Now that the DTRI is out, I have received the same question various
times from different policy officers in the field: what digital policy
restrictions should we focus on?
The DTRI covers a wide spectrum of policy categories ranging
from tariffs in ICT goods to regulations in services and investment to
cross-border data flows restrictions. The obvious answer to a trade economist
like me would therefore be: well it depends. That’s a cliché, but since
economics is about scarcity, decisions need to be made about trade-offs.
Personally, I am more interested in the future of trade,
namely (digital) services, data and ideas and other intangibles. I think that’s
where world trade is heading to and where new large productivity gains will have
to come from. That’s not to disregard trade in ICT goods or e-commerce. Precisely
if a choice needs to be made, I would argue for these flows to focus on in
future policy negotiations.
Now, to focus which policies then: the OECD recently
released an interesting
report in which services trade by modes of supply are estimated.
This is a huge step since before we only had a rough idea whether services trade took place through foreign affiliates after FDI was established (i.e. Mode 3), or through the internet (i.e. cross-border called Mode 1). The figure below shows both items in the form of a ratio: Mode 3 over Mode 1 in two points in time, namely 2000 (white dots) and 2014 (blue bars).
This is a huge step since before we only had a rough idea whether services trade took place through foreign affiliates after FDI was established (i.e. Mode 3), or through the internet (i.e. cross-border called Mode 1). The figure below shows both items in the form of a ratio: Mode 3 over Mode 1 in two points in time, namely 2000 (white dots) and 2014 (blue bars).
The figure tells me that the higher the blue bar,
the more trade through establishments were important in 2010. When the blue bar
falls below the white dot, trade over the internet has become more important
over the years to 2014 – and vice versa.
Source: Andrenelli et al. (2018), page 21; Analytical AMNE database Note: Exports of
foreign affiliates have been removed from cross-border exports.
When looking at this figure, some
extremely interesting conclusions become visible. One, for some services such as
Distribution, Publishing activities, Computer and information services, and
Financial and Insurance services, and possibly for Professional and Scientific
services, this ratio decreased over time.
This means that the internet as a vehicle for trade in these sectors has become more important. In other words, more trade of these sectors has been traded over the internet rather than through foreign establishments.
This means that the internet as a vehicle for trade in these sectors has become more important. In other words, more trade of these sectors has been traded over the internet rather than through foreign establishments.
Other sectors such as Construction,
Postal services, Warehousing and Transport support, Administrative services or
even Telecom, trade through a foreign establishment has become more important
over time as the blue bar falls above the white dots (though Telecom
already had a high internet-trade ratio).
This pattern is very relevant to
decide to focus on in terms of policy in services. The services sectors that
have seen an increase of internet-based trade are also the ones that Ferracane
et al. (2018) have assessed as very data-intensive. These are sectors that use a
lot of software and data. These are also the sectors that are mostly affected
by data-related policies such as data localization.
That’s visible in the figure below. The sectors
which are colored in green are the ones which are most data-intensive; the sectors in red are least data-intensive. If a
country has comparative advantage in data-intensive sectors, the policy restrictions
covered by Cluster C in the DTRI are most relevant: data localization, data
retention, intermediate liability and policies related to content access.
Source: Author; Note: Data & Software intensities based on US Census data.
Conversely, if your country has
comparative advantage in say Postal services, Transport, Health or
Construction, then it makes sense for policy makers to focus on policies
covered under Cluster B of Establishment restrictions.
Sure, some trade in these sectors are still traded over the internet, but since complementarities exists between the two Modes of trade, prioritizing establishment restrictions will nonetheless have a knock-on effect on trade in these services over the internet.
Sure, some trade in these sectors are still traded over the internet, but since complementarities exists between the two Modes of trade, prioritizing establishment restrictions will nonetheless have a knock-on effect on trade in these services over the internet.
Ultimately, therefore, choices on
what policy to focus on will have to be based on your country’s comparative
advantage: where is your country good at in exporting – and how it is traded.
Ferracane, M., J. Kren and E. van
der Marel (2018) “Do Data Policy Restrictions Impact the Productivity
Performance of Firms?”, DTE ECIPE Working Paper Series No. 1, ECIPE, Brussels, forthcoming.