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
Big Tech’s Free Online Services Aren’t Costing Consumers Their Privacy
There is no evidence that breaking up big online platforms will improve digital privacy, but there is overwhelming evidence that breaking up these services or restricting them from collecting user data will harm consumers and workers.
The National Economic Council Gets It Wrong on the Roles of Big and Small Firms in U.S. Innovation
A new White House report insinuates that small firms are America’s true innovators. Advancing this narrative makes it easier to advance an anticorporate antitrust agenda, including banning all mergers. However, scholarly studies and data do not support the administration’s premise.
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.
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.
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.
Events
May 1, 2024|Register Now
US v. Apple: Whither The Limits of Antitrust?
Please join ITIF for an expert panel discussion about the merits and implications of the DOJ’s lawsuit against Apple.
January 31, 2024
The DOJ-FTC 2023 Merger Guidelines: Evolution or Revolution?
Watch now to learn more about the ongoing efforts to reform U.S. antitrust law.
December 13, 2023
US v. Google: Implications of a Landmark Trial
Watch now for an expert panel discussion on the possible outcomes and implications of this landmark antitrust case.
October 17, 2023
Assessing the FTC’s Complaint Against Amazon
Watch this expert discussion about the merits and implications of the FTC’s landmark challenge to Amazon.
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.
Staff
Director, Antitrust and Innovation Policy
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Read Bio
Advisors
More From the Center
April 12, 2024|Blogs
Large Firms Generate Positive Productivity and Non-Productivity Spillovers for Their Suppliers
Policymakers should not follow neo-Brandeisian calls to break up large companies because such actions will only hurt the economy and small firms
April 4, 2024|Blogs
Forbidden Fruit: DOJ Bites Apple in the Walled Garden
The Justice Department’s antitrust suit against Apple risks committing the sin of turning antitrust enforcement into de facto regulation by putting forward flawed theories of exclusionary conduct. Courts should ensure that American consumers remain able to enjoy the mobile Eden that Apple has created.
April 4, 2024|Op-Eds & Contributed Articles
Innovation Instead of Imitation: Brazil Needs a Brazilian Approach to Digital Markets
Europe’s digital model may not be the best fit for Brazil. Bill 2768/2022, mirroring the EU’s experimental Digital Markets Act, could potentially hinder innovation rather than ignite it. Brazil’s digital landscape calls for a culture of innovation, not borrowed blueprints of unnecessary intervention.
March 27, 2024|Blogs
Why Labor Monopsony Shouldn’t Be Included in Merger Guidelines
Monopoly power is not the main explanation for changes in workers’ earnings after a merger or acquisition, and including labor monopsony power in the updated Merger Guidelines will not only disincentivize greater consolidation but will also harm consumers. The FTC and DOJ should ignore the guideline on labor monopsony when reviewing mergers.
March 27, 2024|Blogs
What You Need to Know as the DMA Goes Live
The EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) is attempting to chip away at the alleged dominance of the so-called tech giants, but not for the better.
March 22, 2024|Blogs
US v. Google: Why Behavioral Economics Fails to Capture the Realities of Competition
The DOJ's recent antitrust lawsuit against Google has brought renewed attention to the role of behavioral economics in antitrust law.
March 7, 2024|Blogs
The Brussels Effect: How the EU’s Digital Markets Act Projects European Influence
As the Digital Markets Act comes into effect, more jurisdictions are adopting similar laws to shoot for big tech targets, creating the “Brussels effect.”
