cefis, E., Grondsma, M., Sabidussi, A., and Schenk, E. J.J. 2007. The role of innovation in merger policy: Europe’s efficiency defence versus America’s innovation markets approach. Two cases. Discussion Paper Series/Tjalling C. Koopmans Research Institute, 7(21), 3-38.
[20] Clarke, R.N. 1983. Collusion and the incentives for information sharing. The Bell Journal of Economics, 383-394.
[21] Coase, R.H. 1994. Essays on Economics and Economists: The University of Chicago Press.
[22] Craig, P., and De Búrca, G. 2008. EU law: text, cases, and materials (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[23] das Nair, R., and Mncube, L. 2009. The role of information exchange in facilitating collusion-insights from selected cases. Paper presented at the 3rd Annual Competition Conference, Competition Commission South Africa.
[24] De Geest, G. 1994. Economische analyse van het contracten-en quasi-contractenrecht: een onderzoek naar de wetenschappelijke waarde van de rechtseconomie: Maklu uitgevers.
[25] Dixit, A.K., and Pindyck, R. S. 1994. Investment under uncertainty: Princeton UP.
[26] Doyle, M.P., and Snyder, C.M. 1999. Information sharing and competition in the motor vehicle industry. Journal of Political Economy, 107(6), 1326-1364.
[27] Eilmansberger, T. 2005. How to distinguish good from bad competition under Article 82 EC: In search of clearer and more coherent standards for anti-competitive abuses. Common Market Law Review, 42(1), 129-177.
[28] Faull, J., and Nikpay, A. (Eds.). 2007. The EC Law of Competition: Oxford University Press.
[29] Friederiszick, H.W. 2009) Economic Analysis in EU Competition Cases. In J. Drexl, L. Idot and J. Monéger (Eds.), Economic Theory and Competition Law (pp. 3-19). Cheltenham and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[30] Glader, M. 2006. Innovation markets and competition analysis: EU competition law and US antitrust law: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[31] GlaxoSmithKline Services Ltd v. Commission, ECR II-2969 (2006).
[32] Gnyawali, D.R., and Park, B.-J. 2009. Co-opetition and Technological Innovation in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: A Multilevel Conceptual Model. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(3), 308-330.
[33] Gnyawali, D.R., and Park, B.J.R. 2011. Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with competitors for technological innovation. Research Policy, 40(5), 650-663.
[34] Goetz, C.J., and McChesney, F.S. 2006. Antitrust Law: Interpretation and Implementation: Foundation Press.
[35] Golodner, A.M. 2001. Antitrust, innovation, entrepreneurship and small business. Small Business Economics, 16(1), 31-35.
[36] Grillo, M. 2002. Collusion and facilitating practices: a new perspective in antitrust analysis. European Journal of Law and Economics, 14(2), 151-169.
[37] Growitsch, C., Nulsch, N., and Rammerstorfer, M. 2012. Preventing innovative cooperations: the legal exemptions unintended side effect. European Journal of Law and Economics, 1-22.
[38] Haan, M.A., Schoonbeek, L., and Winkel, B.M. 2006. Experimental Results on Collusion: The role of information and communication. Unpublished Manuscript, University of Groningen.
[39] Havnes, P.A., and Senneseth, K. 2001. A panel study of firm growth among SMEs in networks. Small Business Economics, 16(4), 293-302.
[40] Hildebrand, D. 1998. The role of economic analysis in the EC competition rules: Kluwer Law International.
[41] Hirshleifer, J. 1971. The private and social value of information and the reward to inventive activity. The American Economic Review, 561-574.
[42] Hovenkamp, H. 1985. Economics and Federal Antitrust Law: West Publishing Company.
[43] Hüls AG v. Commission, C-199/92 I-4287 (1999).
[44] ICI v. Commission, C-48/69 619 (1972).
[45] Jensen, R. 2007. The digital provide: Information (technology), market performance, and welfare in the South Indian fisheries sector. The quarterly journal of economics, 122(3), 879-924.
[46] Jorde, T.M., and Teece, D.J. 1990. Innovation and cooperation: implications for competition and antitrust. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3.
[47] Jorde, T.M., and Teece, D.J. 1993. Rule of reason analysis of horizontal arrangements: Agreements designed to advance innovation and commercialize technology. Antitrust LJ, 61, 579.
[48] Kerber, W. 2008. Should Competition Law promote efficiency? Some reflections of an economist on the normative foundations of competition law. In J. Drexl, L. Idot and J. Moneger (Eds.), Economic Theory and Competition Law: Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
[49] Kjolbye, L. 2004. The new commission guidelines on the application of article 81 (3): an economic approach to article 81. European Competition Law Review, 25, 566-577.
[50] Korah, V. 1981. Rise and Fall of Provisional Validity--The Need for a Rule of Reason in EEC Antitrust, The. Nw. J. Int'l L. and Bus., 3, 320.
[51] Kotnik, P., Kovač, M. 2012, Horizontal exchange of information – institutional impact on entrepreneurial activity. 12 Perspect. Innov. Econ. Bus. 32012, 34-40.
[52] Kühn, K.U., and Vives, X. 1995. Information exchanges among firms and their impact on competition. Luxembourg: Office for official publications of the European communities.
[53] Laffont, J.J., and Martimort, D. 1997. Collusion under asymmetric information. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 875-911.
[54] Lanjouw, J. O., and Schankerman, M. 2001. Characteristics of patent litigation: a window on competition. RAND journal of economics, 129-151.
[55] Lerner, J. 1995. Patenting in the Shadow of Competitors. JL and Econ., 38, 463.
[56] Lorentzen, J., and Mollgaard, P. 2006. Competition policy and innovation. In P. Bianchi and S. Labory (Eds.), International handbook on industrial policy (pp. 115-133): Edward Elgar.
[57] Malerba, F., and Brusoni, S. 2007. Perspectives on innovation: Cambridge University Press.
[58] Minniti, M. 2008. The role of government policy on entrepreneurial activity: productive, unproductive, or destructive? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(5), 779-790.
[59] Morlacchi, P. 2007. Schumpeterian legacies for entrepreneurship and networks: The social dimensions of entrepreneurial action In S. Brusoni and F. Malerba (Eds.), Perspectives on innovation: Cambridge University Press.
[60] Motta, M. 2004. Competition policy: theory and practice: Cambridge University Press.
[61] Müller, F. 2004. The New Council Regulation (EC) No. 1/2003 on the Implementation of the Rules on Competition. German Law Journal, 5(6), 9.
[62] North, D.C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance: Cambridge University Press.
[63] Odudu, O. 2011. Indirect Information Exchange: The Constituent Elements of Hub and Spoke Collusion. European Competition Journal, 7(2), 205-242.
[64] Padilla, A.J., and Pagano, M. 2000. Sharing default information as a borrower discipline device. European Economic Review, 44(10), 1951-1980.
[65] Posner, R.A. 1972. A theory of negligence. The Journal of Legal Studies, 1(1), 29-96.
[66] Posner, R.A. 2001. Antitrust law (2nd ed.): University of Chicago Press.
[67] Raith, M. 1996. A general model of information sharing in oligopoly. Journal of economic theory, 71, 260-288.
[68] Ritter, L., Braun, W. D., and Rawlinson, F. 2000. European competition law: a practitioner's guide (2nd ed.): Kluwer Law International.
[69] Ross, D., and Scherer, F. 1990. Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
[70] Roth, P., and Rose, V. (Eds.). 2008. Bellamy and Child: European Community Law of competition: Oxford University Press.
[71] Ruble, R., and Versaevel, B. 2009. Market Share, RandD Cooperation, and EU Competition Policy: GATE Working Paper.
[72] Sammarra, A., and Biggiero, L. 2008. Heterogeneity and specificity of inter-firm knowledge flows in innovation networks. [Review]. Journal of Management Studies, 45(4), 200-829.
[73] Schumpeter, J. A. 1934. The Theory of Economic Development: Harvard University Press.
[74] Schumpeter, J. A. 1949. Economic Theory and Entrepreneurial History. In R. Clemence (Ed.), Essays: On entrepreneurs, innovations, business cycles, and the evolution of capitalism: Transaction Pub.
[75] Shane, S., and Venkataraman, S. 2000. The Promise Of Entrepreneurship As A Field Of Research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217-226.
[76] Shavell, S. 1994. Acquisition and disclosure of information prior to sale. The RAND Journal of Economics, 20-36.
[77] Storey, D. 2005. Entrepreneurship, small and medium sized enterprises and public policies. In Z. J. Acs and D. B. Audretsch (Eds.), Handbook of entrepreneurship research (pp. 473-511): Springer.
[78] Tirole, J. 1988. The theory of industrial organization: MIT press.
[79] Whish, R. 2012. Competition law (7th ed.): OUP Oxford.
[80] Whish, R., and Sufrin, B. 1987. Article 85 and the Rule of Reason. Yearbook of European Law, 7, 1.
Published
2017-03-21
How to Cite
KOTNIK, Patricia; KOVAČ, Mitja. Self-Assessment System: Detrimental Effects upon Entrepreneurial and Innovative Activity. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, [S.l.], v. 5, n. 1, p. 23-37, mar. 2017. ISSN 2068-696X. Available at: <https://journals.aserspublishing.eu/jarle/article/view/870>. Date accessed: 17 apr. 2024.