Schumpeter Project on Competition Policy
The Schumpeterian perspective represents a new intellectual framework for antitrust reforms that focus less on competition for competition's sake and more on enabling firm dynamic capabilities to power productivity, innovation and global competitiveness. The Schumpeter Project’s mission is to advance dynamic competition policy with boosting firm dynamic capabilities as a central concern for antitrust enforcement. (Read more.)
- Useful bookmarks: ITIF’s Monopoly Myth Series and Schumpeterian Takes on Pending Antitrust Bills.
- Stay posted by signing up for ITIF emails and checking the box for “Regulation and Antitrust” under “Innovation and Competitiveness.”
Featured Publications
Comments to Japan’s Fair Trade Commission Regarding the Smartphone Software Competition Promotion Act
The SSCP’s broad per se prohibitions and limited cybersecurity exemption are likely to chill the very innovative behavior that is key to allowing Japan’s smartphone markets to thrive, and risk targeting a leading firm of one of its closest allies.
The Case for Cracking Down on Large Corporations and Promoting Small Businesses Is Deeply Flawed
A Democratic staff report from the House Small Business Committee claims that small businesses are better for the economy and large firms are harming it. But most of the report’s assertions stem from flawed research, and its policy recommendations would be detrimental.
Corporate Concentration Is Good for Productivity and Wages
Despite claims by anticorporate neo-Brandeisians, corporate concentration appears positively correlated with higher productivity and wages. So, the push to break up large companies is antiworker and anti-middle class.
Why the U.S. Economy Needs More Consolidation, Not Less
Larger firms are generally more productive because of scale economies, but some U.S. industries still have too high a share of small firms. Policymakers should encourage, not discourage, greater consolidation in these industries.
Comments to Brazil’s Finance Ministry Regarding Digital Markets Regulation
As Brazil crafts its own Digital Markets Act in the mold of the EU’s, it should be aware of the potential shortcomings and unsubstantiated advantages associated with such wide-ranging economic regulation within the digital market landscape.
Events
October 30, 2024|Register Now
US v. Google (Again): A Post-Trial Analysis of the Ad Tech Case
Join ITIF for this virtual panel discussion with experts exploring the merits and implications of the DOJ v. Google ad tech case.
October 10, 2024|Register Now
Is the DMA a Boost or Brake for European Competitiveness?
Join ITIF’s Schumpeter Project on Competition Policy for a lively and insightful discussion featuring leading experts from Europe.
July 16, 2024
The Brussels Effect: Digital Market Regulation in East Asia
Watch now for an event hosted by ITIF's Schumpeter Project on Competition Policy, featuring leading antitrust experts from Taiwan, Japan, Korea, and the United States.
May 22, 2024
Can India Regulate Its Digital Boom Without Stifling Innovation?
Watch now for a timely panel discussion featuring leading antitrust lawyers from India and the United States.
May 1, 2024
US v. Apple: Whither The Limits of Antitrust?
Watch now for an expert panel discussion about the merits and implications of the DOJ’s lawsuit against Apple.
Director, Antitrust and Innovation Policy
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Read Bio
More From the Center
October 2, 2024|Blogs
The Draghi Report: Right Problem, Half-Right Solutions for Competition Policy
The Draghi Report is a monumental but imperfect step in the right direction to correct Europe’s failing competition policy and better drive European innovation and productivity growth.
September 30, 2024|Blogs
No, the Evidence Does Not Suggest That Competition Has Declined and Antitrust Policies Need an Overhaul
Policymakers should reject neo-Brandeisian efforts to radically change U.S. antitrust laws under the false pretense that competition has declined in recent decades.
September 30, 2024|Blogs
Google Antitrust Redux: The Ad Tech Case
The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) ad tech lawsuit is a frontal assault by the neo-Brandeisians on Google’s ad tech business model that faces several high hurdles in court.
August 29, 2024|Testimonies & Filings
Comments for the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission Regarding Digital Platform Services
The ACCC should consider digital models beyond the EU's Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act, such as those of the United States, Singapore, and Taiwan, which do not involve heavy-handed digital regulations that can stifle the very innovation Australia seeks to foster.
August 26, 2024|Testimonies & Filings
Comments for the California Law Revision Commission Study of Antitrust Law Regarding Consumer Welfare Standard, Concerted Action, and Other Issues
There is no need to expand California’s antitrust regime, as changes should be grounded in empirically demonstrable failures by the status quo to protect competition and consumers. California’s economy is fueled by innovation and technological revolutions, which continue to drive its dynamic businesses and benefit consumers.
August 23, 2024|Blogs
DOJ v. Google: Six Weak Spots in Judge Mehta’s Decision
In the words of Judge Mehta, Google is what it is today because it has “innovated consistently, and made shrewd business decisions.” Hopefully courts will ensure that this antitrust case doesn’t end up hindering Google from continuing to do just that.
August 12, 2024|Blogs
Compustat Data: A Misleading Measure of Corporate Market Power and Market Competition
Compustat data has three major limitations, which makes citing studies that use these datasets as evidence of rising concentration (or declining competition) problematic. Policymakers should focus on studies that use the official and much more comprehensive data from the Economic Census.
