@ARTICLE{26583242_821792766_2023, 
	author = {Marina Larionova and Andrei Shelepov}, 
	keywords = {, localizati, G20data governance},
	title = {Opportunities and Constraints for G20 Leadership in Data Governance: Is There a Chance for Convergence in Approaches?},
	journal = {INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS RESEARCH JOURNAL},
	year = {2023},
	volume = {18},
	number = {1},
	pages = {7-32},
	url = {https://iorj.hse.ru/en/2023-18-1/821792766.html},
	publisher = {},
	abstract = {Dataisaninfiniteresource, a newformof capital in the knowledge economy. In absence of data regulation, global technological corporations seek to expand their influence at each link in data chains and use their market power to build monopolies. Data can generate not only profits for tech giants but also social value; however,marketforcesbythemselves will not create data-based public goods. For this, government actions are needed at the county level, and interstate and multilateral institutional cooperation is required at the international level. To date, despite numerous initiatives to establish coordination mechanisms and data regulation, cooperation on data governance is highly fragmented and gridlocked due to contradictions and tough competition between players. One of the key disagreements is related to the regulation of cross-border data flows.The article explores contradictions between the regulatory practices of the central actors in the digital economy, the U.S., the European Union (EU) and China in the first place, and the approaches they promote in international institutions such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Group of G20 (G20), the Group of 7 (G7), and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). In particular, the authors look at the G20’s agenda on data governance and the initiative on free data flow with trust and consider its challenges and the risks of cooperation stagnation. Theconclusionpresents possible scenarios for futurecooperation on data governance, their risksandperspectives, including the establishment of the Digital Economy and Data Governance Board by the G20, the G7’s initiative on shaping global digital order, deepening of cooperation on data governance within the G7 and the OECD, and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) proposal on building a multilevel, distributed polycentric data-governance model with the UN playing a central role. The authors conclude with a proposal on cooperation within BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) aimed at shaping inclusive multilateral data governance.The article was written on the basis of the RANEPA state assignment research programmeСтатья поступила в редакцию 15.07.2022},
	annote = {Dataisaninfiniteresource, a newformof capital in the knowledge economy. In absence of data regulation, global technological corporations seek to expand their influence at each link in data chains and use their market power to build monopolies. Data can generate not only profits for tech giants but also social value; however,marketforcesbythemselves will not create data-based public goods. For this, government actions are needed at the county level, and interstate and multilateral institutional cooperation is required at the international level. To date, despite numerous initiatives to establish coordination mechanisms and data regulation, cooperation on data governance is highly fragmented and gridlocked due to contradictions and tough competition between players. One of the key disagreements is related to the regulation of cross-border data flows.The article explores contradictions between the regulatory practices of the central actors in the digital economy, the U.S., the European Union (EU) and China in the first place, and the approaches they promote in international institutions such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Group of G20 (G20), the Group of 7 (G7), and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). In particular, the authors look at the G20’s agenda on data governance and the initiative on free data flow with trust and consider its challenges and the risks of cooperation stagnation. Theconclusionpresents possible scenarios for futurecooperation on data governance, their risksandperspectives, including the establishment of the Digital Economy and Data Governance Board by the G20, the G7’s initiative on shaping global digital order, deepening of cooperation on data governance within the G7 and the OECD, and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) proposal on building a multilevel, distributed polycentric data-governance model with the UN playing a central role. The authors conclude with a proposal on cooperation within BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) aimed at shaping inclusive multilateral data governance.The article was written on the basis of the RANEPA state assignment research programmeСтатья поступила в редакцию 15.07.2022}
}