GAFA's information infrastructure distribution: Interconnection dynamics in the global North versus global South

IF 4.1 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Policy and Internet Pub Date : 2021-12-14 DOI:10.1002/poi3.278
Fernanda R. Rosa, J. Hauge
{"title":"GAFA's information infrastructure distribution: Interconnection dynamics in the global North versus global South","authors":"Fernanda R. Rosa, J. Hauge","doi":"10.1002/poi3.278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We analyze public points of interconnection of Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple (GAFA) in the global North versus the global South to determine the degree to which their location preferences differ, if at all. We fi nd that there is a statistically signi fi cant difference in GAFA locating in the global North versus the global South — a difference based on a country's wealth, speci fi cally as given by per capita GNI. Approximately 38% of countries classi fi ed as global North have a GAFA public point of interconnection, while 16% of those classi fi ed as global South do. Apple has approximately 92% of its presence in the global North, followed by Amazon (82.5%), Facebook (73%), and Google (72%). Our fi ndings suggest that competition and antitrust policy discussions of digital platforms should include information on the dynamics of interconnection infrastructure distribution, and for that, such information must be available. We also assert that a global consideration of the digital platforms market is necessary.","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy and Internet","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.278","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

We analyze public points of interconnection of Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple (GAFA) in the global North versus the global South to determine the degree to which their location preferences differ, if at all. We fi nd that there is a statistically signi fi cant difference in GAFA locating in the global North versus the global South — a difference based on a country's wealth, speci fi cally as given by per capita GNI. Approximately 38% of countries classi fi ed as global North have a GAFA public point of interconnection, while 16% of those classi fi ed as global South do. Apple has approximately 92% of its presence in the global North, followed by Amazon (82.5%), Facebook (73%), and Google (72%). Our fi ndings suggest that competition and antitrust policy discussions of digital platforms should include information on the dynamics of interconnection infrastructure distribution, and for that, such information must be available. We also assert that a global consideration of the digital platforms market is necessary.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
GAFA的信息基础设施分布:全球北方与全球南方的互联动态
我们分析了谷歌、亚马逊、脸书和苹果(GAFA)在全球北方和全球南方的公共互联点,以确定他们的位置偏好差异程度(如果有的话)。我们发现,全球北方和全球南方的GAFA在统计上存在显著差异——这一差异基于一个国家的财富,特别是人均国民总收入。在被归类为全球北方的国家中,约有38%拥有GAFA公共互联点,而被归类为南方的国家中有16%拥有。苹果在全球北方的业务约占92%,其次是亚马逊(82.5%)、脸书(73%)和谷歌(72%)。我们的研究结果表明,数字平台的竞争和反垄断政策讨论应包括有关互联基础设施分布动态的信息,为此,必须提供此类信息。我们还断言,对数字平台市场进行全球考虑是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
10.20%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: Understanding public policy in the age of the Internet requires understanding how individuals, organizations, governments and networks behave, and what motivates them in this new environment. Technological innovation and internet-mediated interaction raise both challenges and opportunities for public policy: whether in areas that have received much work already (e.g. digital divides, digital government, and privacy) or newer areas, like regulation of data-intensive technologies and platforms, the rise of precarious labour, and regulatory responses to misinformation and hate speech. We welcome innovative research in areas where the Internet already impacts public policy, where it raises new challenges or dilemmas, or provides opportunities for policy that is smart and equitable. While we welcome perspectives from any academic discipline, we look particularly for insight that can feed into social science disciplines like political science, public administration, economics, sociology, and communication. We welcome articles that introduce methodological innovation, theoretical development, or rigorous data analysis concerning a particular question or problem of public policy.
期刊最新文献
Effects of online citizen participation on legitimacy beliefs in local government. Evidence from a comparative study of online participation platforms in three German municipalities “Highly nuanced policy is very difficult to apply at scale”: Examining researcher account and content takedowns online Special issue: The (international) politics of content takedowns: Theory, practice, ethics Countering online terrorist content: A social regulation approach Content takedowns and activist organizing: Impact of social media content moderation on activists and organizing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1