SHOULD ASEAN ANTITRUST LAWS EMULATE EUROPEAN COMPETITION POLICY?
Dirk Auer,
Geoffrey Manne and
Sam Bowman
Additional contact information
Dirk Auer: International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE), USA2ULiege, Belgium3UCLouvain, Belgium
Sam Bowman: 1104 NW 15th Ave, Ste 300, Portland, Oregon 97209, USA
The Singapore Economic Review (SER), 2022, vol. 67, issue 05, 1637-1697
Abstract:
Recent years have seen the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) members embark upon various initiatives that seek to harmonize their competition regimes. These ongoing efforts to modernize and harmonize ASEAN competition laws take place amid a longstanding effort by both the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) to export their respective competition laws throughout the world. This raises a critical question: Should the ASEAN countries attempt to mimic the competition regimes of other developed nations, notably those that are in force in the EU and the US? And, if so, which one of these regimes should they draw more inspiration from? This paper seeks to dispel the myth that the European model of competition enforcement would necessarily provide a superior blueprint. To the contrary, it shows that the evolutionary, common-law-like regime that has emerged in the US has many strengths that are often overlooked by contemporary competition policy scholarship, and which might provide a particularly good fit for the economic and political realities of the ASEAN member states. The paper proceeds as follows. Section 2 analyzes the high-level differences between the American and European approaches to competition policy. Section 3 shows that the US and Europe also differ substantially in terms of the conduct that may constitute an infringement of competition law — the EU system being significantly more restrictive. Section 4 turns to the thorny problem of digital platforms, in particular, and argues that while the European model might more readily facilitate intervention against digital platforms, the resulting cases may be detrimental to consumers and the economy more broadly. Section 5 posits that reducing economic concentration — sometimes cited as a byproduct of European-style competition enforcement — should not be a self-standing goal of antitrust policy. Finally, Section 6 argues that many of the economic and political characteristics of the ASEAN economy cut in favor of using the US model of competition enforcement as a blueprint for further development and harmonization of ASEAN competition law.
Keywords: Antitrust law; European law; ASEAN markets; digital competition; error-costs; comparative law (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:
Downloads: (external link)
http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0217590821430025
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wsi:serxxx:v:67:y:2022:i:05:n:s0217590821430025
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
DOI: 10.1142/S0217590821430025
Access Statistics for this article
The Singapore Economic Review (SER) is currently edited by Euston Quah
More articles in The Singapore Economic Review (SER) from World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Tai Tone Lim ().