An Economic Analysis of Japan’s Current Mobile Communication Policy from the Competition and Innovation Perspective

Since 2016, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC) and the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) have tried to promote more competition in the mobile market in order to encourage economic growth and promote fairness. In particular, the government agencies have restricted handset subsidies in an effort to lower rates.

The results of these policies have fallen short of expectations. Mobile service prices in Japan have dropped by 10 percent over the past two years, far less than the 25 percent decline in the United States in the same period.

One piece of good news for competition is the impending entry of Rakuten Mobile as the fourth mobile network operator. However, we show in this paper that the restriction on handset subsidies makes it significantly harder for Rakuten to attract customers from the incumbents, since the challenger will be forced to charge customers for the “privilege” of switching to a new network.

日本語の記事:PPI_JapanMobile_Japanese

Bledsoe & Ritz for The Hill, “Democrats must bridge the generational divide to prevent climate and budget crises”

Amid the daily drama of President Trump’s tweets and scandals, it can be hard to focus on the most important issues for our future. An unfortunate consequence of this purposeful turmoil is that few serious solutions are being offered for addressing two of the greatest threats facing the United States: runaway climate change and unsustainable budget policies.

The resignation of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt may end his days of plundering the environment and public treasury, but the Trump administration will continue doing both even in his absence, risking long-term national well-being for temporary political benefits. It’s critical that Democrats offer credible alternatives, especially if they hope to inspire younger voters who will bear the burden of these problems, because we cannot afford to dither on either issue much longer.

We speak from experience. One of us is a baby boomer who has spent most of his career working on energy and climate policy; the other is a millennial focused on the federal budget. Although our two fields may seem unrelated, both these existential challenges require our generations to work together to solve.

Continue reading at The Hill.

Will the European Commission miss the real path to growth?

While we wait for the European Commission to announce the outcome of its antitrust case against Google, let us consider what’s at stake. Each year since 2016 we have estimated the number of App Economy jobs in Europe. These are workers who develop, maintain, and support mobile apps. Our latest figures show almost 1.7 million jobs in the Android ecosystem in Europe, led by the United Kingdom, France, and Germany.

These jobs—which didn’t exist 10 years ago–are fueled by inexpensive smartphones running on the Android operating system. Moreover, Google’s apps are good for society as well. Consider Google Maps, one of the most useful programs ever created. The first Android version of Google Maps came out in 2008, along with the first commercial Android phone. Suddenly if you wanted to know where you were, you no longer had to pay hundreds of dollars for a GPS receiver. It was the democratization of location and navigation.

But accurate mapping doesn’t come for free. In a physical world that’s always changing, there’s no way to know about new buildings, different road signs and closed bridges without actually sending someone out to check.

Maintaining the world’s largest library of video information isn’t cheap either. Want to watch a video that shows you how to build a house? It’s on YouTube. Want to audit a Stanford course on artificial intelligence. It’s on YouTube also, for free.

YouTube users download 1 billion hours of video a day, somewhat more than the number of hours of television that American watch daily. Some of those hours are cat videos, for sure, but even those count as entertainment time with value to the watcher. And the whole system of storage and delivery is expensive to maintain, especially given the amount of bandwidth.

Economists have labored for years trying to estimate the value of unprecedented online sources of information such as Google Maps and YouTube. But the truth is that we’ve barely scratched the surface of the economic gains from the massive stores of information curated and maintained by Google.

These Android jobs and widely-beneficial apps are based on a business model that provides a free operating system to smartphone manufacturers in exchange for app distribution. It’s a well-functioning model that provides benefits for everyone—App Economy workers, consumers, smartphone manufacturers, app developers who have a stable environment to aim for.

The European Commission’s objections to this model run the risk of hurting jobs and economic growth. Depending on the nature of the penalty that the Commission imposes, Google might need to start charging for Android, driving up phone prices and hurting the app ecosystem.

The Commission is focusing on the wrong end of the stick. Rather than restricting Internet business models and forcing Google to charge licensing fees,we need to start teaching people how to best navigate and use these unprecedented stores of information. That’s the road to limitless growth.

Summary: PPI on the Digital Economy

Here’s a selection of PPI’s recent work on the Digital Economy.  This list does not include our global App Economy work.

Perceptions versus Reality,” (June 2018) (Michael Mandel and Desirée Van Welsum)

The Internet of Goods and a Revitalized Economy: Upstate New York as a Template,” (January 2018) (Michael Mandel and Elliott Long)

Get Ready for the Internet of Goods,” Wall Street Journal (October 15, 2017)(Michael Mandel)

The Next Ten Million Jobs: Energizing the Physical Industries in the Heartland States,” (October 2017) (Michael Mandel)

How Ecommerce Creates Jobs and Reduces Income Inequality,” (September 2017) (Michael Mandel)

An Analysis of Job and Wage Growth in the Tech/Telecom Sector,” (September 2017) (Michael Mandel)

The Economic Impact of Data: Why Data Is Not Like Oil,” (July 2017) (Michael Mandel)

Moving Beyond the Balance Sheet Economy,” in Policy Choices for a Digital Age, Friends of Europe, (June 2017) (Michael Mandel)

Robots Will Save the Economy,” Wall Street Journal (May 14, 2017) (Bret Swanson and Michael Mandel)

How the Startup Economy is Spreading Across the Country — and How It Can Be Accelerated,” (March 2017). (Michael Mandel)

The Coming Productivity Boom,” (March 2017) (Michael Mandel and Bret Swanson)

Long-term U.S. Productivity Growth and Mobile Broadband: The Road Ahead,”  (March 2016) (Michael Mandel)

Data, Trade, and Growth,” in Measuring Globalization: Better Trade Statistics for Better Policy – Volume 2. Factoryless Manufacturing, Global Supply Chains, and Trade in Intangibles and Data, Susan N. Houseman and Michael Mandel, eds. W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research (2015) (Michael Mandel)

( See the working paper version hereData, Trade and Growth,” (April 2014) (Michael Mandel))

The 2015 PPI Tech/Info Job Ranking,” (December 2015) (Michelle Di Ionno and Michael Mandel)

Common Carrier Regulation of the Internet: Investment Impacts,” House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Communications and Technology (October 27, 2015) (Michael Mandel)

Should the United States Adopt an Innovation Box?: The Post-BEPS Landscape,” (October 2015) (Michael Mandel and Michelle Di Ionno)

The California Tech/Info Boom: How It Is Spreading Across the State,” (July 2015) (Michael Mandel)

Uncovering the Hidden Value of Digital Trade,” (July 2015) (Paul Hofheinz and Michael Mandel)

The Blame Game: Multinational Taxation in an Era of Knowledge,” (May 2015) (Michael Mandel, Paul Weinstein  & Sarah O’Byrne)

London Shines in Tech/Info Employment: The Rest of the UK Struggles,” (April 2015) (Michael Mandel)

Tech Opportunity for Minorities and Women: A Good News, Bad News Story,” (April 2015) (Michael Mandel and Diana Carew)

Taxing Intangibles: The Law of Unintended Consequences,” (April 2015) (Michael Mandel)

Obama’s Plan To Regulate The Internet Would Do More Harm Than Good,” Washington Post (November 14, 2014) (Michael Mandel)

Where are the Big Data Jobs?,” (May 2014) (Michael Mandel)

Bridging The Data Gap: How Digital Innovation Can Drive Growth and Jobs,” (April 2014) (Paul Hofheinz and Michael Mandel)

 New York, the Silicon City,” New York Times (January 6, 2014) (Michael Mandel)

 The PPI Tech/Info Job Ranking,” (October 2013) (Michael Mandel)

Beyond Goods and Services: The (Unmeasured) Rise of the Data-Driven Economy,” (October 2012) (Michael Mandel)

 Scale and Innovation in Today’s Economy,” (December 2011) (Michael Mandel)

Innovation by Acquisition: New Dynamics of High-Tech Competition,” (November 2011) (Michael Mandel and Diana Carew)

Telecom Investment: The Link to U.S. Jobs and Wages,” (May 2011) (Michael Mandel)

The Coming Communications Boom?: Jobs, Innovation and Countercyclical Regulatory Policy,”  (July 2010) (Michael Mandel)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Five Ideas for a Pro-worker, Pro-employer Agenda

In the aftermath of President Donald Trump’s election and inauguration, former Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders urged Democrats to remake themselves as warriors in opposition to big business as the strategy for winning back voters.

“We need to … make it crystal clear that the Democratic Party is going to take on Wall Street, it’s going to take on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry, it’s going to take on corporate America that is shutting down plants in this country and moving our jobs abroad,” Sanders said on CNN in February 2017.

Many progressives have taken that advice to heart. As in many past election cycles, corporate-bashing rhetoric has been the bread-and-butter of many progressive candidates and their supporters pressing for greater governmental intervention on issues such as corporate governance, wages, and worker benefits.

PPI Proposes Countering China with Smart, Targeted Strategy-Not Tariffs & Trade Wars-to Secure American Competitiveness

The President’s blunt goal of reducing America’s trade deficit with China won’t address the threat of China’s high-tech mercantilism

WASHINGTON —The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) today released a new report by Ed Gerwin, Senior Fellow for Trade & Global Opportunity, proposing a smart, targeted long-term U.S. strategy to combat China’s state-directed technology mercantilism, instead of the unfocused protectionist approach being pursued by the Trump Administration.

“The Trump Administration is right to highlight the threat that China’s state-directed technology mercantilism poses to America’s economic future,” says Gerwin. “But the Administration’s strategy—based on duties that damage the American economy and ‘America First’ policies that alienate our allies—is flawed, and won’t change China’s bad behavior. Neither will doubling down on that ill-considered strategy through this week’s announcement of additional trade taxes on $200 billion in Chinese-origin goods.”

“Instead of tariffs and trade wars, the United States needs to pursue a tough, targeted, long-term strategy that enlists allies, enforces rules and writes new ones, focuses negotiations, and ratchets up pressure on China—all while advocating aggressively to keep global markets open. We detail such a strategy in our new report.”

According to Gerwin, the linchpin of China’s future-oriented mercantilism is an extensive array of plans, policies, rules, and practices to enable the transfer and assimilation of foreign technology and intellectual property for China’s benefit. To achieve these goals, China is employing many unfair or illegal measures, including using foreign ownership restrictions and licensing approvals to compel American companies to transfer their technology, and directing and funding a highly coordinated effort by Chinese state-owned and private firms to acquire foreign tech firms. China’s conduct poses a threat to the United States, Gerwin notes, where IP-intensive industries alone support more than 45 million jobs and represent 39 percent of U.S. GDP.

But threatening duties on Chinese products is unlikely to upend China’s innovation mercantilism, Gerwin argues. Duties are likely to increase American consumer prices and reduce vital technology investments, while a tit-for-tat tariff war with China could cost an estimated 455,000 American jobs, most in less-skilled sectors. The Administration’s “go-it-alone” approach to trade is also alienating allies in Europe, Japan, Korea, and elsewhere who should be natural allies in opposing China’s technology mercantilism. Finally, there’s significant concern that President Trump may undercut the long-term effort required to address Chinese mercantilism by, instead, focusing on short-term “wins.”

America should keep all options on the table in opposing China’s abusive innovation practices, including targeted and intensifying trade sanctions, writes Gerwin. But these tactics must be part of a smarter, focused, long-term U.S. strategy that includes:

  • Working more closely with—and not needlessly alienating—trade partners who also face threats from China’s unfair technology practices;
  • Using the WTO much more aggressively to launch a bold series of WTO challenges to China’s multiple rules violations;
  • Leading a global effort to establish new rules and norms to address China’s unfair innovation practices that aren’t covered by existing global trade rules, including new rules to limit digital protection-ism and unfair competition by SOEs; and
  • Designating a single, high-level official to lead focused negotiations to seek specific and verifiable commitments from China on ending China’s use of abusive practices that harm American competitors in innovative industry sectors

Gerwin calls on Congress to play a more active role in confronting China’s high-tech mercantilism by:

  • Establishing a clear set of negotiating objectives for China that underscore the primacy of eliminating China’s abusive innovation policies;
  • Providing additional resources to support ramped-up investigation, consultation, and enforcement related to China’s unfair trade and technology practices;
  • Amending current law to broaden Executive Branch authority to use national security reviews, export controls, and other tools to address security and industrial base threats posed by China’s acquisitions and technology demands; and
  • Establishing an escalating series of sanctions that would kick in if China fails to make verifiable progress in eliminating abusive innovation practices, potentially including reciprocal restrictions on Chinese technology licensing, the withdrawal of U.S. scientific and technical cooperation, and/or targeted sanctions on Chinese products based on stolen or unfairly obtained American know-how.

###

 

read more here:PPI_China_2018

Confronting China’s Threat to Open Trade

A Smarter Strategy for Securing America’s Innovation Edge

In early April, reportedly after “zero substantive internal debate,” President Trump ordered the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to consider imposing additional tariffs on $100 billion in Chinese products. Trump’s order claimed that new tariffs were needed to retaliate against China’s threatened retaliation for tariffs that Trump had announced earlier.

Trump’s impulsive escalation was denounced by farmers, retailers, tech organizations, and others, and by bipartisan political leaders. Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) put things bluntly: “This is nuts. China is guilty of many things, but the President has no actual plan to win right now.”

Perceptions versus Reality: Regulating Digital Platforms

Digital platforms, also known as “online intermediation services,” are increasingly important for European businesses, bringing wide-ranging benefits to both individual consumers and to the participating companies. More and more new platforms are arising – in areas such as manufacturing and healthcare. Not surprisingly, as digital platforms have become more numerous and significant, they have come under the scrutiny of regulators. In particular, the European Commission has been examining the perception that European business users are being treated unfairly by digital platforms. The result was a recently
proposed new regulation “promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services.”

In this paper, we first analyze the economic and commercial constraints facing digital platforms. In particular, we focus on two economic imperatives: First, platforms have a strong incentive to maintain user trust. Second, platforms have a strong incentive to keep transaction-related costs under control.

Ritz for NY Daily News, “How Trump and Republicans are damning Social Security and Medicare”

When the Social Security and Medicare trustees warned last week that both programs are on tenuous financial footing, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin said: “The administration’s economic agenda — tax cuts, regulatory reform and improved trade agreements — will generate the long-term growth needed to help secure these programs and lead them to a more stable path.” He couldn’t be more wrong.

As more and more baby boomers retire, Social Security and Medicare will require additional revenue just to fund the same level of benefits enjoyed by previous generations. Yet instead of raising more revenue to help fund these programs, the Trump administration and Congressional Republicans recklessly pursued a package of tax cuts that the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office projects will reduce revenue by $2 trillion over the next decade. This law put Social Security and Medicare on a decidedly less stable path.

Continue reading at the New York Daily News.

Update on European App Economy jobs

In this post we update our October 2017 report, “The App Economy in Europe: Leading Countries and Cities, 2017.”  That report found 1.89 million App Economy jobs in Europe as of January 2017. Our new results find 2.05 million App Economy jobs in Europe as of April 2018, an increase of 8.3% (or an annual rate of 6.6%).  As discussed in the earlier report, our methodology is based on an systematic analysis of online job postings for jobs using App Economy skills, benchmarked to the number of information and communications technology professionals in each country, as reported by the International Labour Organization.

The table below lists the number of App Economy jobs by country, and by mobile operating system.  Many App Economy jobs require both iOS and Android skills, as indicated in the online job posting, so they are listed are in both the iOS and Android ecosystems.

App Economy Jobs by Country (April 2018)

Total app economy jobs iOS ecosystem jobs Android ecosystem jobs
Austria 37 28 30
Belgium 30 23 24
Czech 31 20 22
Denmark 54 45 44
Finland 48 32 44
France 314 220 262
Germany 327 262 255
Greece 8 5 6
Hungary 20 14 17
Ireland 20 17 12
Italy 84 62 71
Luxembourg 3 2 3
Netherlands 201 167 155
Norway 52 46 43
Poland 75 44 59
Portugal 36 25 28
Romania 27 20 23
Spain 98 76 84
Sweden 94 70 81
Switzerland 33 28 29
United Kingdom 353 291 292
30-country total* 2049 1576 1666
*Includes estimates for Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Slovakia, and Slovenia.
Data: ILO, Indeed, PPI

 

Bledsoe for The Hill, “Trump’s coal fixation will harm Americans’ health and wallets”

Earlier this month, President Trump ordered Energy Secretary Rick Perry to intervene in electricity markets to prop up failing coal power plants, falsely claiming the effort was needed to protect electricity grid reliability for national security reasons.

In truth, the action amounts only to a war on the working- and middle-class energy consumers Trump claims to care about, all to indulge his political fixation with “saving coal.”

Yet, this unprecedented intervention in electricity markets is only the latest Trump decision that would raise consumer energy costs and put taxpayers at risk.

Continue reading at The Hill. 

Yarrow for SF Chronicle, “Update labor laws to meet needs of ‘gig’ economy”

I write this article as a freelancer. I take Lyft to get around. I’ve booked an apartment this summer through Airbnb. I’ve been an adjunct professor. I’ve just gotten estimates for roof and other home repairs from men who work for themselves.

All of these activities are part of a large universe of what’s come to be called the “gig economy” in America, the contentious subject of a U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics report released Thursday.

The study found that about 15.5 million Americans work in contingent, or short-term, jobs and/or in “alternative work arrangements,” including as independent contractors, on-call workers, temporary agency workers, and workers sent out on jobs by contract firms. A majority of these workers is men, and African Americans and Hispanics are disproportionately represented in the lowest-paid sectors of the gig economy. Sara Horowitz, founder of the Freelancers Union, says that 55 million Americans are independent workers, and the Government Accountability Office puts the number even higher. “Establishing a statistical definition of the gig economy is no easy task,” as a 2016 Congressional Research Service report said.

Whatever the number, the gig economy is a sign of the growing precariousness of work in America. With artificial intelligence and other technologies threatening to further reduce the need for full-time workers, it’s imperative that labor law and social policies change.

Continue reading at San Francisco Chronicle.

Kim for Washington Post, “Rural America has too few dentists – but also too few jobs to create paying patients”

Lynnel Beauchesne’s dental office hugs a rural crossroads near Tunnelton, W.Va., population 336. Acres of empty farmland surround the weathered one-story white building; a couple of houses and a few barns are the only neighbors. But the parking lot is full. Some people have driven hours to see Beauchesne, the sole dentist within 30 miles. She estimates that she has as many as 8,000 patients. Before the office closes at 7 p.m., she and her two hygienists will see up to 50 of them, not counting emergencies.

About 43 percent of rural Americans lack access to dental care, according to the National Rural Health Association, and West Virginia, among the poorest and most rural states, is at the center of the crisis. All but six of the state’s 55 counties include federally designated “Health Professional Shortage Areas,” “Medically Underserved Areas” or both. The state’s Oral Health Program found in 2014 and 2015 that nearly half of counties had fewer than six practicing dentists, just half of adult West Virginians had visited a dentist in the previous year, and more than one-fifth hadn’t seen a dentist in five years. By comparison, a U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study in 2015 found that 64 percent of all American adults ages 18 to 64 reported seeing a dentist in the previous year. The rate of total tooth loss is 33.8 percent among West Virginians over 65, compared with roughly 19 percent for all seniors nationally.

One seemingly obvious solution is to persuade more dentists and other oral-health providers to come to places like West Virginia, a goal of various public efforts. The federal National Health Service Corps program, for example, offers up to $50,000 in loan assistance to doctors and dentists willing to work two years in a designated shortage area. And several states have passed or considered legislation authorizing “dental therapists” — midlevel providers akin to nurse practitioners — to provide certain kinds of primary dental care in areas where dentists are scarce.

Continue reading at The Washington Post.

How the Ecommerce Boom Could Benefit Workers of Color

On May 8, PPI participated in a congressional roundtable on the impact of retail automation on workers of color.  The roundtable was led by Representative Bobby Scott of Virginia, and moderated by Spencer Overton of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies.  I presented PPI’s latest research on the impact of the ecommerce boom on black and Hispanic workers.

We found that roughly 24% of ecommerce workers identify as black or African-American, compared to 12% of workers in brick-and-mortar retail. This is based on BLS surveys. We also found that roughly 20% of ecommerce workers identify as Hispanic or Latino, compared to 17% of workers in brick-and-mortar retail (Table 1).

We also found that ecommerce industries are hiring workers of color at a rapid rate. From 2007 to 2017, the number of black /African-American workers in ecommerce rose by 51%, compared to a 15% gain for all jobs. The number of Hispanic/Latino workers in ecommerce rose by 73%, compared to 27% for all jobs. (Table 2)

Taken together, these results suggest that the ecommerce boom could benefit workers of color, assuming we have the right policies to allow access to the new jobs.  We need to train workers for the new jobs in ecommerce, brick-and-mortar retail, and the next wave of growth in local custom manufacturing. These jobs will require a combination of technical, design, and people skills.

Moreover, we need to provide financing to enable a diverse population of entrepreneurs to take advantage of the new opportunities created by the ecommerce revolution. States must set up programs which allow potential entrepreneurs to experiment with the latest 3D printing and robotics technologies.

Summary of my remarks attached here.

Science-based Regulation and Innovation: The Silicone Example

In recent years, innovation has become synonymous with digital companies such as Apple, Google and Amazon. The Internet, the smartphone, and the cloud have transformed daily life and the way we do business, and artificial intelligence and machine learning will continue the process.

Nevertheless, overall productivity growth remains sluggish. The reason is simple: The digital sector of the economy, where innovation today is focused, is still far smaller than the physical sector. Even today, we spend much more time interacting with the physical world than with the digital world. The chairs we sit on, the food we eat, the cars we ride in, are all made of physical materials, not intangible bits and bytes. According to recent research, digital industries such as communications, entertainment, and finance comprise only 30 percent of the economy, while physical industries such as manufacturing and construction comprise 70 percent.

Innovating Out of Student Debt

A “College Finance Innovation Fund” could accelerate ideas to lower debt and make schools more accountable for their graduates’ success

For many students, the burden of student debt lingers years after leaving college, dragging down their finances and household security. New federal data find that, 12 years after enrollment, students with debt still owed, on average, two-thirds of what they had borrowed – and as many as 27 percent had defaulted.

Colleges, however, face no equivalent long-term financial stake in their students’ education: their obligations are done once the tuition is paid and the last exam is graded. Except perhaps for the pressure to put on a good show for U.S. News & World Report’s college rankings, schools have little incentive to ensure their students can land good jobs with decent pay – let alone graduate. Students bear the full risk of their investment and cope with the fallout if things don’t pan out as planned.

This lopsided burden of risk is one reason a dramatic expansion in financial aid – i.e., “free college” – can’t solve the crisis in college affordability. Schools would see no need to rein in their costs or to share the risks of investing in education with their students. In fact, the opposite. If the government is willing to pick up more of the tab for students, there’s no reason that tab wouldn’t simply grow – with potentially no reduction in student debt.