ITIF Search
Schumpeter Project on Competition Policy

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.)

Featured Publications

How to Restore Limiting Principles for “Unfair Methods of Competition” in Antitrust Law

How to Restore Limiting Principles for “Unfair Methods of Competition” in Antitrust Law

The FTC has granted itself the power to bring antitrust enforcement actions based on amorphous and politically motivated ideas of “fairness.” There should instead be a uniform standard for what constitutes fairness in both consumer protection and competition policy.

Platforms Are the New Organizational Paradigm

Platforms Are the New Organizational Paradigm

Just as there was opposition to the corporate economy in the early 1900s, there is opposition to the platform economy today. But limiting “platformization” would have considerable long-lasting economic costs for the nation and consumers.

The Flawed Analysis Underlying Calls for Antitrust Reform: Revisiting Lina Khan’s “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox”

The Flawed Analysis Underlying Calls for Antitrust Reform: Revisiting Lina Khan’s “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox”

In the 2017 law journal article that established her reputation, now FTC Chair Lina Khan ignored or misapplied the economics of two-sided markets, mischaracterized competitive conditions, and did not consider the pro-competitive effects of Amazon’s conduct.

Oops! It Turns Out Aggressive Antitrust Would Increase Business Lobbying

Oops! It Turns Out Aggressive Antitrust Would Increase Business Lobbying

The common refrain that big business wields disproportionate political power is overblown. Lobbying data indicates that large firms spend relatively less on lobbying than do smaller firms.

History Shows How Private Labels and Self-Preferencing Help Consumers

History Shows How Private Labels and Self-Preferencing Help Consumers

Private label products have been important for consumers and the economy since the 19th century because retailers can sell them at lower prices with greater efficiency than brand-name alternatives. Legislation that prevents retailers from putting their own products front and center—either online or on store shelves—would jeopardize those benefits.

More Publications


September 22, 2022

The EU’s Digital Markets Act: A Triumph of Regulation Over Innovation?

Watch ITIF’s Schumpeter Project on Competition Policy's event for an expert panel discussion and presentation of a new report on the challenges ahead in implementing and enforcing the DMA.

August 10, 2022

Dynamic Antitrust Discussion Series: Commissioner Noah Phillips

In this conversation, Director of the Schumpeter Project on Competition Policy, Aurelien Portuese, sits down with Commissioner Noah Phillips of the Federal Trade Association to learn about his views on the current state of antitrust and competition policy and the state of capitalism in America.

June 27, 2022

Dynamic Antitrust Discussion Series: Antitrust and Inflation

Watch the latest installment of the Dynamic Antitrust series, where Julie Carlson moderates a panel with antitrust and inflation experts to get their views on the relationship between corporate concentration and inflation.

June 3, 2022

Assessing the Neo-Brandeisian Revolution: Looking for Mr. Schumpeter?

Watch this expert discussion about how to integrate the Schumpeterian perspective into competition policy as an alternative to the Neo-Brandeisian movement agenda.

April 28, 2022

Dynamic Antitrust Discussion Series: “Chief Economists’ Perspectives on Horizontal Merger Guidelines”

Please join ITIF for the latest in a series of discussions on “dynamic antitrust.” In this installment, Julie Carlson will sit down with former chief economists from the DOJ and FTC to discuss their views on the planned revisions to the guidelines.

More Events


HadiHadi Houalla

Research Assistant

TrelysaTrelysa Long

Research Assistant


PhilippePhilippe Aghion

Professor, College de France, LSE, & INSEAD

Christopher G.Christopher G. Caine

President, The Center for Global Enterprise

RichardRichard Gilbert

Professor Emeritus, UC Berkeley

DavidDavid Kappos

Partner, Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP

MaureenMaureen Ohlhausen

Former Acting Chairwoman, Federal Trade Commission

DavidDavid Teece

Executive Chairman, Berkeley Research Group

More From the Center

June 5, 2023|Blogs & Features

Any Remake of Antitrust Law for the Digital Economy Should Advance the Principles of Consumer Protection and Free Competition

The history of major antitrust actions against dominant tech firms suggests that the federal government would be wise to always move with precision and an eye toward the evolution of business models and underlying technologies in our dynamic economy.

May 17, 2023|Op-Eds & Commentary

Killing Mergers Hurts America’s Global Competitiveness

Microsoft buying Activision would help the firm compete with Japan’s Sony and Nintendo, and Adobe buying Figma would put America in a better position in the international market for creative design tools.

May 15, 2023|Reports & Briefings

The Great Revealing: Taking Competition in America and Europe Seriously

With its provocative claim that America now has less economic competition than the EU, Thomas Philippon’s book The Great Reversal has become a bible for neo-Brandeisians. But reports of the death of competition in America are highly exaggerated: While U.S. antitrust remains effective, EU competition policy has failed to stimulate innovation, productivity, or growth.

May 10, 2023|Blogs & Features

Concentrated Markets Are More Productive

Strengthening antitrust laws purely based on a big-is-bad ethos will not benefit consumers and, in many circumstances, will impede the most effective businesses from expanding.

May 5, 2023|Blogs & Features

Foreign Sales’ Influence on Assessing Corporate Market Power

This is no time to purposefully damage some of America's most prominent and competitive businesses by focusing solely on domestic concentration. As American markets are increasingly exposed to competition from other countries, antitrust enforcers should not rely on these mismeasurements of market power.

May 3, 2023|Reports & Briefings

Why Merger Guidelines Must Do More to Support Productivity, Innovation, and Global Competitiveness

Antitrust authorities want to revise merger guidelines based on dubious theories of potential harm that fail to recognize how many mergers foster innovation, productivity, and U.S. global competitiveness. New merger guidelines should better account for these considerations.

April 10, 2023|Op-Eds & Commentary

U.S. Antitrust Kneecaps Companies Trying to Compete Globally

Throughout its 100-year-plus history, U.S. antitrust policy has studiously ignored the issue of global economic competitiveness. Indeed, U.S. antitrust enforcers have often harmed U.S. companies while helping their foreign counterparts, as DOJ would do by blocking the Microsoft-Activision aquisition.

See All

Back to Top