In recent ten years, China's digital economy has developed rapidly. Research by China Institute of Information and Communication shows that the added value of digital economy has increased from 9.5 trillion yuan in 2111 to 35.8 trillion yuan in 2119, and its proportion in GDP has increased from 21.3% to 36.2%.
In 2121, when the COVID-19 epidemic struck, social isolation highlighted the importance of non-contact technology. Online office, video conference, online lectures and online payment flourished, and the digital economy showed a positive role in hedging economic downside risks.
Recently, Peng Wensheng, a member of the China Financial Forty Forum (CF41), the head of the research department of CICC and the chief economist, led the completion of the project "Digital Economy in the Next Decade", and conducted a comprehensive study on the digital economy from macro-economy, industry and investment dimensions.
The topic thinks that at present, digital operation has become a vital way for these enterprises to maintain their business. In order to expand their living space, many enterprises have significantly accelerated their digital strategic layout. A survey of 2569 enterprises around the world found that this epidemic has advanced the global digitalization process by at least 5-7 years.
"However, such a profound digital revolution is obviously not only a Pareto improvement, but there are still great differences in people's cognition of problems and risks." Peng Wensheng thinks.
the following contents are excerpted from the above-mentioned research results. The original topic was published in WeChat official account, the "Golden Eye".
data is the core factor of production in the era of digital economy. The collection, processing and use of data have obvious economies of scale and network. Low or even zero marginal cost means that the threshold for innovation and entrepreneurship is low, but the first-Mover enterprises can achieve and solidify their monopoly position by virtue of their self-enhanced big data advantages.
The topic thinks that it is not so clear which digital economy enterprises are "good" monopolies and which are "bad" monopolies in reality-giant technology enterprises are "good" monopolies in the initial stage, which are closely related to innovation, but they may hinder competition when they reach a certain scale.
At the initial stage of development, such as Amazon, Google, Facebook and other technology giants, the non-competitive zero marginal cost brought about their rapid expansion and improved the overall welfare of society. The "monopoly" at this stage is a good "monopoly". However, once the first-Mover advantage is formed, these successful people often use intellectual property rights, first-Mover advantage and network effect to build their own competitive barriers in order to seek monopoly rent.
The topic believes that judging whether there is a "monopoly" in the digital economy still needs to be viewed from a dynamic perspective.
According to Schumpeter's innovation theory, there is a natural connection between monopoly and innovation. Without the excess income of monopoly, there would be no such great innovation motivation. Technology companies are likely to fail in innovation, so they need compensation for risk premium to attract innovation. Excess income comes from both monopoly rent and risk compensation required by the overall market.
from the historical experience, the monopoly of giant technology companies seems to conform to the above dynamic characteristics. For example, in the 1991s, Yahoo's search engine was dominant, occupying almost all the search markets. However, after Google launched the search engine, Yahoo's search business was quickly replaced by Google Search with better performance. If the regulatory authorities strongly supervise Yahoo's search business from the beginning and limit its profit, Google may not have the motivation to launch a better search engine.
Microsoft's IE browser was once accused of monopoly, but now its position has also given way to Chrome. Similar examples are not uncommon in China. Although e-commerce platforms JD.COM and Ali have built high industry barriers, they can't stop the rapid rise of Pinduoduo. Similarly, iQiyi and Youku can't stop Tik Tok from becoming a world-class popular application.
Therefore, how to judge the "monopoly" phenomenon in the digital economy is still a controversial topic. Peng Wensheng believes that "on the one hand, we should encourage competition and prevent malicious monopoly, on the other hand, we should also look at the issue of return and income in digital innovation from a dynamic perspective, and we should not accidentally hurt innovation for anti-monopoly."
so, can we supervise the monopolistic behavior of science and technology enterprises?
The academic circles put forward a possibility, that is, starting from the most important production factor of digital economy-data, to reduce the exclusiveness of data use. The regulatory layer can make interoperabilitymandate requirements for different technology companies based on the data collected by themselves.
The topic points out that the logic behind this is that if the productivity of data has scale effect, then the process of collecting data is rewarding the pioneers, but this actually harms the interests of consumers. Because consumers can only be forced to choose the company that collects data first, and can't choose other companies that may provide better services. Once the data has certain interoperability, then the competitive disadvantage of latecomers can be avoided.
Of course, this kind of supervision requires the close cooperation of experts and scholars. On the one hand, it is necessary to prevent the initial innovation from being inhibited, and at the same time, it is also necessary to prevent consumers' privacy from being abused. Therefore, this regulatory activity itself may also need to be dynamic. While protecting the operating mechanism of the free market, it should also be adjusted according to the specific situation.
Historically, from Ricardo 211 years ago to Keynes 111 years ago, economists have been worried about the substitution of machines for people. There is a proper term in economics called "Technological Unemployment", that is, unemployment caused by technological progress. This concern runs through history and has always been controversial.
how do we look at this problem at present? The subject thinks that in this once-in-a-century COVID-19 epidemic, the rapid development of digital economy has brought us an important enlightenment, that is, machines can not only empower people, but also replace people.
the empowerment of machines to people is reflected in many fields. For example, in the food and beverage take-away industry, if there is no technical support such as digital technology, smart phone and GPS positioning, the delivery efficiency of the take-away staff will be very low; For example, the contactless economy such as distance education, telecommuting and telemedicine under this epidemic did not replace teachers, white-collar workers and doctors, but empowered them. Digital technology enables us to maintain certain economic activities in the case of epidemic impact and social isolation, so it is complementary to people. Of course, machines can also replace people, such as unmanned logistics, unmanned distribution, and developing unmanned driving.
The topic thinks that the degree of digital economy in China and the United States is not the same as that of replacing people and empowering people, which is related to the endowment difference between China and the United States. The development of the digital economy in the United States is more about machines replacing people and replacing employment through capital deepening. The development of digital economy in China is more complementary to machines and labor, which is friendly to labor.
The digital economy of labor substitution in the United States embodies routine and simple repetitive work. For example, some manufacturing assembly lines can be replaced by machines, and even some jobs that are not very simple and repetitive can be replaced by machines. China's labor-complementary digital economy is embodied in some unconventional services, such as take-away, deliveryman, bus driver, video anchor and so on.
However, Peng Wensheng believes that although the development of digital economy has a labor-friendly side in China at this stage, it is also difficult for China to avoid the * * side of the digital economy that widens the income distribution gap. Digital technology enables star enterprises and individuals to serve the big market at low cost, and a few people and winners of enterprises can take it all.
American academic research shows that the widening income gap between workers in the past 41 years mainly reflects the differences between employed enterprises (within the same industry), not the differences between occupations. An important related issue behind this is that data property rights are not clearly defined. The free and exclusive possession of big data resources by related enterprises is actually a monopoly rent of key resources.
how to define the ownership of big data? Should this monopoly rent be regulated or taxed? If tax is levied, how to determine the tax base and tax rate? The bigger the digital economy is, the more these problems cannot be ignored.
Peng Wensheng believes that at the same time, it should be noted that the digital economy has also enriched the policy tools to deal with the polarization between the rich and the poor: digital immigrants and digital currency. The traditional way to solve the imbalance of regional development is usually labor transfer or industrial transfer. The digital economy has created a new idea, namely "digital transfer".
For example, large enterprises set up customer service centers in underdeveloped areas, and the labor force can enjoy the radiation drive of developed areas without transferring, which can be regarded as "digital immigrants"; The new digital infrastructure has spawned webcasting, cloud tourism and other ways, "transporting" the local customs, green mountains and green waters and other special resources from underdeveloped areas to developed areas, and "digital transfer of industries" has increased the income of local people.
In digital currency, the DCEP of the People's Bank of China focuses on the development of electronic payment means. However, in the long run, the development of digital currency may have a subversive impact on the existing financial system, promote inclusive finance, reduce the procyclicality of finance, and help the structural-oriented fiscal policy to play its role more effectively and better balance the relationship between efficiency and fairness.
Peng Wensheng believes that this may come from three aspects: service trade, international taxation and data sovereignty and security.
The first one is easy to understand. Just as the expansion of manufacturing trade will lead to international friction, the expansion of service trade may also lead to disputes. China needs to actively participate in the reform of international trade rules to adapt to the digital economy era.
in terms of taxation, in view of the problem of tax evasion and tax avoidance in the digital economy bypassing the current taxation standards, the alternative scheme that is widely discussed internationally is based on user taxation, which requires international coordination to determine the taxable tax base of each country. Under the background of great changes in the world, international coordination is becoming more and more difficult.
The greater risk of international conflict may come from national security or data sovereignty.
Peng Wensheng, for example, the recent unfriendly practices of the United States and India towards China's platform enterprises certainly have political reasons, but also reflect a question: Does the ownership of big data involve sovereignty or even national security? Recently, China updated the Catalogue of Export-Prohibited and Restricted Technologies in China and added "Personalized Information Push Service Technology Based on Data Analysis", which seems to confirm the importance of big data and related technologies to national security.
the development of digital economy has brought about the problems of personal data collection and privacy protection.
When people use mobile phones, personal data will be continuously uploaded to the servers of related applications. Although many people realize that private data is collected, they know nothing about what data is collected and how it is used. The "black box" of data collection and use makes people extremely passive in preventing privacy leakage.
The topic thinks that because data is non-competitive and sometimes non-exclusive, it makes data have the property of public goods to some extent, but for individuals, it means that privacy may be more vulnerable.
For example, during the epidemic, the extensive use of health codes helped public and private institutions to participate in epidemic prevention. However, if these data cannot be safely withdrawn after the epidemic, once leaked, it may damage personal privacy.
The topic puts forward that enterprises have reached an unprecedented level in mastering users' private information, but detailed and rich user data is a "double-edged sword". On the one hand, these data help enterprises to better match potential consumer groups, thus reducing the transaction cost between enterprises and consumers; On the other hand, once detailed personal information is leaked, it will pose a threat to personal safety and even business operation.
There are two schools of thought about whether privacy should be protected:
One school, represented by Chicago School, thinks that in a competitive market, privacy protection will reduce social welfare and reduce the operating efficiency of the market, while complete information will help improve the market efficiency. The Chicago school believes that individuals have the motivation to conceal their negative information, and these behaviors will be passed on to the costs of other market participants. The obstruction of the flow of real information will lead to the inefficient use of economic resources and production factors, thus reducing social welfare.
However, another group of people who support privacy protection thinks that the individual's behavior motivation is complicated and the assumption of selfish behavior behind Chicago School is not accurate. If privacy is not protected, technology companies can use the collected data to infer consumer preferences, thus implementing price discrimination, and at this time, all the consumer surplus will be taken away by enterprises; In addition, enterprises can also sell consumers' data to third parties, but consumers can't share any benefits, and may even bear the risk of data abuse. Therefore, the protection of personal privacy data is helpful to improve economic efficiency and social welfare.
The topic holds that, no matter what the theory is, the greater the dependence of digital economy development on data and the fewer obstacles to information transmission, the greater the harm caused by privacy disclosure. In the era of digital economy, it is a general trend for public power to intervene in data supervision and privacy protection.
In fact, Europe and the United States have made meaningful explorations in privacy protection. For example, the Consumer Privacy Act promoted by the United States in 2112 put forward suggestions on consumer privacy protection, aiming at giving consumers greater control over personal information and reducing the risks brought by data disclosure to others. Similarly, in 2118, the EU implemented the General Data Protection Regulation, which applies to all personal data in the EU and restricts the way companies collect and use private data. In China, the protection of personal privacy data has also attracted the attention of the national legislature. In 2121, the National People's Congress of China proposed that a complete Personal Information Protection Law would be specially formulated to solve the problem that the corresponding laws and regulations were relatively scattered before.
with the development of digital economy, privacy protection will continue to be an important issue in public governance. Peng Wensheng believes that from the perspective of fairness, it is necessary to legislate to protect private data; From the perspective of efficiency, the key to privacy protection may lie in the degree, and even the state-dependent protection system needs to be designed.
Editor: Se Se
Producer: Bu Haisen Li Junhu