This analysis compares global regulatory frameworks for digital platforms and suggests leniency, indicating potential benefits for market efficiency.
This article examines the regulatory approach to self-preferencing by digital platforms in China, arguing for a lenient rather than stringent framework. Through comparative analysis of international casessuch as the EU s structural interventions and the behavioral remedies adopted in South Korea and the United Statesthe study highlights the risks of strict regulation in stifling innovation, disrupting ecosystem synergies, and undermining data-driven efficiency gains. It further explores how consumer heterogeneity, particularly between loyal and switching consumers, naturally constrains abusive self-preferencing. The article concludes that China should embrace conduct-based regulatory tools such as algorithmic transparency and cross-platform comparability to foster fair competition while preserving platform dynamism, aligning with both domestic market conditions and global digital governance trends.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chengxi Wu (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: