In this paper we analyse why an understanding of the global ‘non-system’, in which we now live, took so long to arrive after the Bretton Woods system collapsed in 1971. We first describe how knowledge of how an inflation-targeting regime would operate—what we call ‘Taylor-rule macroeconomics’—was only gradually created during the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. We then describe how, subsequent to this, an awareness emerged, also gradually, of how the international non-system might work, depending, as it does, on Taylor-rule macroeconomics being already in place. We then discuss the Great Moderation, making clear that a well-functioning global non-system would require not just inflation targeting and floating exchange rates in each country, but also adequate fiscal discipline, and a satisfactory form of financial regulation. We describe how a well-functioning version of this global non-system would actually fit together. We then discuss how this non-system has responded to two enormous challenges of the last 15 years, namely the Global Financial Crisis and the Covid pandemic. This discussion of what has happened in the recent past provides the background to a discussion, in the companion paper by Subacchi and Vines in this issue of the Oxford Review of Economic Policy, of the challenges that the global non-system will face in the future.
在本文中，我们分析了为什么在1971年布雷顿森林体系崩溃后，人们花了这么长时间才理解我们现在所处的全球“非体系”。我们首先描述了通胀目标制如何运作的知识——我们称之为“泰勒规则宏观经济学”——在20世纪70年代、80年代和90年代才逐渐被创造出来。然后，我们描述了在此之后，人们如何逐渐意识到国际非体系如何运作，这取决于已经存在的泰勒规则宏观经济学。然后，我们讨论了大稳健，明确指出一个运作良好的全球非体系不仅需要每个国家的通胀目制制和浮动汇率，还需要充分的财政纪律和令人满意的金融监管形式。我们描述了一个运作良好的全球非系统是如何真正整合在一起的。然后，我们讨论了这一非体系如何应对过去15年的两大挑战，即全球金融危机和新冠肺炎大流行。苏巴奇和瓦因斯在本期《牛津经济政策评论》(Oxford Review of Economic Policy)的合著论文中讨论了全球非体系未来将面临的挑战，对最近发生的事情的讨论为这一讨论提供了背景。
{"title":"From the Bretton Woods system to the global non-system: the trials and tribulations of slow learning","authors":"D. Vines, Paola Subacchi","doi":"10.1093/oxrep/grad017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grad017","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In this paper we analyse why an understanding of the global ‘non-system’, in which we now live, took so long to arrive after the Bretton Woods system collapsed in 1971. We first describe how knowledge of how an inflation-targeting regime would operate—what we call ‘Taylor-rule macroeconomics’—was only gradually created during the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. We then describe how, subsequent to this, an awareness emerged, also gradually, of how the international non-system might work, depending, as it does, on Taylor-rule macroeconomics being already in place. We then discuss the Great Moderation, making clear that a well-functioning global non-system would require not just inflation targeting and floating exchange rates in each country, but also adequate fiscal discipline, and a satisfactory form of financial regulation. We describe how a well-functioning version of this global non-system would actually fit together. We then discuss how this non-system has responded to two enormous challenges of the last 15 years, namely the Global Financial Crisis and the Covid pandemic. This discussion of what has happened in the recent past provides the background to a discussion, in the companion paper by Subacchi and Vines in this issue of the Oxford Review of Economic Policy, of the challenges that the global non-system will face in the future.","PeriodicalId":48024,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Economic Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.8,"publicationDate":"2023-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42909263","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Journal Article Avoiding a lost decade—sovereign debt workouts in the post-Covid era Get access Lee C Buchheit, Lee C Buchheit Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Mitu Gulati Mitu Gulati mgulati@law.virginia.edu Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 39, Issue 2, Summer 2023, Pages 360–366, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grad015 Published: 11 April 2023
期刊文章避免失去的十年-后新冠时代的主权债务重组访问Lee C Buchheit, Lee C Buchheit搜索本文作者的其他作品:牛津学术谷歌学者Mitu Gulati Mitu Gulati mgulati@law.virginia.edu搜索本文作者的其他作品:牛津学术谷歌学者牛津经济政策评论，第39卷，第2期，2023年夏季，360-366页，https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grad015出版:2023年4月11日
{"title":"Avoiding a lost decade—sovereign debt workouts in the post-Covid era","authors":"Lee C Buchheit, Mitu Gulati","doi":"10.1093/oxrep/grad015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grad015","url":null,"abstract":"Journal Article Avoiding a lost decade—sovereign debt workouts in the post-Covid era Get access Lee C Buchheit, Lee C Buchheit Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Mitu Gulati Mitu Gulati mgulati@law.virginia.edu Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 39, Issue 2, Summer 2023, Pages 360–366, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grad015 Published: 11 April 2023","PeriodicalId":48024,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Economic Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135592911","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The European Commission has proposed a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) to enable ambitious climate policies in EU member states and to incentivize emission reductions in other countries. This paper adopts a dynamic, multilevel, polycentric perspective to discuss how domestic as well as foreign interest groups would be affected by the policy. Our analysis yields three central insights. First, diplomatic efforts should be focused on a small number of countries that would be most severely affected by the CBAM. Second, the CBAM should be implemented as an enabler of domestic mitigation efforts in an open climate alliance instead of an attempt to extend EU climate policy to other countries. Third, gradually phasing in the CBAM while phasing out free emission permits for EU producers and supporting the transformation of carbon-intensive sectors in third countries can ease political opposition from domestic as well as foreign industries.
{"title":"The political economy of carbon border adjustment in the EU","authors":"Michael Jakob","doi":"10.1093/oxrep/grac044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grac044","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The European Commission has proposed a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) to enable ambitious climate policies in EU member states and to incentivize emission reductions in other countries. This paper adopts a dynamic, multilevel, polycentric perspective to discuss how domestic as well as foreign interest groups would be affected by the policy. Our analysis yields three central insights. First, diplomatic efforts should be focused on a small number of countries that would be most severely affected by the CBAM. Second, the CBAM should be implemented as an enabler of domestic mitigation efforts in an open climate alliance instead of an attempt to extend EU climate policy to other countries. Third, gradually phasing in the CBAM while phasing out free emission permits for EU producers and supporting the transformation of carbon-intensive sectors in third countries can ease political opposition from domestic as well as foreign industries.","PeriodicalId":48024,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Economic Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.8,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42907495","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
M. Mazzucato, Ilan Strauss, Tim O'Reilly, Josh Ryan‐Collins
Attempts by governments to curb the market power of ‘Big Tech’ (Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta Platforms, and Microsoft) are impeded by limited public information on their diversified digital platform ecosystems. Big Tech’s annual 10-K financial reports disclose little about their globally dominant ‘free’ services, platform user numbers, and monetization practices, and suites of products. To support antitrust and regulatory oversight, we propose mandatory 10-K type disclosures covering Big Tech’s: (i) internally used operating metrics (e.g. monthly active users), which underpin platform market share and monetization; (ii) ubiquitous ‘free’ products which escape traditional ‘profit and loss’ reporting; (iii) ‘monetization’ processes detailing how platforms make money from user data and attention; and (iv) product-by-product reporting through updating segment reporting rules. Disclosures should be mandatory for digital ‘gatekeepers’ and eventually integrated into reporting standards for all digital platforms.
{"title":"Regulating Big Tech: the role of enhanced disclosures","authors":"M. Mazzucato, Ilan Strauss, Tim O'Reilly, Josh Ryan‐Collins","doi":"10.1093/oxrep/grac040","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grac040","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Attempts by governments to curb the market power of ‘Big Tech’ (Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta Platforms, and Microsoft) are impeded by limited public information on their diversified digital platform ecosystems. Big Tech’s annual 10-K financial reports disclose little about their globally dominant ‘free’ services, platform user numbers, and monetization practices, and suites of products. To support antitrust and regulatory oversight, we propose mandatory 10-K type disclosures covering Big Tech’s: (i) internally used operating metrics (e.g. monthly active users), which underpin platform market share and monetization; (ii) ubiquitous ‘free’ products which escape traditional ‘profit and loss’ reporting; (iii) ‘monetization’ processes detailing how platforms make money from user data and attention; and (iv) product-by-product reporting through updating segment reporting rules. Disclosures should be mandatory for digital ‘gatekeepers’ and eventually integrated into reporting standards for all digital platforms.","PeriodicalId":48024,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Economic Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.8,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49028021","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As part of its Green Deal, the European Union has advanced a ‘Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism’ (CBAM). Reflective of a trend towards greater use of coercive trade measures to advance environmental and other policy objectives, the CBAM would extend carbon pricing to imported goods with the aim of limiting carbon leakage. Theoretical enquiry into this type of policy approach—known as border carbon adjustments (BCAs)—suggests economic and environmental benefits, but typically discounts the role of legal and practical constraints on BCA design and implementation. In this paper, we show why the BCA design commonly featured in past research—basing the adjustment level on default carbon intensities—runs counter to the economic logic of carbon pricing by distorting the incentives for emissions abatement. Requiring producers to demonstrate their actual carbon intensity captures additional economic benefits of carbon pricing and improves the overall legal prospects of a BCA, but adds to its administrative complexity and creates risk of avoidance practices such as ‘resource shuffling’. What emerges is a more nuanced understanding of BCAs that highlights the challenges when transitioning from theory to practice.
{"title":"From theory to practice: determining emissions in traded goods under a border carbon adjustment","authors":"M. Mehling, Robert A. Ritz","doi":"10.1093/oxrep/grac043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grac043","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 As part of its Green Deal, the European Union has advanced a ‘Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism’ (CBAM). Reflective of a trend towards greater use of coercive trade measures to advance environmental and other policy objectives, the CBAM would extend carbon pricing to imported goods with the aim of limiting carbon leakage. Theoretical enquiry into this type of policy approach—known as border carbon adjustments (BCAs)—suggests economic and environmental benefits, but typically discounts the role of legal and practical constraints on BCA design and implementation. In this paper, we show why the BCA design commonly featured in past research—basing the adjustment level on default carbon intensities—runs counter to the economic logic of carbon pricing by distorting the incentives for emissions abatement. Requiring producers to demonstrate their actual carbon intensity captures additional economic benefits of carbon pricing and improves the overall legal prospects of a BCA, but adds to its administrative complexity and creates risk of avoidance practices such as ‘resource shuffling’. What emerges is a more nuanced understanding of BCAs that highlights the challenges when transitioning from theory to practice.","PeriodicalId":48024,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Economic Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.8,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47522526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Food and agriculture accounts for around one-third of global emissions reflecting the effects of consumption in high-income countries on production and land use around the world. These effects include those transmitted through international trade such as in the constituents of animal feed for meat. African countries face a dual challenge of adapting to the growing effects of climate change in the shape of extreme weather, and increasing agriculture and food production as part of developing their economies. At the same time, there is increasing concentration in the production and trading of agriculture and food products, globally and within Africa. This article considers the interaction of concentration and responses to climate change in food markets through a focus on meat and animal feed, and the developments in maize and soybeans in East and Southern Africa. The possible role for competition policy as part of a wider reform agenda is proposed.
{"title":"Competition, trade, and sustainability in agriculture and food markets in Africa","authors":"S. Roberts","doi":"10.1093/oxrep/grac041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grac041","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Food and agriculture accounts for around one-third of global emissions reflecting the effects of consumption in high-income countries on production and land use around the world. These effects include those transmitted through international trade such as in the constituents of animal feed for meat. African countries face a dual challenge of adapting to the growing effects of climate change in the shape of extreme weather, and increasing agriculture and food production as part of developing their economies. At the same time, there is increasing concentration in the production and trading of agriculture and food products, globally and within Africa. This article considers the interaction of concentration and responses to climate change in food markets through a focus on meat and animal feed, and the developments in maize and soybeans in East and Southern Africa. The possible role for competition policy as part of a wider reform agenda is proposed.","PeriodicalId":48024,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Economic Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.8,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47836979","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article discusses the challenges and potential policy choices for levying progressive taxes and taxing the rich in Latin America, a region known for its high-income inequality, limited tax-collection capacity, and low share of taxes collected from personal income and wealth. Factors such as high exemption thresholds, low top marginal tax rates, and limited administrative capacity undermine the redistributive ability and revenue collection of the tax systems in the region. Moreover, the income composition for the top percentiles largely comes from capital, and the effective tax rates they face are often low due to the preferential treatment of capital income and wealth. After discussing the evidence of how the rich in Latin America respond to progressive taxes on income and wealth and changes in enforcement policy, we provide some insights on potential policy choices to tax them effectively. These may include broadening the income tax base by lowering the number of exempt and non-taxable income items and the statutory exemption thresholds, reevaluating preferential tax rates on capital income, monitoring foreign income, addressing the abuse of tax treatment by business earners, and enhancing tax administration capacity. Additionally, wealth taxes may complement the tax system with updates to property registers and scrutiny of foreign assets.
{"title":"Tax progressivity and taxing the rich in developing countries: lessons from Latin America.","authors":"Marcelo Bergolo, Juliana Londoño-Vélez, Darío Tortarolo","doi":"10.1093/oxrep/grad029","DOIUrl":"10.1093/oxrep/grad029","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article discusses the challenges and potential policy choices for levying progressive taxes and taxing the rich in Latin America, a region known for its high-income inequality, limited tax-collection capacity, and low share of taxes collected from personal income and wealth. Factors such as high exemption thresholds, low top marginal tax rates, and limited administrative capacity undermine the redistributive ability and revenue collection of the tax systems in the region. Moreover, the income composition for the top percentiles largely comes from capital, and the effective tax rates they face are often low due to the preferential treatment of capital income and wealth. After discussing the evidence of how the rich in Latin America respond to progressive taxes on income and wealth and changes in enforcement policy, we provide some insights on potential policy choices to tax them effectively. These may include broadening the income tax base by lowering the number of exempt and non-taxable income items and the statutory exemption thresholds, reevaluating preferential tax rates on capital income, monitoring foreign income, addressing the abuse of tax treatment by business earners, and enhancing tax administration capacity. Additionally, wealth taxes may complement the tax system with updates to property registers and scrutiny of foreign assets.</p>","PeriodicalId":48024,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Economic Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11221600/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45336105","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article is set against the complex backdrop of the evolution of the data-driven economy and its regulation, and seeks to provide a better contextualization of the topic of data protection as a matter of trade law. It looks at the recent proliferation of rules on data flows, specifically addressed in free trade agreements (FTAs), at how data protection has been framed in these treaties, as well as at the available reconciliation mechanisms developed to interface trade and privacy. The article explores the most advanced models that have been developed in this regard so far, with a focus on some US-led and EU-led treaties. These analyses build the basis for testing the conjecture as to whether trade law has gone too fast and too deep, encroaching on domestic privacy law developments that unfold at a much slower pace.
{"title":"Cross-border data flows and privacy in global trade law: has trade trumped data protection?","authors":"Mira Burri","doi":"10.1093/oxrep/grac042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grac042","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article is set against the complex backdrop of the evolution of the data-driven economy and its regulation, and seeks to provide a better contextualization of the topic of data protection as a matter of trade law. It looks at the recent proliferation of rules on data flows, specifically addressed in free trade agreements (FTAs), at how data protection has been framed in these treaties, as well as at the available reconciliation mechanisms developed to interface trade and privacy. The article explores the most advanced models that have been developed in this regard so far, with a focus on some US-led and EU-led treaties. These analyses build the basis for testing the conjecture as to whether trade law has gone too fast and too deep, encroaching on domestic privacy law developments that unfold at a much slower pace.","PeriodicalId":48024,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Economic Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.8,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46054903","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Digital platforms have reshaped many product markets and play an increasingly important role in economies around the globe. Some of these platforms have become powerful players and may possess a lot of market power. Economists use a number of indicators to assess market power. In this article we discuss to which extent these indicators are helpful in the context of digital platforms. In particular, we focus on assessing entrenched market power and the role of potential competition to constrain this power. Finally, we discuss some cross-border issues of platform market power.
{"title":"Market power of digital platforms","authors":"Jens-Uwe Franck, Martin Peitz","doi":"10.1093/oxrep/grac045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grac045","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Digital platforms have reshaped many product markets and play an increasingly important role in economies around the globe. Some of these platforms have become powerful players and may possess a lot of market power. Economists use a number of indicators to assess market power. In this article we discuss to which extent these indicators are helpful in the context of digital platforms. In particular, we focus on assessing entrenched market power and the role of potential competition to constrain this power. Finally, we discuss some cross-border issues of platform market power.","PeriodicalId":48024,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Economic Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136092279","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Digitalization of the global economy is occurring apace and has spurred a new wave of trade negotiations, as governments and technology firms vie to establish international rules and standards for the digital era. This article examines the ways that trade policy-makers are responding to artificial intelligence (AI), arguably the most disruptive of the new digital technologies. In a digitalized global economy, trade rules have implications for AI innovation, uptake, and governance, yet existing trade rules have significant shortcomings and need updating in order to assist with effective AI governance. Updating is happening but, so far, the changes focus on promoting AI and disproportionately reflect the interests of large technology firms, the major innovators and owners of AI. New digital trade rules include stringent intellectual property protections for source code and algorithms, and strong commitments to enable the free flow of data across borders. However, much less progress has been made in addressing cross-border risks and harms associated with AI, in areas such as competition policy; ethical, transparent, and accountable use of AI; personal data protection; and protections against the exploitative use of algorithms in consumer and labour markets.
{"title":"Digital disruption: artificial intelligence and international trade policy","authors":"Emily Jones","doi":"10.1093/oxrep/grac049","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grac049","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Digitalization of the global economy is occurring apace and has spurred a new wave of trade negotiations, as governments and technology firms vie to establish international rules and standards for the digital era. This article examines the ways that trade policy-makers are responding to artificial intelligence (AI), arguably the most disruptive of the new digital technologies. In a digitalized global economy, trade rules have implications for AI innovation, uptake, and governance, yet existing trade rules have significant shortcomings and need updating in order to assist with effective AI governance. Updating is happening but, so far, the changes focus on promoting AI and disproportionately reflect the interests of large technology firms, the major innovators and owners of AI. New digital trade rules include stringent intellectual property protections for source code and algorithms, and strong commitments to enable the free flow of data across borders. However, much less progress has been made in addressing cross-border risks and harms associated with AI, in areas such as competition policy; ethical, transparent, and accountable use of AI; personal data protection; and protections against the exploitative use of algorithms in consumer and labour markets.","PeriodicalId":48024,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Economic Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.8,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48895364","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：