http://iorj.hse.ru en-us Copyright 2024 Mon, 03 Jun 2024 11:29:37 +0300 https://iorj.hse.ru/en/2024-19-2/928678139.html The article examines the reasons for the fragmentation of the world economy and trade at the beginning of the 21st century. The author explores two aspects of fragmentation that are associated. The first aspect relates to the weakening of the WTO and its rule-making function, which has intensified regionalization, manifested in the emergence of trade mega-agreements. Further progress of the latter, while the WTO remains relatively weak, may contribute to the future fragmentation of world trade, from which small developing countries will primarily lose. The second aspect is largely due to the consequences of the financial crisis of 2008-2009, which resulted in the desire of key players to create more autonomous national economies and ensure economic security in order to avoid excessive costs in the event of a recurrence of such crises. This gave rise to talk about strengthening deglobalization trends. The second aspect also includes the US-China trade war with technological decoupling between them; influence of geopolitical factors on trade; the impact of industrial policies of large states on trade. The final third part of the article provides a brief analysis of the negative impact of fragmentation on the global economy and trade. The author comes to the conclusion that geo-economic fragmentation poses a real threat to the global economy.This article was submitted on 05.02.2024. https://iorj.hse.ru/en/2024-19-2/928685223.html Global political economy has been experiencing a new normal period through the COVID-19 pandemic and the Ukraine War since Jan. 2020. At the same time, the trade conflict between the USA and China has been continuing since the Trump Administration and even expanding to the technology conflict under the Biden Administration that has enhanced protectionism in the world trade. Due to these conflicts, discussions on de-globalization or re-globalization are raised. The two expected or unexpected historical events have resulted in a long wave of high inflation, energy and food crises, disorder of global supply chains etc. in the global economy, which is known as a new normal era shifted from low inflation, well-functioning global supply chains (GSCs) based on division of labor. In order to strengthen its economic and political leadership, the Biden government has upgraded the Trump’s America First Policy to the Made in America Policy based on Chips and Science Act (CSA) and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which represent a new era of protectionism. In parallel, the EU has also considered to impose Net Zero Industry Act (NZIA) and other Acts. The research hypothesis is that protectionism in the name of economic security generates instability of the world trade. Its result may be negative impacts of some East Asian economies. This paper aims to analyze the new trend of protectionism in the USA and the EU. It also focuses on impacts of protectionism on East Asia in general and South Korea in particular.The article was submitted 14.11.2023. https://iorj.hse.ru/en/2024-19-2/928685842.html Rather important goal for international relations is to improve methods forstudying of interstate dialogue. The author pays attention to the format of intergovernmental consultations. The goal of article is to explore the functioning of the format on the example of Germany, which uses this one in the dialogue with 12 other states. The problems of the functioning of the format are still not in the details explored in Russian political science. Usually, the format is established by one power for the cooperation with another power or the very important ally among small and medium-sized states. The frequency of the meetings is established for each format. Compliance with frequency or violation of it, especially interruption of the work are the indicators of the dialogue development. One meeting in the format lasts only one day and it determines the scheme of the negotiations. The sites should focus on the most perspective and, on the contrary, the most problematic issues, even if the agenda differs from the conceptual guidelines. The key variants of the end of the meeting in the format are presented.The article explores the geography and chronology of establishment of the formats with German participation. Before the XXI century there was the long period of time between the launch of every two new formats. In the early – mid 2010s and early 2020s there were the waves of newly established formats. The author stresses the absence of the ones between Germany and the Arabian states, Iran, the African ones and explains the reasons. The difficulty for Germany was also the creation of formats with the Anglo-Saxon states. Another problem has become since the mid 2010-s the “freezing” of some formats (with Russia), the long interruption of their functioning (with Brazil, Italy, Poland, Turkey), the violation of frequency (with France, Netherlands, Spain). The article shows the reasons of such situations in each case. At the same time there has been stable functioning of the mechanisms with India and China, even when the confrontation between the PRC and the USA has begun. The author concludes that in the 2010s Germany has tried to make the system of the formats of intergovernmental consultations global. But by the beginning of 2020s these efforts were unsuccessful and there was the degradation of the process. The article was submitted 09.10.2023 https://iorj.hse.ru/en/2024-19-2/928700308.html Digital platforms act as private regulators of their ecosystems. However, until recently, these platforms have not been objects of regulation by the state. Currently, many jurisdictions adapt and update their consumer protection and competition policy instruments and introduce ex ante regulation to protect consumers and competition in digital markets. Regulatory problems derive from the nature of platforms’ business models, the transnational character of their operations, and the significant resources necessary to ensure regulation enforcement and monitoring. Coherence of regulatory approaches applied by different jurisdictions creates legal certainty, reduces costs of compliance and prices, and ensures consistency of requirements with regard to the quality of platforms’ services and user protection. Despite the advantages of policy coherence, cooperation develops slowly and is fragmented due to a contestation over the influence on the rules of governance.This article reviews the main problems and key approaches to the digital platforms’ regulation, and the challenges of, and perspectives on, international cooperation. The study draws on a survey of research articles, national documents on digital platforms policies and EU regulations, analytical materials of research centres and international organizations, and assessments of regulatory practices by concrete jurisdictions. The article explores problems and approaches to ensuring protection of users and fair competition, ex ante regulation application, and multilateral initiatives. In conclusion, the authors put forward some ideas on international cooperation perspectives. The article was written on the basis of the RANEPA state assignment research programme.This article was submitted 25.03.2024. https://iorj.hse.ru/en/2024-19-2/928999949.html Brazil is a major market and both the G20 and BRICS member. It is particularly important to analyse Brazil's position on digital platforms and markets regulation in the context of its G20 Presidency, where since the beginning of the year it has been trying to agree on common solutions to regulate digital platforms, especially in the aspect of content moderation and the fight against fake news. The fight against misinformation and hate speech is one of the central themes of Brazil's 2024 G20 presidency programme, which aims to ensure the integrity of information in the digital environment. According to Brazilian officials, preventing the spread of misinformation requires action on four directions: guaranteeing regulation by holding digital platforms responsible for the dissemination of illegal and harmful content, implementing media education strategies, strengthening professional journalism, and expanding public policies aimed at disseminating correct information to the public.The aim of this article is to identify Brazil's main priorities in digital platforms regulation. Project laws dedicated to the regulation of digital platforms are analysed, as well as the political context of their submission and consideration, because they were proposed during and following the 2018 and 2022 electoral campaigns. Coordinating positions with Brazil on the regulation of digital platforms may help to better address the interests of developing countries, as well as markets where large technology companies play a significant role but are subject to the laws of other jurisdictions.the article was written on the basis of the RANEPA state assignment research programmeThis article was submitted on 05.04.2024 https://iorj.hse.ru/en/2024-19-2/929000122.html Given the active formation and development of digital platforms in Russia, the discussion of possible approaches has intensified and legislative changes have been initiated aimed at improving regulation in platform markets. The Ministry of Economic Development and Bank of Russia have published the Concept of Regulating Digital Platforms and Ecosystems and the Report “Ecosystems: Approaches to Regulation”, respectively. The competition legislation has been supplemented, primarily within the framework of the Fifth Antimonopoly Package, along with regulations aimed at protecting consumer rights on digital platforms. FAS Russia and representatives of business participated in developing tools for digital platforms’ self-regulation.The purpose of this article is to analyze approaches to regulation of digital platforms in Russia, identify difficulties in its development and opportunities for improvement. The study is based on the analysis of legislation and law enforcement practice, scientific articles and analytical reports. Based on the results of the analysis, the author makes conclusions regarding possible future directions for regulatory developments and proposals for deepening international cooperation.The approach to protecting consumer rights on digital platforms in Russia combines the extension of previously existing norms to the platform economy with the addition of some new norms relating to aggregators of information about goods and services. Antimonopoly regulation follows the same approach, while as part of the Fifth Antimonopoly Package rules have been introduced aimed at eliminating illegal practices of dominant platforms and ecosystems.Based on the results of the analysis, the author has forecasted further regulatory developments, which may relate to a wide range of aspects, from the unification of terminology and the introduction of new criteria for classifying platforms as dominant to the appointment of platforms’ contact points for communication with authorities and consumers, and interdepartmental coordination. The author recommends to use regulatory experience accumulated by both Western jurisdictions and partner countries, take measures to promote Russian approaches at the international level and intensify cooperation on the regulation of digital platforms in multilateral formats, primarily in the BRICS.the article was written on the basis of the RANEPA state assignment research programme.This article was submitted on 12.04.2024 https://iorj.hse.ru/en/2024-19-2/929007612.html India’s government set the goal to grow the country’s digital economy to $1 trillion by 2025–26. Dynamic growth of digital markets is one of the government’s priorities for attaining this goal. Digital platforms are important drivers of growth. Simultaneously, big tech’s non-competitive practices create risks of economic and moral damage for consumers and distort competition in the markets. India’s authorities shape regulation of the digital markets in two main directions: consumer protection and prevention digital platform behaviours which might impair competition. To protect consumers, the government has amended the consumer protection rules and expanded their application to digital enterprises.  India adopted the Consumer Protection Act (2019), the Consumer Protectionin E-Commerce Rules (2020), and theDigital Personal Data Protection Act (2023).  To ensure contestability, fairness, and transparency in digital markets, in 2023 the Competition (Amendment) Act was approved by Parliament, placing digital markets within the legal framework of competition. The Committee on the Digital Competition Law developed a draft Digital Competition Bill (2024) which aims to regulatesystemically significant digital enterprises through an ex ante approach.The article reviews the government of the Republic of India’s policy on digital platform regulation, exploring the main instruments and difficulties in shaping the new system and determining a regulatory approach. The study draws on a survey of the regulatory bills and rules, reports, bill drafts, experts’ assessments, and research articles. The authors focus on the amendments to the consumer and competition protection laws adopted in recent years. The article concludes with the authors’ views regarding the adoption of the Digital Competition Bill and perspectives on India’s interest in deepening international cooperation on digital markets regulation, including in the BRICS group (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and others) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). The article was written on the basis of the RANEPA state assignment research programme.This article was submitted on 29.03.2024.  https://iorj.hse.ru/en/2024-19-2/929574805.html With the increasing importance of digital platforms as an infrastructure for the digital modernization of industry, China is moving towards a comprehensive, but more flexible, model for their regulation. The distinctive features of this model include the requirement to ensure interoperability of large platforms, interoperability of social networks and mobile payments, the use of artificial intelligence by platforms, and three-way interaction between AI developers, platform operators, and inspection authorities. This article presents the results of monitoring the key decisions of the Chinese leadership in changing the regulatory model for digital platforms in recent years, as well as analyzing the PRC's policy of regulating digital platforms in three key areas - competition protection, ex-ante regulation, and consumer and personal data protection.The article was written on the basis of the RANEPA state assignment research programme.This article was submitted on 15.04.2024. https://iorj.hse.ru/en/2024-19-2/929435870.html South Africa represents an actively developing digital services market that ranks among first in Africa. The local market attracts major international companies that endangers local suppliers threaten with prospects of loosing competitive market power and overall monopolization of the segment. Loose of competitive power  by local suppliers threatens the country’s data sovereignty and users data safety. Digital platform services suppliers’ regulation issues are among the most demanded research topics that is especially important for the BRICS bringing together digital growth leaders from the countries of global majority.The article presents results of South Africa’s digital platform services regulation framework analysis. The paper relies upon the author’s personal attempt to examine the country’s existing regulatory framework as well as upon reports presented by competent international expert groups and the national regulator. The analysis indicates existence of systemic constrains referring to institutional arrangements within the digital platform services provision regulatory framework along with imperfection of the local legislation. The author claims that South Africa’s experience in promotion of the local businesses might be of interest for the competent governmental bodies of Russia. For South Africa deepening of cooperation within the BRICS is one of the top priorities as its realization would provide firm ground for implementation of the country’s development goals.The article was written on the basis of the RANEPA state assignment research program.This article was submitted08.04.2024