European Union digital single market: Legal framework and challenges
Abstract
EconStor is a publication server for scholarly economic literature, provided as a non-commercial public service by the ZBW.
Full text
Bertarini, Beatrice Book European Union digital single market: Legal framework and challenges Collana di Diritto Provided in Cooperation with: FrancoAngeli Suggested Citation: Bertarini, Beatrice (2023) : European Union digital single market: Legal framework and challenges, Collana di Diritto, ISBN 978-88-351-5246-0, FrancoAngeli, Milano, https://www.francoangeli.it/Libro/9788835152460 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/279839 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
10315.4 B. BERTARINI EUROPEAN UNION DIGITAL SINGLE MARKET Beatrice Bertarini European Union Digital Single Market Legal Framework and Challenges di Diritto Collana European Union Digital Single Market SAGGI E RICERCHE This study analyzes the evolution of the legal framework of the Digital Single Market in Europe, beginning with the first acts issued by the European Union on the subject of an information society. The gradual evolution of multiple regulatory frameworks aimed at aspects of digital technologies highlights how public regulation is now reaching the definition of the guiding principles for the Digital Single Market. In the digital era, this will increasingly dominate the lives of enterprises and citizens. Beatrice Bertarini is an Associate Professor of Economics Law at the University of Bologna, Department of Sociology and Business Law. She has published academic articles in several academic journals (Percorsi costituzionali, Giustamm, Il lavoro nella Pubblica Amministrazione, Innovazione e diritto, Il diritto dell’informazione e dell’informatica, Ambietediritto.it) and is the author of four books. FrancoAngeli La passione per le conoscenze 10315.4_315.2.6 14/04/23 14:55 Pagina 1
Il presente volume è pubblicato in open access, ossia il file dell’intero lavoro è liberamente scaricabile dalla piattaforma FrancoAngeli Open Access (http://bit.ly/francoangeli-oa). FrancoAngeli Open Access è la piattaforma per pubblicare articoli e monografie, rispettando gli standard etici e qualitativi e la messa a disposizione dei contenuti ad accesso aperto. Oltre a garantire il deposito nei maggiori archivi e repository internazionali OA, la sua integrazione con tutto il ricco catalogo di riviste e collane FrancoAngeli ne massimizza la visibilità e favorisce la facilità di ricerca per l’utente e la possibilità di impatto per l’autore. Per saperne di più: http://www.francoangeli.it/come_pubblicare/pubblicare_19.asp I lettori che desiderano informarsi sui libri e le riviste da noi pubblicati possono consultare il nostro sito Internet: www.francoangeli.it e iscriversi nella home page al servizio “Informatemi” per ricevere via e-mail le segnalazioni delle novità. Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
copy/front 15,5x23_Layout 1 20/04/23 14:57 Pagina 1 di Diritto Collana SAGGI E RICERCHE Beatrice Bertarini European Union Digital Single Market Legal Framework and Challenges Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
This publication has been co-funded by the Erasmus + Programme of the European Union. ‘Jean Monnet Centre of excellence Consumers and SMEs in the Digital Single Market - project 610728-EPP-1-2019-1-IT-EPPJMO-CoE’. The European Commission’s support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents, which reflect the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. Beatrice Bertarini, European Union Digital Single Market. Legal Framework and Challenges, Milano: FrancoAngeli, 2023 Isbn: 9788835152460 (eBook) La versione digitale del volume è pubblicata in Open Access sul sito www.francoangeli.it. Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. Pubblicato da FrancoAngeli srl, Milano, Italia, con il contributo del programma Erasmus + dell’Unione Europea. L’opera è realizzata con licenza Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode). Tale licenza consente di condividere ogni parte dell’opera con ogni mezzo di comunicazione, su ogni supporto e in tutti i formati esistenti e sviluppati in futuro. Consente inoltre di modificare l’opera per qualsiasi scopo, anche commerciale, per tutta la durata della licenza concessa all’autore, purché ogni modifica apportata venga indicata e venga fornito un link alla licenza stessa. Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
5 Contents Introduction pag. 7 1. Information society and the market: First European legal reference points to the digital context » 11 1. The information society and the 1990s Communications from the European Commission » 11 2. The 1999 European Commission Communications “Towards a new framework for Electronic Communications infrastructure and associated services” and “eEurope – An Information Society for All”: the future of digital in Europe » 22 3. The 2000s: Different plans for information society » 27 4. The European Commission Communications of 2010: “A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth” and “A Digital Agenda for Europe” » 33 2. AffirmationoftheDigitalSingleMarket and related regulatory frameworks » 39 1. Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe » 39 2. Digital divide and e-Inclusion: challenges for digital participation » 47 3. Public regulation of connectivity and 5G as a key asset for Europe’s growth » 55 4. TheroleofDigitalPlatformsandtheaffirmation of the Data Economy » 64 BERTARINI.indd 5BERTARINI.indd 5 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
6 3. ThelatestinnovationsfortheDigitalSingleMarket in the cultural revolution of Industry 5.0 pag. 73 1. Digital Market Act and Digital Services Act: Gatekeeper and intermediary services. The role of big companies in the digital market » 73 2. Artificialintelligenceanditsimpactonconsumerchoices » 81 3. From Industry 4.0 to Industry 5.0, the role of social and environmentalfactors » 88 4. Monetary innovations: Virtual currencies and Digital euro » 96 Conclusion » 103 References » 111 BERTARINI.indd 6BERTARINI.indd 6 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
7 The phenomenon of digitalization is proliferating in present-day society, simultaneouslyinfluencingandtransformingeconomicandsociallife1. Throught digitalization «the world has undergone a transition from a traditional economy (e.g. agriculture or industrial based) to a digital economy that is based on digital technologies»2;thus,«reapingthebenefits and addressing the challenges of the digital age requires narrowing the gap between technological developments and public policy»3. In fact, many policiesare«pre-digitalera,anddifficultiesinunderstandingthechanges underway and their implications may delay the review and adaptation of these policies»4. Digital transformation currently operates fundamentally in the development of nations across the globe5. It is therefore centrally positioned 1. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), How’s Life in the Digital Age?: opportunities and risks of the Digital Transformation for people’s Well-being, OECDPublishing,2019,p.15«theoriginsofthedigitaltransformationgobacktothefirst halfofthetwentiethcentury,whenthefirstmainframecomputingmachinesweredeveloped. Thesemachinesboostedthecomputingcapacitythatsupportedscientificadvancesinawide rangeoffields,allowingforbreakthroughsinareassuchasmedicinethathadalargeimpact onpeople’slives.Similarly,startinginthe1980s,intheearlyphasesofpersonalcomputers, most functionalities greatly improved working environments (e.g. through text processors, information storage, calculations); and individual entertainment possibilities (e.g. games or cultural consumption on discs)». See also J. Bower, C. Christensen, Disruptive technologies: Catching the Wave, in Harvard Business Review, January-February 1995 and S. Cassese, La nuova costituzione economica,Laterza,2023,p.389ss. 2. F. Zhao, J. Wallis, M. Singh, E-government development and the digital economy: A reciprocal relationship, in Internet Research, 2015, n. 5, p. 734. 3. OECD, Going Digital: shaping policy, improving lives, 2019, OECD Publishing, 2019, p.18. 4. OECD, Going Digital: shaping policy, improving lives, 2019, OECD Publishing, 2019, p.18. 5. For an in-depth analysis OECD, Measuring the Digital Transformation: a roadmap for the Future, 2019. Introduction BERTARINI.indd 7BERTARINI.indd 7 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
8 inreflectionsrelatedtothedefinitionofefficientandeffectiveregulations allowing countries to seize opportunities and minimize the risks posed by the digital growth of societies6 and enterprises7. Digital transformation «refers to the economic and societal effects of digitisation and digitalisation. Digitisation is the conversion of analogue data and processes into a machine-readable format. Digitalisation is the use of digital technologies and data as well as their interconnection that result in new activities or in changes to existing ones. Together, digitisation and digitalisation make up the digital transformation»8. Digital transformation is connected to the digital economy, which is definedasaneconomythataimstoproduceandexchangegoodsandservices connected to novel applications, ideas, and business models derived from information and communication technologies (ICTs)9. Notably, however, «the presence of an ICT infrastructure and the mere accessibility to ICT facilities, are only a necessary pre-condition for moving towards a digitalized society and that the “level” and the “quality” in the use of these technologies, as well as the conditions-facilitating or hampering “digital empowerment”, are likely to play a much more important role»10. Definingnewpublicpoliciesthatcantacklechallengesassociatedwith the affirmation of digitalization is essential for the economic and social 6. OECD, How’s Life in the Digital Age?: opportunities and risks of the Digital Transformation for people’s Well-being, OECD Publishing, 2019, p. 15. 7. OECD Productivity Growth in the Digital Age, OECD Publishing, 2019. 8. OECD, How’s Life in the Digital Age?: opportunities and risks of the Digital Transformation for people’s Well-being, OECD Publishing, 2019, p. 16. 9.CommunicationfromtheCommission,COM(1999)687,December10,1999,“An information society for all”. 10. R. Evangelista, P. Guerrieri, V. Meliciani, The economic impact of digital technologies in Europe, in Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 2014, n. 8, p.803;for the Authors the analysis of digital technologies requires «a more complex and multidimensional view on the relevant dimensions and mechanisms governing the relationship between ICT and the economy. In order to assess the economic impact of ICT in this broad perspective, we have used three composite indicators measuring, respectively, three different dimensions/stages of digitalization and namely one synthesizing access conditions to the ICT infrastructure, onereflectingtheactual usage of ICTfacilitiesandInternetandonemeasuringtheICT empowermentofindividualsandfirmsinday-to-daylifeinkeysocialandeconomicdomains». The results underlines «digitalization may represent a major driver of labor productivity, economic and employment growth, and that inclusive policies may effectively contribute to bridging the gap between the most favoured and the disadvantaged parts of the population, thus helping in achieving the 2020 European targets. This is particularly important for those countries, such as the Mediterranean and some of the new EU entrant countries, where these gaps are still very large». BERTARINI.indd 8BERTARINI.indd 8 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
15 divergence, and more generally the preservation of its social model; (iii) creating the conditions whereby, in an open and competitive international system, Europe still has an adequate take-up of basic technologies and an efficientandcompetitiveindustry»16. The coexistence of some essential factors determines the creation of a “common information area”, which is central to economic and social development and socioeconomic cohesion17; six factors are identified: «(i) the information itself, converted and collated in electronic, i.e. digital, form (databases, document bases, image bases, CDI, etc.); (ii) the hardware, components and software available to the user to process this information; (iii) the physical infrastructure (terrestrial cable infrastructure, radio communications networks and satellites); (iv) the basic telecommunications services, particularly electronic mail, file transfer, interactive access to databases and interactive digital image transmission; (v) the applications, for which the above mentioned levels perform the storage, processing and transmissionfunctions,providinguserswiththespecificservicestheyneed. Generally, users “see” only the application to which they are connected; the transport side needs to be “transparent” for them. Consequently, applications are the area where the greatest efforts must be made to improve the structuring of the information and user-friendliness. With the aid of the applications, their performance and the conditions in which they can be used, the common information area will have an economic and social impact and can help to improve the employment situation; (vi) users, who are not only trained in operation of the applications, but are also aware of the potential of ICTs and of the conditions required for optimum use thereof»18. The Community policy «aimed at establishing a common information area will help to increase competition and improve European competitiveness. It will help to createjobs.Itshouldbebackedupbyspecificmeasuresaimedatfacilitating economic and social changes»19. In a competitive context, «access to and mobilization of information are 16. COM (1993) 700, p. 110. 17. Economic and social cohesion is explicitly mentioned in the Single European Act of1986in“Sub-sectionIV–Economicandsocialcohesion”,article23declares“ATitleV shall be added to Part Three of the EEC Treaty reading as follows: ‘TITLE V ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COHESION Sub-section III – Social policy’”. In particular, article 130a stated «in order to promote its overall harmonious development, the Community shall develop and pursue its actions leading to the strengthening of its economic and social cohesion. In particular the Community shall aim at reducing disparities between the various regions and the backwardness of the least-favoured regions». 18.COM(1993)700,p.109. 19. COM (1993) 700, p. 115. BERTARINI.indd 15BERTARINI.indd 15 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
16 becoming the central aspects of productivity and competitiveness, especially for SMEs»20; this assumes that the role of the Member State is to facilitate and regulate information: «the private sector is seen as the generator of change. A radical re-engineering of the fundamentally different relationship between public and private sectors is foreseen where the state instead of providing services simply regulates private provision»21. In December 1993, the Recommendations to the European Council, entitled as “Europe and the global information society”, known as the Bangemann Report, expressly stated that «there should be no more public money, subsidies or protectionism. The market, in other words, provides the solution while the state’s job is simply to encourage the market through deregulation. If we follow these suggestions the Bangemann Report claims “we will all win in the long run”»22. While the Bangemann Report recognizes that «the chief risk of the information age lies in the widening of the gap between the information haves and have-nots it supplies no convincing recommendations for how this is to be avoided. As a concern itcertainlyplayssecondfiddletothedriveforproductivitygainsthrough networking»23. In 1994, the Communication “Europe’s way to the information society: an Action Plan”24 pointed out that «the information society is on its way. A “digital revolution” is triggering structural changes comparable to last century’s industrial revolution with the corresponding high economic stakes. The process cannot be stopped and will lead eventually to a knowledgebased economy»25. InthisCommunication,theCommissionstressedthat«itisnotsufficient merely to act; there is a need for a consistent response by Europe to the challenge, avoiding initiatives which neutralise each other or are mutually incompatible. A global, coherent and balanced approach of mutually supportive measures is called for. The Community will assume its responsibilities for 20. COM (1993) 700, p. 109. 21. J. Downey, XS 4 All? “Information Society” Policy and Practice in the European Union, in J. Downey, J. McGuigan (eds.), Technocities: The Culture and Political Economy of the Digital Revolution, SAGE Publications, 1999, p. 126. 22. J. Downey, XS 4 All? “Information Society” Policy and Practice in the European Union, in in J. Downey, J. McGuigan (eds.), Technocities: The Culture and Political Economy of the Digital Revolution, SAGE Publications, 1999, p. 126. 23. J. Downey, XS 4 All? “Information Society” Policy and Practice in the European Union, in in J. Downey, J. McGuigan (eds.), Technocities: The Culture and Political Economy of the Digital Revolution, SAGE Publications, 1999, p. 127. 24. Communication from the Commission, COM (1994) 437, July 19, 1994. 25. COM (1994) 437, p. 1. BERTARINI.indd 16BERTARINI.indd 16 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
17 setting the appropriate regulatory environment. In parallel, the private sector is invited to play its entrepreneurial role and launch without delay concrete initiatives for the prompt deployment of the information society»26. For these reasons, the Commission presents a work program on the information society based on four areas: «the regulatory and legal framework, for which new proposals will be made, in particular regarding telecommunications infrastructure and services, on the protection of intellectual property rights and of privacy, on media concentration, as well as the updating of the “rules of the game” for the free movement of TV broadcast in the Community; networks, basic services, applications, and content, where there is a need to bring the parties concerned together in order to stimulate the development of applications in the areas proposed by the High Level Group and endorsed by the European Council; social, societal and cultural aspects, including the linguistic and cultural dimensions of the information society stressed by the European Council; and promotion of the information society in order to increase public awareness and support»27. This regulatory and legal framework is analyzed because it underlines the «importance of backing up the efforts of the private sector with the rapid establishment of a clear and stable regulatory framework, notably with regards to market access, compatibility between networks, intellectual property rights, data protection and copyright»28, these sectors remain central to the Digital Single Market today. The key points on which the regulatory and legal framework is based are as follows: toward a competitive environment; standardization, interconnection, and interoperability; rates; worldwide dimensions; intellectual property rights; privacy; electronic protection, legal protection, and security; and media ownership and competition. It is notable that «the Commission proposes a broad regulatory framework package, while preserving missions of public interest according to the principles of universality, equality and continuity» and «of central importance to the development of the European information society is the need to safeguard the free circulation of services across our internal frontiers. Given the range of measures mat might be necessary, the Commission will, as a matter of importance, set such issues in the context of an Internal Marketframework,withtheviewtoguaranteeingalevelplayingfield»29: 26. COM (1994) 437, p. 2. 27. COM (1994) 437, p. 2. 28.COM(1994)437,p.2. 29. COM (1994) 437, p. 3. BERTARINI.indd 17BERTARINI.indd 17 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
18 the Commission proposes laws while preserving a free, competitive market dominated by public interest. At the end of 1996, the Commission adopted the Communication “Europe at the forefront of the global information society: rolling action plan”30 indicating many social challenges and highlighting that «the information society is not a challenge for the future but one for the present. Decision makers are now fully aware that Europe’s future in the global economy will be shaped by the speed and success with which it exploits the opportunities arising from the new information and communication technologies. Momentum toward the information society is already building up in Europe at a breath-taking pace. But major tasks are still ahead of us. The key challenges are to ensure that Europe remains at the forefront of the new global and networked society and that European citizens equally enjoy itsbenefits.TheEUmustthereforefocusonaneffectiveimplementationof all aspects of the information society»31. In fact, «the development of the information society requires changes which still have to overcome a certain degree of organisational inertia and psychologicalresistanceaswellasfinancialconstraints.Thisisextremely hard to achieve in a period characterised by high unemployment, pressure on social benefits and budgetary restrictions. Whilst the implementation of the information society is mostly taking place at national, regional or local level, the value-added of Community level actions is to set up a common framework, to co-ordinate various activities and to act as a catalyst. Therefore, the Rolling Action Plan aims to harness and give more impetus to the implementation of the various measures taken at Member State level»32. The rolling action plan emphasizes that improving «the business environment through efficiency and coherent implementation of the liberalized telecommunications environment and the comprehensive application of the principles of the internal market (i.e. the free movement of goods, the free provision of services, free movement of capital and freedom of establishment) in the context of the information society»33 is essential with regard to dedicated actions «to promote the introduction of new technologies into daily business activities, in particular with respect to SMEs and for the promotion of satellite personal communication services (S-PCS) in Europe. Ensuring that the necessary conditions are met for the introduction of 30. Communication from the Commission, COM (1996) 607, January 27, 1996. 31. COM (1996) 607, p. 2. 32. COM (1996) 607, p. 4. 33. COM (1996) 607, p. 4. BERTARINI.indd 18BERTARINI.indd 18 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
19 electronic commerce (e.g. copyright, data protection, digital signatures, etc.) is also a major priority»34. In1997,thefinalreport“BuildingtheEuropeaninformationsocietyforus all: Final policy report of the high-level expert group” presented by the group formed in 1995 to analyze the social aspects of the information society35, contains 12 recommendations and sub recommendations: «1. Actively stimulating the acquisition of knowledge and skills; a. Establishing an educationnetwork,b.Newfinancialincentivesfortraining,c.Improving and disseminating knowledge on learning methods, d. Producing highquality, low-cost learning materials; 2. Coordinating regulation at EU level; 3. Public services as an engine of growth in the emerging IS, a. Shifting public services from infrastructure to content, b. Making public services more effective: improved productivity, for a better service, c. Public services as models of service provision, d. Improving health services; 4. Exploiting the virtual value chain, a. Measuring intangible performance, b. Creating confidenceinelectroniccommerce,c.Masteringtheimpactofvirtuality; 5. Developing flexible working arrangements, a. Collecting successful case studies of organizational innovation, b. Handling outsourcing, c.Towardssecurityinflexibleworkingarrangements,d.Dealingwithnew occupational health risks, e. From promoting telework to integrating it within society, f. Social dialogue in the IS; 6. Managing time, a. Structuring flexibleworking time, b.In searchoftime, c.Healthy living inthe IS; 7. Reprioritizing “full” employment, a. Enhancing employment growth in theIS,b.Towardsasocialgloballevelplayingfield;8.Maintainingnational government revenue in an increasingly global environment; 9. Including everyone, a. Increasing social participation, b. Avoiding exclusion/targeting specific needs, c. Providing technological tools for the social partners, d. Towards a European Social Fund focused on employability; 10. The death of distance, a. Towards universal community service, b. Rethinking regional cohesion policy; 11. European diversity – taking advantage of the many emerging information societies, a. Developing a high-quality multimedia 34. COM (1996) 607, p. 4. 35. In May 1995, the high-level expert group was formed, but prior, in February 1995, the European Commission formed the Information Society Forum, «the aim of the Information SocietyForumistocontributetoanopendebateandareflectiononthechallengesincluding social, societal, cultural and linguistic aspects of the information society. It will also recommend priority projects to be implemented by the Commission. 124 members have been drawn from a wide range of groups: users, network operators, academia, trade unions, family associations, parliamentarians, industry, the public sector and consumer groups, amongst others» (IP/95/757). BERTARINI.indd 19BERTARINI.indd 19 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
20 industry, b. Nurturing a multicultural Europe, c. Celebrating the local; 12. Transparency and democracy, a. Maintaining pluralism, b. A democracy project»36. Theserecommendationsderivefromabroaderreflectionthatthehighlevel expert group conducted on the subject of the information society, deliberating about what the information society is and what it will be in the future. Thereportdefinestheinformationsocietyas«thesocietycurrentlybeing put into place, where low-cost information and data storage and transmission technologies are in general use. This generalization of information and data use is being accompanied by organizational, commercial, social and legal innovations that will profoundly change life both in the world of work and in society generally»37. The high-level expert group stressed that «in the future there could be different models of information society, just as today we have different models of industrialized society. They are likely to differ in the degree to which they avoid social exclusion and create new opportunities for the disadvantaged», considering the importance of the social dimension that characterizes the European model; however, «it will also need to be imbued with a strong ethos of solidarity – not an easy goal to achieve, since the traditional structures of the welfare State will have to undergo substantial changes. Furthermore, that concept of solidarity will need to be active, not passive, to adapt to these changes»38. Thereportadditionallydefinedthedifferencebetween“data,information and knowledge” and what it meant by the “social integration requirement”. Regarding data, information, and knowledge, the group underlined «the generation of unstructured data does not automatically lead to the creation of information, nor can all information be equated with knowledge. All informationcan beclassified, analysedandreflecteduponandotherwise processed to generate knowledge. Both data and information, in this sense, are comparable to the raw materials industry processes into commodities» 36. Building the European information society for us all: Final policy report of the high-level expert group, p. 12. With reference to new prospectives of health right in Europe A. Santuari, C. Ugolini, Verso una nuova sanità europea: reti integrate e livelli assistenziali condivisi?, in C. Golino, A. Martelli (eds.), Un modello sociale europeo? Itinerari dei diritti di welfare tra dimensione europea e nazionale, FrancoAngeli, 2023. 37. Building the European information society for us all: Final policy report of the highlevel expert group, p. 15. 38.BuildingtheEuropeaninformationsocietyforusall:Finalpolicyreportofthehighlevel expert group, p. 15. BERTARINI.indd 20BERTARINI.indd 20 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
21 such technologies «have had no such effect on the generation or acquisition of knowledge and still less on wisdom»39. Instead, a direct connection between technologies and wisdom is hoped for,towarda“wisesociety”,«wherescientificallysupporteddata,information and knowledge would increasingly be used to make informed decisions to improve the quality of all aspects of life. Such wisdom would help to form a society that is environmentally sustainable, that takes the well-being of all its members into consideration and that values the social and cultural aspects of life as much as the material and economic»40. The high-level expert group noted that «our hope is that the emerging information society will develop in such a way as to advance this vision of wisdom»41. The information society must be a “learning society” and «the learning process is no longer limited to the traditional period of schooling, but is a lifelong process, starting before formal school-going age and taking place at work and in the home»42. Concurrently, the “social integrationist vision” places emphasis «on technology as a social process which by meeting real or imagined needs changes those needs just as it is changed by them. Society, in this view, is shaped by technical change, and technical change is shaped by society. Technicalinnovation–sometimesimpelledbyscientificdiscovery,atother times induced by demand – stems from within the economic and social system and is not merely an adjustment to transformations brought about by causes outside that system»43. The future implications of the information society are not well understood and analyzed; «there are numerous social policy challenges associated with a future European information society, stress that these transcend the simplistic notions of rapid adjustment to a future determined by the “external” force oftechnologicalchangeinwhichpeoplehavenoinfluenceandnochance 39. Building the European information society for us all: Final policy report of the highlevel expert group, p. 16. 40. Building the European information society for us all: Final policy report of the highlevel expert group, p. 16. 41. Building the European information society for us all: Final policy report of the highlevel expert group, p. 16. 42. Building the European information society for us all: Final policy report of the highlevel expert group, p. 17. 43. Building the European information society for us all: Final policy report of the highlevel expert group, p. 17, the high-level expert group mentioned the OECD reports on the socioeconomic aspects of new technologies, known as the Sundqvist report: OECD, “New technologies:asocioeconomicstrategyforthe90s”,Paris,1989,p.117. BERTARINI.indd 21BERTARINI.indd 21 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
22 to participate, and highlight the countless opportunities for engineering a European information society for us all»44. From this analysis emerges how «the information society may not be a new concept, but it is constantly evolving. He’s still in his youth, and as such, his dynamics change every day. We know a lot about the potential, even if we’re still learning as the information age unfolds. What seems clear is that the continued development of ICT in all its forms and applications is driving radical change in our lives, with the constant creation of new products and services, new ways of doing business, new markets and investment opportunities, new social and cultural opportunities, expressions and new channels of interaction between citizens and government»45. 2. The 1999 European Commission Communications “Towards a new framework for Electronic Communications infrastructure and associated services” and “eEurope – An Information Society for All”: the future of digital in Europe The Communication of November 10, 1999, n. 539 entitled “Towards a new framework for Electronic Communications infrastructure and associated services” underlined that «an advanced communications industry is a pre-condition of Europe’s transition to the information Society withallthesocialandeconomicbenefitswhichthatentails.Information Society industries already contribute around 15% to growth of the EU’s Gross Domestic Product and create 1 out of every 4 new jobs in European economy»46. Toward the end of the 20th century, the information society assumed acentralroleintheaffirmationofthecompetitivenessoftheEuropean economy by affecting the reduction of disparities between regions and increasing social cohesion. However, these results are only achievable if «information society services are available for everybody in all regions of the EU»47; to do so, the «existing obstacles for access to information society, whether economic, educational, social, cultural or geographical, must be addressed. Co-ordinated public policy measures are needed to 44. Building the European information society for us all: Final policy report of the highlevel expert group, p. 19. 45. P. Lindroos, M. Pinkhasov, Information society: The ICT challenge, in Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, December 2003, p. 27. 46. COM (1999) 539, p. ii. 47. COM (1999) 539, p. ii. BERTARINI.indd 22BERTARINI.indd 22 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
23 overcometheseobstaclestoensurethebeneficialeffectsofinformation technologies»48. In the coming years, the problem of access to digital technologies will be a central issue for the institutions of the European Union to concretely andfullyimplementthedigitalsinglemarket,infact,«efficientaccessto communication infrastructure is vital for business to participate in the digital economy»49. Currently,the rolethattheInternethas indefiningadifferentmarket and new opportunities appears overwhelming, breaking traditional market structures and «providing a common platform for the delivery of a wide range of services. It is blurring the distinction between voice, image and data transmission services, changing radically traditional pricing models for communications services, and challenging existing regulatory structures»50. In 1999, in December, the European Commission issued a Communication entitled “eEurope – An Information Society For All”51, which argued that thechangesassociatedwiththeinformationsocietyarethemostsignificant since the industrial revolution and are changes of a global dimension; «they are not just about technology. They will affect everyone, everywhere. Bringing communities, both rural and urban, closer together, creating wealth, sharing knowledge, they have huge potential to enrich everyone’s lives»52, and in a broad sense analyzed how «the world economy is moving from a predominantly industrial society to a new set of rules – the information society»53. Suchchangesaredefiningtheemergenceofthe“neweconomy”and«the underpinning dynamics of the new economy are strong. Digital technologies make accessing, processing, storing and transmitting information increasingly cheaper and easier. The sheer scale of information available creates huge opportunities for its exploitation through the development of new products and services. Transforming digital information into economic and social value is the basis of the new economy, creating new industries, changing others and profoundly affecting citizens’ lives. Enterprises in all sectors are starting to transform their business into e-business – requiring restructuring of the entire company»54. 48.COM(1999)539,p.iii. 49. COM (1999) 539, p. iii. 50. COM (1999) 539, p. iv. 51.COM(1999)687,December8,1999. 52.COM(1999)687,p.2. 53.COM(1999)687,p.4. 54.COM(1999)687,p.4. BERTARINI.indd 23BERTARINI.indd 23 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
24 This new economy can only be successful if consumers have the ability to exploititsbenefits:«forthis,theyneedtoacquiretheskillsthatwillenable them to access the information they seek and interact successfully on the Internet.Consumerconfidencemustbebuiltifmarketsaretodevelop»55. Simultaneously, public policies must evolve to ensure that the legal context isabletosupportbusinessdevelopmentanddefineaframeworkconducive toconsumerconfidence. However, the Commission notes general obstacles to the information society that require solutions, namely, «generally expensive, insecure and slowaccesstotheInternetande-commerce;aninsufficientdigitallyliterate on-linepopulation;lackofasufficientlydynamic,entrepreneurial,serviceorientedculture;apublicsectorwhichisnotplayingasufficientlyactiverole in enabling the development of new applications and services»56. Therefore, the EU and Member States have defined 10 actions to be pursued, which are as follows: 1. European youth into the digital age; 2. Cheaper Internet access; 3. Accelerating E-Commerce; 4. Fast Internet for researchers and students; 5. Smart cards for secure electronic access; 6. Risk capitalforhigh-techSMEs;7.eParticipationforthedisabled;8.Healthcare online; 9. Intelligent transport; 10. Government online. For each of these 55.COM(1999)687,p.4. 56. COM (1999) 687, p. 5. The European Parliament resolution on the “Next Generation Internet: the need for an EU research initiative” (2000/2102(INI)) considers that «the following key areas of the Internet’s evolution should be factored, inter alia, into any research strategy: – the availability of abundant, low-cost, expanded high bandwidth infrastructure to which access is on equitable terms; – a requirement for a significant improvement in the quality of Internet delivery (its speed, reliability, and security), and its “value added” potential (e.g. collecting payment, handling customised requirements); – an increase in the number of remote device connections, operating automatically, without user intervention (e.g. connecting baby monitors, domestic appliances, automobiles); – a large escalation in the amount of wireless communications; – the emergence of many dedicated service channels (i.e. the conventional “Internet” will become just one service among many)» (point n. 9) and «urges the EU to promote research and coordinated development efforts, inter alia, within the following areas of exploitation of electronic communications infrastructure with high capacity, always-on connections and high mobility: – interoperability and open architectures; – the effective use of the capacity offered by expanded bandwith opportunities; – the optimum types of software and hardware to be used, leading to potential new standards; – the further development of photonics technology for the communications infrastructure, particularly to relieve the potential bottleneck in switching and routing; – the new architectural framework of a very high capacity Internet; – how a high capacity backbone network will interface with the mobile infrastructure; – how content delivery, availability and security will be managed; – how information search and retrieval can be facilitated; – a distributed Domain Name Server route-service under the control of separate commercial entities» (point n. 10). BERTARINI.indd 24BERTARINI.indd 24 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
31 policy measures to review and adapt legislation at national and European level; to ensure legislation does not unnecessarily hamper new services; to strengthen competition and interoperability; to improve access to a variety of networks; and, to demonstrate political leadership». Secondly, the plan «will facilitate the exchange of experience, of good practices and demonstration projects, but also of sharing the lessons from failures; thirdly, policy measures will be monitored and better focussed by benchmarking of the progress made in achieving the objectives and of the policies in support of the objectives»86. Finally, the plan aims to generate synergies between the various proposed actions. The 2005 Communication “i2010 - A European Information Society for growth and employment” stresses that the «European Council called knowledge and innovation the engines of sustainable growth and stated that it is essential to build a fully inclusive information society, based on the widespread use of information and communication technologies (ICT) in public services, SMEs and households»87. Data provided by the European Commission in 2005 report that «a quarter of EU GDP growth and 40% of productivity growth are due to ICT»88, in fact «the digital convergence of information society and media services, networks and devices is finally becoming an everyday reality: ICT will become smarter, smaller, safer, faster, always connected and easier to use, with content moving to three-dimensional multimedia formats»89. Proactive policies are needed «to respond to the fundamental changes in technology. Digital convergence requires policy convergence and a willingness to adapt regulatory frameworks where needed so they are consistent with the emerging digital economy»90. In consideration of this, i2010 outlines «broad policy orientations. It promotes an open and competitive digital economy and emphasises ICT as a driver of inclusion and quality of life»91: the i2010 proposes three priorities: «i) the completion of a Single European Information Space which promotes an open and competitive internal market for information society and media; ii) strengthening Innovation and Investment in ICT research to promote growth and more and better jobs; iii) achieving an Inclusive European Information Society that promotes growth and jobs in a manner that is 86.COM(2002)263,p.4. 87.CommunicationfromtheCommission,COM(2005)229,June1,2005,p.3. 88.COM(2005)229,p.3. 89.COM(2005)229,p.3. 90. COM (2005) 229, p. 3. 91. COM (2005) 229, p. 3. BERTARINI.indd 31BERTARINI.indd 31 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
32 consistent with sustainable development and that prioritises better public services and quality of life»92. The definition of the “Single European Information Space” sets four challenges: «speed: faster broadband in Europe services to deliver rich content suchashighdefinitionvideo;richcontent:increasedlegalandeconomic certainty to encourage new services and on-line content; interoperability: enhancing devices and platforms that “talk to one another” and services that are portable from platform to platform; security: making internet safer from fraudsters, harmful content and technology failures to increase trust amongst investors and consumers»93. The goal is to offer «affordable and secure high bandwidth communications, rich and diverse content and digital services»94. Regarding “Innovation and Investment in ICT”, the «ICT sector is a major contributor to the economy, while the adoption and skillful application of ICT is one of the largest contributors to productivity and growth throughout the economy, leading to business innovation in key sectors»95. For ICTs to continue to be a source of employment and growth, substantial investments are necessary in research and innovation considering that Europe currently invests less in these aspects than the United States and Japan. Additionally, investments in research and innovation must be accompanied by greater diffusion of ICT, «the benefits of ICT come from embedding them into products and services and the adoption of new business models, organisational change and skills. Businesses are getting productivity gains from ICT but still face a lack of interoperability, reliability and security; difficultiestoreorganiseandintegrateICTintotheworkplaceandhighcost ofsupport.SMEsinparticularhavedifficultiestoadoptICT»96. The growing use of ICT will give life to a “new era of ‘e-business solutions’” based «on integrated ICT solutions, secure web-services and “collaboration tools” to raise worker productivity. New developments indicate that the business use of ICT will increase in the next years. It is also essentialtoadapttheworkingenvironmentthroughefficientuseofICTinthe workplaceandforaflexibleorganisationofsafeandhigh-qualitywork»97. Finally, “Inclusive European Information Society” analyzes how the development of ICT grows with its usage. The i2010 strategy aims at «makingsurethatICTbenefitallcitizens;makingpublicservicesbetter, 92. COM (2005) 229, p. 4. 93. COM (2005) 229, p. 5. 94. COM (2005) 229, p. 5. 95. COM (2005) 229, p. 6. 96. COM (2005) 229, p. 7. 97. COM (2005) 229, p. 7. BERTARINI.indd 32BERTARINI.indd 32 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
33 more cost effective and more accessible; and improving quality of life»98. TheCommunicationfindsthatalthoughthediffusionofICTshassignificantly increased, over half of the population either does not have access to them or does not take full advantage of the access; thus, «making ICT products and services more accessible, including in regions lagging behind, is an economic, social, ethical and political imperative. In i2010, strong emphasis is given to full participation and to providing people with basic digital competence»99. This aids the improvement of the quality of life for citizens, for example, improving citizens’ health services, further, «ICT can help to make transport safer,cleanerandmoreenergyefficient»100. The aim is an «Information Society that is inclusive, provides high quality public services and promotes quality of life»101. The strategy thus outlined requires actions by the European institutions, in particular by the European Commission, through legislative proposals aimed at updating regulatory frameworks, and the Member States who must create internal national programs that consider the information society a priority. 4. The European Commission Communications of 2010: “A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth” and “A Digital Agenda for Europe” The role that digitization would play in Europe’s future is further analyzed in the Communication of the European Commission of March 3, 2010, entitled “A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth”102, which focusesontheevolutionprospectsoftheUniontoward2020bydefiningthe following targets: «75% of the population aged 20-64 should be employed. 3% of the EU’s GDP should be invested in R&D. The “20/20/20” climate/ energy targets should be met (including an increase to 30% of emissions reduction if the conditions are right). The share of early school leavers should be under 10% and at least 40% of the younger generation should have a tertiary degree. 20 million less people should be at risk of poverty»103. TheCommunicationadditionallydefinesthreeprioritiesforthegrowthof Europe for 2030, “mutually reinforcing priorities”, they are: «Smart growth: 98.COM(2005)229,p.9. 99. COM (2005) 229, p. 9. 100. COM (2005) 229, p. 10. 101. COM (2005) 229, p. 10. 102. COM (2010) 2020. 103. COM (2010) 2020, p. 5. BERTARINI.indd 33BERTARINI.indd 33 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
34 developing an economy based on knowledge and innovation. Sustainable growth:promotingamoreresourceefficient,greenerandmorecompetitive economy. Inclusive growth: fostering a high-employment economy delivering social and territorial cohesion»104. To achieve these objectives, the Commission defines “seven flagship initiatives to catalyse progress” under each priority theme: “Innovation Union”aims«toimproveframeworkconditionsandaccesstofinancefor research and innovation so as to ensure that innovative ideas can be turned into products and services that create growth and jobs»105; “Youth on the move” aims «to enhance the performance of education systems and to facilitate the entry of young people to the labour market»106; “A digital agenda for Europe” aims «to speed up the roll-out of high-speed internet and reap the benefitsofadigitalsinglemarketforhouseholdsandfirms»107; “Resource efficientEurope”aims«tohelpdecoupleeconomicgrowthfromtheuseof resources, support the shift towards a low carbon economy, increase the use of renewable energy»108; “An industrial policy for the globalisation era” aims «to improve the business environment, notably for SMEs, and to support the development of a strong and sustainable industrial base able to compete globally»109; “An agenda for new skills and jobs” aims «to modernise labour markets and empower people by developing their of skills throughout the lifecycle with a view to increase labour participation and better match labour supply and demand, including through labour mobility»110; and “European platform against poverty” aims «to ensure social and territorial cohesion such that the benefits of growth and jobs are widely shared and people experiencing poverty and social exclusion are enabled to live in dignity and take an active part in society»111. These objectives are ambitious, but result from the impact of the economic-financialcrisisontheeconomicgrowthoftheUnion112, in fact, 104. COM (2010) 2020, p. 5. 105. COM (2010) 2020, p. 5. 106. COM (2010) 2020, p. 5. 107. COM (2010) 2020, p. 6. 108.COM(2010)2020,p.6. 109. COM (2010) 2020, p. 6. 110. COM (2010) 2020, p. 6. 111. COM (2010) 2020, p. 6. 112. COM (2010) 2020, p. 7, stresses «the steady gains in economic growth and job creation witnessed over the last decade have been wiped out – our GDP fell by 4% in 2009, our industrial production dropped back to the levels of the 1990s and 23 million people – or 10% of our active population – are now unemployed. The crisis has been a huge shock for millions of citizens and it has exposed some fundamental weaknesses of our economy. The BERTARINI.indd 34BERTARINI.indd 34 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
35 theCommissionclarifiesthat«asanimmediatepriority,theCommission chartswhatneedstobedonetodefineacredibleexitstrategy,topursue thereformofthefinancialsystem,toensurebudgetaryconsolidationfor long-term growth, and to strengthen coordination within the Economic and Monetary Union. Stronger economic governance will be required to deliver results. Europe 2020 will rely on two pillars: the thematic approach outlined above, combining priorities and headline targets; and country reporting, helping Member States to develop their strategies to return to sustainable growthandpublicfinances»113. The Commission wants to mark the path for entry “into a new economy”114, that is able to «for our own and future generations to continue to enjoy a highquality of healthy life, underpinned by Europe’s unique social models»115. Thesevenflagshipinitiativesdefineaframeworkforthegrowthofthe Union. For our study the most interesting is “A Digital Agenda for Europe”, which aims to «deliver sustainable economic and social benefits from a Digital Single Market based on fast and ultra fast internet and interoperable applications, with broadband access for all by 2013, access for all to much higher internet speeds (30 Mbps or above) by 2020, and 50% or more of European households subscribing to internet connections above 100 Mbps»116. Considering this general goal at the European level, the Commission will work «to provide a stable legal framework that stimulate investments in an open and competitive high-speed internet infrastructure and in related services;todevelopanefficientspectrumpolicy;tofacilitatetheuseofthe EU’s structural funds in pursuit of this agenda; to create a true single market for online content and services (i.e. borderless and safe EU web services and digitalcontentmarkets,withhighlevelsoftrustandconfidence,abalanced regulatory framework with clear rights regimes, the fostering of multi-territorial licences, adequate protection and remuneration for rights holders and active support for the digitisation of Europe’s rich cultural heritage, and to shape the crisishasalsomadethetaskofsecuringfutureeconomicgrowthmuchmoredifficult.Thestill fragilesituationofourfinancialsystemisholdingbackrecoveryasfirmsandhouseholdshave difficultiestoborrow,spendandinvest.Ourpublicfinanceshavebeenseverelyaffected,with deficitsat7%ofGDPonaverageanddebtlevelsatover80%ofGDP–twoyearsofcrisis erasingtwentyyearsoffiscalconsolidation.Ourgrowthpotentialhasbeenhalvedduringthe crisis. Many investment plans, talents and ideas risk going to waste because of uncertainties, sluggish demand and lack of funding». 113. COM (2010) 2020, p. 6. 114. COM (2010) 2020, p. 10. 115. COM (2010) 2020, p. 10. 116. COM (2010) 2020, p. 14. BERTARINI.indd 35BERTARINI.indd 35 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
36 global governance of the internet; to reform the research and innovation funds andincreasesupportinthefieldofICTssoastoreinforceEurope’stechnology strengthinkeystrategicfieldsandcreatetheconditionsforhighgrowthSMEs to lead emerging markets and to stimulate ICT innovation across all business sectors; to promote internet access and take-up by all European citizens, especially through actions in support of digital literacy and accessibility»117. Simultaneously, all Member States need «to draw up operational high-speed internet strategies, and target public funding, including structural funds, on areas not fully served by private investments; to establish a legal framework for co-ordinating public works to reduce costs of network rollout; to promote deployment and usage of modern accessible online services (e.g. e-government, online health, smart home, digital skills, security)»118. The general objectives described in the initiative are explained in more detail in another Communication entitled “A Digital Agenda for Europe”119 of May 19, 2010, which discusses how ICTs and the Internet are acquiring an increasingly central role120 in socioeconomic activities. However, being able to derive “sustainable economic and social benefits”121 from the diffusion of the Internet and Digital Single Market requires the intervention of the Union in favor of citizens and businesses «through a well-functioning virtuous cycle of activity. Attractive content and services need to be made available in an interoperable and borderless internet environment. This stimulates demand for higher speeds and capacity, which in turn creates the business case for investments in faster networks. The deployment and take-up of faster networks in turn opens the way for innovative services exploiting higher speeds»122.Thisflowofactivity«can be largely self-reinforcing. It requires a business environment that fosters investments and entrepreneurship»123. 117. COM (2010) 2020, p. 14. 118.COM(2010)2020,p.14. 119. COM (2010) 245. 120. COM (2010) 245, p. 4 underlines «the ICT sector is directly responsible for 5% of European GDP, with a market value of € 660 billion annually, but it contributes far more to overall productivity growth (20% directly from the ICT sector and 30% from ICT investments). This is because of the high levels of dynamism and innovation inherent in the sector, and the enabling role the sector plays in changing how other sectors do business. At thesametime,thesocialimpactofICThasbecomesignificant–forexample,thefactthat there are more than 250 million daily internet users in Europe and virtually all Europeans own mobile phones has changed life style». 121. COM (2010) 245, p. 3. 122. COM (2010) 245, p. 4. 123. COM (2010) 245, p. 4. BERTARINI.indd 36BERTARINI.indd 36 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
37 The Digital Agenda for Europe emphasizes that in Europe there are «a patchwork of national online markets, and Europeans are prevented by solvableproblemsfromenjoyingthebenefitsofadigitalsinglemarket»124; considering this fragmentation, the legislative intervention is oriented toward defininganewregulatoryframework. The Digital Agenda defines seven problem areas: fragmented digital markets; lack of interoperability; rising cybercrime and risk of low trust in networks; lack of investment in networks; insufficient research and innovation efforts; lack of digital literacy and skills; and missed opportunities in addressing societal challenges. Thus, the agenda «frames its key actions around the need to systematically tackle these seven problem areas, which as a horizontal initiative spans, the three growth dimensions set out in Europe 2020»125. Each problem area is analyzed in detail and actions are proposed, which commit the European Commission in the future, for example, in the area called“avibrantdigitalsinglemarket”;theCommissionidentifiesthatfirst «the creation of attractive online content and services and its free circulation inside the EU and across its borders are fundamental to stimulate the virtuous cycle of demand. However, persistent fragmentation is stifling Europe’s competitiveness in the digital economy. It is therefore not surprising that the EU is falling behind in markets such as media services, both in terms of what consumers can access, and in terms of business models that can create jobs in Europe»126; second, «despite the body of key single market legislation on eCommerce, e-Invoicing and eSignatures, transactions in the digital environment are still too complex, with inconsistent implementation of the rules across Member States»127; and third, consumers and businesses are faced with «considerable uncertainty about their rights and legal protection when doing business on line. Fourth, Europe is far from having a single market for telecom services»128. This determines the need to rethink the traditionally understood single market, which is declining in the internet era. To support and implement this single market, a series of actions are needed in different areas, namely: “opening up access to content” i.e., facilitating access for content users while maintaining a high trust level among rights 124. COM (2010) 245, p. 5. 125. COM (2010) 245, p. 6. 126. COM (2010) 245, p. 7. 127. COM (2010) 245, p. 7. 128.COM(2010)245,p.7. BERTARINI.indd 37BERTARINI.indd 37 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
38 holders so as to create a virtuous demand-supply circle for companies129; “making online and cross border transactions straightforward” i.e. European consumers «are still not getting the gains of price and choice that the single market should offer because online transactions are too complicated. Fragmentation also limits demand for cross-border eCommerce transactions»130, this highlights «the urgency of tackling the regulatory barriers holding back European businesses from trading cross-border»131: only in an integrated payment market, «will it be possible for enterprises and consumerstorelyonsafeandefficientpaymentmethods»132; “building digital confidence”meansensuringthatusersareawareoftheirdigitalrightsand that«usersmustbeabletofindsimple,codifiedexplanationsoftheirrights and obligations, set out in a transparent and understandable way»133; in fact, lack of trust in the online environment hinders its development. “Reinforcing the single market for telecommunications services” means the commission’s priority «will be the swift and consistent implementation of the amended regulatory framework, together with greater co-ordination of spectrum use and, where necessary, harmonisation of spectrum bands, to create economies of scale in equipment and service markets. Since the single market demands that similar regulatory issues be given correspondingly similar treatment the Commission will prioritise the provision of guidance on key regulatory concepts under the electronic communications rules»134. The overall scheme of the legislative interventions foreseen in the seven areas is presented in Annex 1 of the Communication and involves a complex and articulated context of legislative proposals. What emerges from the overall analysis of the agenda is the need for market-, business-, and consumer-oriented actions because only a broad interventioncanproduceeffectiveandefficientresults. 129. COM (2010) 245, pp. 7-9. 130. COM (2010) 245, p. 10. 131. COM (2010) 245, p. 10. 132. COM (2010) 245, p. 10. 133. COM (2010) 245, p. 11. 134. COM (2010) 245, p. 12. BERTARINI.indd 38BERTARINI.indd 38 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
39 Summary: 1. Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe – 2. Digital divide and e-Inclusion: challenges for digital participation – 3. Public regulation of connectivity and 5G as a key asset for Europe’s growth – 4. The role of Digital Platforms and the affirmationoftheDataEconomy. 1.DigitalSingleMarketStrategyforEurope The regulatory evolution that characterizes the current information societyhasmorerecentlycometodriveamoredetaileddefinitionofthe Digital Single Market. An analysis of the new prospects for regulating the Digital Single Market at the European level must fully account for of the communication from the Commission, May 6, 2015, “A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe”1, which focuses on «a key part of the EU’s 1. COM (2015) 192. Studies on the subject: E. Carbonara, M.R. Tagliaventi (eds.), SMEs in the Digital Era, Edward Elgar, 2023; F. Ferri, Il bilanciamento dei diritti fondamentali nel mercato unico digitale, Giappichelli, 2022; M. Suska, The European Union digital single market: Europe digital transformation, Routledge, 2022; P. João, The New Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive: A Critical Look, in European Intellectual Property Review, 2020, n. 1; J. Basedow, The EU Digital Single Market Strategy and Insurance Law, in The Journal of Business Law, 2018, n. 6; N. Bodiroga-Vukobrat,A. Pošćić, “Old economy” restrictions in the digital market for services, in Journal for International and European Law, Economics and Market Integrations,2018,n.2;S.Schroff,J.Street,The politics of the Digital Single Market: culture vs. competition vs. copyright, in Information, Communication & Society,2018,n.10;J.Hoffman,Crossing borders in the digital market: a proposal to and copyright territoriality and geo-blocking in the European Union, in The George Washington International Law Review, 2017, n. 1; K. Havu, The Eu digital Single Market from a consumer standpoint: how do promises meet means?, in Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice, 2017, n. 2; A. De Franceschi (eds.), European contract law and the digital single market: the implications of the digital revolution, Intersentia, 2016; W. Paardekooper, M. van 2. Affirmation of the Digital Single Market and related regulatory frameworks BERTARINI.indd 39BERTARINI.indd 39 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
40 strategy to prepare itself for the future and to continue to deliver high living standards for its population»2. Priortothestrategydefinition,in2012,theEuropeanEconomicandSocial Committee issued an opinion on “The digital market as a driver for growth”, stressing that «the market for the market’s sake is not an end in itself. ICTs must be a means to serve the economy and must not threaten our economic, social, human, and cultural gains»3. In 2014, a European Commission communication, “An Investment Plan for Europe”4 highlighted the urgency offundingfollowingtheeconomicandfinancialcrisis andidentifiedthe need to implement actions related to the needs of the Digital Single Market. TheEuropeanUnionstressedthat«whatweneedisconfidenceinthe overall economic environment; predictability and clarity in policy-making and the regulatory framework; effective use of scarce public resources; trust in the economic potential of investment projects under development; andsufficientrisk-bearingcapacitytoencourageprojectpromoters,unlock investment and entice private investors»5; hence, these problems require actions by public authorities at all levels of government as only highly coordinated deliberate actions can provide a thriving Digital Single Market. In this sense, both traditional and digital markets are fundamental and should be exploited to the fullest extent so that they can become «a launch pad for companies»6, and Europe needs «to develop a truly connected Digital Single Market, including through swift and ambitious legislative steps in the areas of data protection, telecoms regulation and by modernising and simplifying copyright and consumer rules for online and digital purchases»7. The Digital Single Market should deliver «trust and security in online transactions, interoperability of different technological solutions and access to digital resources and infrastructures»8. de Ven, A. van Esdonk, A, Y. Cattel, Tax Considerations for the European Union’s Digital Single Market Strategy, in Intertax, 2016, n. 6-7; A. Tarrant, L. Di Mauro, Increasing the Benefits from the Digital Single Market, in European Networks Law and Regulation Quarterly, 2016, n. 2. 2. COM (2015) 192, p. 17. 3. Point 1.3, Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on “The digital market as a driver for growth”. 4. COM (2014) 903, November 26, 2014. 5. COM (2014) 903, p. 4. See P. Manzini, Diritto antitrust dell’Unione europea, Giappichelli, 2022. 6. COM (2014) 903, p. 15. 7. COM (2014) 903, p. 15. See F. Ferretti, Consumers in the Digital Single Market, in European Business Law Review, 2022, n. 33. 8.COM(2014)903,p.15. BERTARINI.indd 40BERTARINI.indd 40 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
47 resolution entitled “Towards a Digital Single Market Act”. This resolution called upon the Commission to integrate the Digital Single Market Strategy, arguing that «better regulation requires taking an approach to legislation that is digital by default, principle-based, and technologically neutral; in order to provide room for innovation, it requires an assessment of whether existing legislation, complementary non-regulatory actions and enforcement frameworks, following necessary consultations and impact assessments, arefitforpurposeinthedigitalage,inlightofnewtechnologiesandnew business models, with the aim of overcoming legal fragmentation of the single market, reducing administrative burden, and boosting growth and innovation»43. Furthermore, we must consider that «the trust of citizens and businesses in the digital environment is vital to fully unlocking innovation and growth in the digital economy»44. Scholars have noted that European institutions and Member-State governments have to redouble their efforts in the next years to create better and larger space for the digital economy to grow. Even if there is a great deal of variation between the performances of different EU economies»45. Thesedelayshaveasignificantimpactontheeconomyandmayreduce thebenefitsofferedbydigitalizationtosocietyandenterprises.Additionally, regulating the Digital Single Market requires European Union institutions to reflectdeeplyontheimpacts,pros,andconsofthispublicregulation. 2.Digitaldivideande-Inclusion:challengesfordigitalparticipation The full development of the Digital Single Market requires preparation bytheEUviasuitableregulatoryframeworkscapableofinfluencingthe diffusion of digital technologies, which are essential for enterprises and citizens as they seek to fully seize the opportunities and exploit the advantages inherent to the Digital Single Market. Since the 2000s, the role of Information and Communication Technologies 43. European Parliament Resolution, January 19, 2016, “Towards a Digital Single Market Act” (2015/2147(INI)), point n. 3. 44. European Parliament Resolution, January 19, 2016, “Towards a Digital Single Market Act” (2015/2147(INI)), point n. 4. 45. F. Erixon, P. Lamprechet, The Next Steps for the Digital Single Market: From Where do We Start?,EuropeanCentreforinternationalpoliticaleconomy,PolicyBrief,2018,n.2, p. 1; authors underlines «the digital economy is increasingly depressed by heavy-handed regulations that have raised the total level of digital restrictiveness and the cost of digital commerce» (p. 5). BERTARINI.indd 47BERTARINI.indd 47 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
48 (ICTs)hasbeenacentralelementintheDigitalSingleMarketaffirmation process. However, today, «the presence of an ICT infrastructure and the mere accessibility to ICT facilities, are only a necessary pre-condition for moving towards a digitalized society and that the “level” and the “quality” in the use of these technologies, as well as the conditions facilitating or hampering “digital empowerment”, are likely to play a much more important role»46. The impact of ICTs is transversal and supranational, although the global context «is to a high degree driven by technological progress. But whereas the economies of developed countries are experiencing a fundamental transformation towards the information society based on the international exchanges in knowledge, research and information, developing countries are facinganincreasingdigitaldivide.Unlesstheopportunitiesflowingfrom these new technologies are seized, this implies the risk of a new form of marginalisation as access to global networks and advanced services become necessary elements of integration into the world economy»47. The problem of internet access and the consequent digital divide was analyzed in a Commission staff working document, “A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe - Analysis and Evidence”48, which indicated that «aparticularproblemisidentifiedintheruralareasofthelargemajorityof Member States (the so-called “digital divide”), where broadband high-speed access is available only in less than 20% of those areas, compared to 62% on a nationwide basis. This is explained by the fact that the market often does not deliver high-speed broadband in rural areas, as demand may be too small toensureprofitabilityanddeploymentcostsareinsomerespectshigherthan in urban centres»49. 46. R. Evangelista, P. Guerrieri, V. Meliciani, The economic impact of digital technologies in Europe, in Economics of Innovation and New Technology,2014,n.8,p.803. 47. Communication from the Commission, COM (2000) 212, April 26, 2000, “The European Community’s Development Policy”, p. 7. 48.Commissionstaffworkingdocument,ADigitalSingleMarketStrategyforEurope– Analysis and Evidence. Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe, SWD (2015) 100, May 6, 2015. See the analysis by S. Pantea, B. Martens, Has the digital divide been reversed? Evidence from five EU Member States, Joint Research Centre of the European Commission – Institute for Prospective Technological Studies Digital Economy Working Paper, 2013, n. 6. 49. SWD (2015) 100, p. 39. On the subject with international references M. Ragnedd, G.W. Muschert, The Digital Divide: The Internet and Social Inequality in International Perspective,Taylor&Francis,2013,p.3,whomentionthat«definedasstratificationinthe access and use of the Internet, the so-called digital divide is inevitably tied with the concept of social inequalities (van Dijk, 2005), a classic sociological concept» even if «social BERTARINI.indd 48BERTARINI.indd 48 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
49 However, a fully functioning Digital Single Market «needs to rely on efficient ICT, including broadband infrastructure, to support digital growth and uptake in SMEs, e-society and the development and roll-out of ICT- based innovation. Given the large investments needed to roll out and upgrade the current connections to the next generation of digital networks – often based on fibre technology – there is a serious risk that market failure will rapidly increase the so-called digital divide across Europe»50. The problem of the existence of the digital divide among people with internet access and those without is central, as it will significantly impact citizens and businesses regarding the full affirmation of rights under the digital context and on the full development of businesses. This situation should be framed in terms of the multiple services currently being offered by the public administration of governments using digital technologies. At the international level, the first World Summit on the Information Society was held in Geneva on December 10-12, 2003. The group agreed that «we use the term “digital divide” to refer to the gap between those who can effectively use new information and communication tools, such as the internet, and those who cannot»51. Historically, digital-divide research focused on the issue of access; however, now «digital divide research applies multifaceted conceptualizations, spanning motivation, material access, skills, use, and outcomes. In general, digital skills are considered the primary requirement for conducting capitalenhancing activities online, for obtaining positive outcomes from Internet use, and for the entire process of access and information inequality; consequently, they are deeply entwined with the notion of the digital divide»52. It is evident that digital equality is necessary to avoid new forms of social discrimination. There are many factors connected to the digital divide, including the lack of an adequate infrastructure to reduce the gap between those who have access and those who do not and the efficacy of using ITCs to gain access. For this reason, a particular focus has been placed on the digital literacy of stratification is a crucial part of all human organization ever observed, it was in the writings of the “fathers of sociology” such as Marx, Weber, and Durkheim, that the study of this topic became more systematic, articulated using concepts that remain with us to this day». 50. SWD (2015) 100, p. 85. With reference to SMEs see M.A. Stefanelli, Small business enterprises and “the digital revolution” in EU regulation, in F. Marrella, N. Soldati (eds.), Arbitration, contracts and international trade law, Giuffrè, 2021. 51. S. Hubregtse, The digital divide within the European Union, in New Library World, 2005, n. 3-4, p. 165. 52. A. Van Deursen, K. Mossberger, Any thing for anyone? A new digital divide in internet- of-things skills, in Policy and Internet, 2018, n. 2, p. 123. BERTARINI.indd 49BERTARINI.indd 49 28/04/23 09:3728/04/23 09:37 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
50 citizens and enterprises. Regarding this issue, «the researchers appreciate thatthereareseveralstagesofit.ThefirstistheaccesstotheInternet,the second by the ability to use it and the third, is to achieve tangible results using this technology. For those interested, it is important to understand the steps involved because it should be noted that the digital divide continues to deepenevenafterthefirststep.EvenwhenaccesstotheInternetisguaranteed, there are material differences between people (in terms of devices, software programs, etc.), the dominance of English at the international level further exacerbating the digital divide, as most content on the web is written in this language»53. The most recent phase of ICT development concerns the internet-of- things, which includes «everyday devices implemented with microprocessors andsensorsbeyondtherectangularconfinesofpersonalcomputers,laptops, tablets,andsmartphones.Thetechnologyhasbeenfindingwideapplicability andisexpectedtodelivergreatbenefitstoitsusers»54. Although the widespread presence of these technologies in society is recognized, «inequality continues to rise on account of skills and usage opportunities. In the contemporary literature on the digital divide, inequality of Internet skills is acknowledged as a key dimension, affecting types of engagement and social outcomes of Internet use, or digital citizenship. WhilethereisevidenceregardingthebenefitsofInternetuseforeconomic opportunity, civic engagement, and political participation, these gains are not equal across all Internet users»55. The central point now reflects that the «digital divide threatens the process of e-inclusion. It refers to the implementation of policies so that all inhabitants of a country can participate in the information society through easy access to technology and the use of ICT tools and services, as well as the ability and skills of all people to use these tools»56. “E-inclusion” was proposed by the eEurope Advisory Group in their 2005 report, “E-Inclusion: New Challenges and Policy Recommendations”. E-Inclusion «refers to the effective participation of individuals and communities in all dimensions of the knowledge-based society and economy 53.G.Brătucu,E.Nichifor,S.Sumedrea,I.Chițu,R.Lixăndroiu,Avoiding Digital Divide in European Union through European Green Deal, in Amfiteatru Economic, 2022, n. 4, p. 79. 54. A. Van Deursen, K. Mossberger, Any thing for anyone? A new digital divide in internet- of-things skills, in Policy and Internet,2018,n.2,p.124. 55. A. Van Deursen, K. Mossberger, Any thing for anyone? A new digital divide in internet- of-things skills, in Policy and Internet,2018,n.2,p.134. 56.G.Brătucu,E.Nichifor,S.Sumedrea,I.Chițu,R.Lixăndroiu,Avoiding Digital Divide in European Union through European Green Deal, in Amfiteatru Economic,2022,n.4,p.80. BERTARINI.indd 50BERTARINI.indd 50 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
51 through their access to ICT, made possible by the removal of access and accessibility barriers, and effectively enabled by the willingness and ability to reap social benefits from such access»57. Furthermore, «e-Inclusion refers to the degree to which ICT contribute to equalising and promoting participation in society at all levels (i.e. social relationships, work, culture, political participation, etc.)»58. It follows that «the digital divide measures the gap between those who are empowered to substantially participate in an information and knowledgebased society and economy, and those who are not»59. Thus, it is evident that e-inclusion and the digital divide are opposite but parallel concepts in reference to digital participation. The question then becomes «what will happen to the population that cannot integrate into a society in which access to information technology ensures an increase in the standard of living? The persistence of growing differences in the quality of data infrastructure between urban and rural areas links the issue of connectivity to the issue of digital inclusion. General policies in this area emphasize the paradox of rural communities, which are in great need of improved digital connectivity but are the weakest connected and virtually excluded from the information society. The adoption of personalized policies for these communities by governments would focus on a combined approach to the issues of connectivity and digital inclusion»60. With reference to rural communities, the concept of “lonely places” has recently been introduced as a «multidisciplinary and multi-scalar concept, can refer to a plurality of places that present a certain vulnerability in terms of local endowment, accessibility, or connectivity. Lonely places can be found in remote and rural areas as well as cities. The concurrence and interactions among vulnerabilities can make one place more lonely than others»61. 57. eEurope Advisory Group, report “E-Inclusion: New Challenges and Policy Recommendations, p. 7. 58. eEurope Advisory Group, report “E-Inclusion: New Challenges and Policy Recommendations, p. 7. 59. eEurope Advisory Group, report “E-Inclusion: New Challenges and Policy Recommendations, p. 7. 60.G.Brătucu,E.Nichifor,S.Sumedrea,I.Chițu,R.Lixăndroiu,Avoiding Digital Divide in European Union through European Green Deal, in Amfiteatru Economic,2022,n.4,p.80. 61. P. Proietti, P. Sulis, C. Perpiña Castillo, C. Lavalle, J.P. Aurambout, F. Batista, C. Bosco, C. Fioretti, F. Guzzo, C. Jacobs, M. Kompil, A. Kucas, M. Pertoldi, A. Rainoldi, M. Scipioni, A. Siragusa, G. Tintori, J. Woolford, New perspectives on territorial disparities, PublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion,2022,p.4,thereportunderlines«thisconcept identifies a plurality of places that present a certain vulnerability in terms of lack of or insufficientlocalendowment,aswellasaccessibilityorconnectivity(spatialand/ordigital), BERTARINI.indd 51BERTARINI.indd 51 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
52 It is evident that researchers have analyze the digital divide from multiple angles and «in differing choices of research objects (facets or social forces vs individual actions or propensities), primary determinants (social structure vs individual agency) and interpretations of stimuli (observable or objective measurements vs internal or subjective entities)»62. In this way, different results can be reached. The accessibility and diffusion of broadband infrastructures are a characteristic of “lonely places”, but «there are several possibilities for improving the current disadvantaged conditions of rural and remote areas, exploiting the potential that connectivity and digitalization represent for education and training, cooperation and networking, access to services and markets, to make them more attractive to people and businesses. Access to broadband and data, and building digital skills are elements that might help to foster new business and economic activities in rural and remote areas. However, digitalization can be an opportunity only if its rollout is quick enough to enable rural businesses to remain competitive, especially in remote areas»63. To improve the broadband infrastructure in rural areas, the Rural Development Policy «entrusts Broadband Competence Offices to support “Member States and to advise local and regional authorities on ways to develop broadband to deploy next-generation broadband networks (NGA)»64. with other territories. In this sense, remote places experiencing depopulation and economic decline are considered lonely for the sake of this report. Lonely places are also territories with a disadvantage in access to basic services and infrastructure, either for all their residents or for some specific groups. In this respect, some depopulating areas might experience disadvantaged access to local schools, which hampers the future social mobility of children living in those areas and favours the emigration of young families. Furthermore, some towns or suburbs might be less digitally connected than others, while some neighbourhoods in cities might experience high levels of socio-economic deprivation. Even city neighbourhoods lacking access to everyday services are lonely places, as they do not guarantee their residents – especially those in vulnerable conditions such as older people – access to the urban services they need. Finally, places that experience a particularly low electoral turnout are also considered lonely places, as this phenomenon might be interpreted as a form of withdrawal and disconnection from the democratic process» (p. 12). 62. B. Yu, A. Ndumu, L. Mon, Z. Fan, E-inclusion or digital divide: an integrated model of digital inequality, in Journal of Documentation,2018,n.3,p.553. 63. P. Proietti, P. Sulis, C. Perpiña Castillo, C. Lavalle, J.P. Aurambout, F. Batista, C. Bosco, C. Fioretti, F. Guzzo, C. Jacobs, M. Kompil, A. Kucas, M. Pertoldi, A. Rainoldi, M. Scipioni, A. Siragusa, G. Tintori, J. Woolford, New perspectives on territorial disparities, PublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion,2022,p.54. 64. P. Proietti, P. Sulis, C. Perpiña Castillo, C. Lavalle, J.P. Aurambout, F. Batista, C. Bosco, C. Fioretti, F. Guzzo, C. Jacobs, M. Kompil, A. Kucas, M. Pertoldi, A. Rainoldi, M. BERTARINI.indd 52BERTARINI.indd 52 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
53 At the same time, the Commission «also implemented an “Action Plan for Rural Broadband”, with concrete actions undertaken at Commission level, aiming to help Member States advance broadband rollout in rural and remote areas»65. As mentioned in the Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee, “A socially sustainable concept for raising living standards, boosting growth and employment, as well as citizens’ security in the digital era”66, new inequalities and social risks «in the digital era may in part be attributed to the phenomenon of digital exclusion, whereby some segments of the population may or may not possess the necessary IT skills and basic digital literacy to have access to information and services, some of them crucial»67. Moreover, «in the digital era it is essential to guarantee access to the internet, provide digital literacy training for anyone at risk of unemployment, and to provide the opportunity for them to exercise their rights and access the social services – particularly the fundamental ones»68. At the global level, in 2016, the World Bank estimated that «the lives of the majority of the world’s people remain largely untouched by the digital revolution. Only around 15 percent can afford access to broadband internet. Mobile phones, reaching almost four-fifths of the world’s people, provide the main form of internet access in developing countries. But even then, nearly 2 billion people do not own a mobile phone, and nearly 60 percent of the world’s population has no access to the internet»69. Recently, the International Telecommunication Union, the United Nations specialized agency for ICTs, estimated that «in 2019, 4.1 billion people (or 54 per cent of the world’s population) were using the Internet. Since then the number of users has surged by 800 million to reach 4.9 billion people in 2021, or 63 per cent of the population. Nonetheless, this means that some 2.9 billion people Scipioni, A. Siragusa, G. Tintori, J. Woolford, New perspectives on territorial disparities, Publications Office of the European Union, 2022, p. 54. 65. P. Proietti, P. Sulis, C. Perpiña Castillo, C. Lavalle, J.P. Aurambout, F. Batista, C. Bosco, C. Fioretti, F. Guzzo, C. Jacobs, M. Kompil, A. Kucas, M. Pertoldi, A. Rainoldi, M. Scipioni, A. Siragusa, G. Tintori, J. Woolford, New perspectives on territorial disparities, Publications Office of the European Union, 2022, p. 54. 66. March 15, 2018. 67. European Economic and Social Committee on “A socially sustainable concept for raising living standards, boosting growth and employment, as well as citizens’ security in the digital era”, point 3.14. 68. European Economic and Social Committee on “A socially sustainable concept for raising living standards, boosting growth and employment, as well as citizens’ security in the digital era”, point 3.14. 69. World Bank, “World Development Report 2016 – Digital Dividends”, 2016, p. 6. BERTARINI.indd 53BERTARINI.indd 53 28/04/23 09:3728/04/23 09:37 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
54 remain offline, 96 per cent of whom live in developing countries. Those who remain unconnected face multiple barriers, including a lack of access: some 390 million people are not even covered by a mobile broadband signal70. At the European level, recent statistical data show that «ICT has become widely available to the general public, both in terms of accessibility and cost. One border was crossed in 2007, when the majority (53%) of households in the EU had access to the internet. This share has continued to increase, exceeding three-quarters in 2012, four-fifths in 2014 and 90% in 2020. By 2022, the share of EU households with internet access had risen to 93»71. The conclusions of the European Council of June, 2016, underlined the importance «to create the right conditions for stimulating new business opportunities by: − ensuring very high-capacity fixed and wireless broadband connectivity across Europe, which is a precondition for future competitiveness. The review of the telecoms regulatory framework should aim to incentivize major network investments while promoting effective competition and consumer rights; − better coordinating spectrum assignment modalities together with the timely release of the 700 MHz band so as to help ensure Europe’s leadership in the roll-out of 5G networks; − coordinating EU efforts on high-performance computing. In this context the European Council looks forward to the launch of an important project of common European interest in this field»72. Uniform access to the digital market by citizens and enterprises is an issue widely addressed also by the European Commission, which, in 2016, stated that «consumers and businesses still face fragmentation of the electronic communications markets along the national borders and the current regulatory framework has not systematically favoured deployment by all market actors of very high-capacity networks»73, while it is essential «ensure widespread deployment and take-up of very high capacity networks, in rural as well as urban areas and across all of society»74. The “Commission work programme 2023. A Union standing firm and united”75 underline the need «to make digital solutions accessible and 70. ITU, “Measuring digital development Facts and figures 2021”, p. 1. 71. Eurostat, “Digital economy and society statistics – households and individuals”, December 2022. 72. European Council conclusions, 28 June 2016 (EUCO 26/16), p. 5. 73. Communication from the Commission, COM (2016) 587, 14 September 2016, “Connectivity for a Competitive Digital Single Market – Towards a European Gigabit Society”, p. 2. 74. COM (2016) 587, p. 2. 75. COM (2022) 54, October 18, 2022. BERTARINI.indd 54BERTARINI.indd 54 28/04/23 09:3728/04/23 09:37 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
55 available to all Europeans and ensure Europe becomes the leading force for an ethical, transparent and safe digital transformation»76. Achieving the widest access and maximum diffusion requires large investments from both private and public institution «in Internet connectivity networks for digital progress» and «a stable regulatory framework in enabling all players to invest in all areas, including rural and remote ones»77. The European Gigabit Society is intended to become «where availability and take-up of very high capacity networks enable the widespread use of products, services and applications in the Digital Single Market»78. Forthispurpose,threestrategicobjectivesweredefinedfor2025.The firstisrelatedtoEurope’sgrowthandjobsvia“Gigabitconnectivityfor places driving socio-economic developments”. The second addresses the competitiveness and seeks «5G coverage for all urban areas and all major terrestrial transport paths»; the third looking at Europe’s cohesion propose an «access for all European households to Internet connectivity offering at least 100 Mbps»79. 5G refers «to the next generation of network technologies offering prospects for new digital economic and business models»80. Therefore, prospectively, the fundamentalroleofconnectivitymustbeclarifiedwithsupportiveactions. This prompted the European Commission to call for the reform of the regulatory framework through their Communication, “5G for Europe: An Action Plan”, September 14, 2016, which focuses on the role of 5G on the future of Europe81. 3. Public regulation of connectivity and 5G as a key asset for Europe’s growth Over the years, connectivity has taken on new importance by considering only internet access but also high capacity network connectivity that supports the enormous amount of data and information present in the digital context. 76. COM (2022) 54, p. 6. 77.COM(2016)587,p.2. 78.COM(2016)587,p.2. 79.COM(2016)587,p.2. 80.COM(2016)587,p.2. 81.Foranin-depthlookathowtheconceptofultra-highperformance5Gnetworkscomes from a combination of several factors see the Commission Staff Working document SWD (2016) 306, September 14, 2016, “5G Global Developments – Accompanying the document: 5G for Europe: An Action Plan”. BERTARINI.indd 55BERTARINI.indd 55 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
56 By 2017, the European Parliament, in their resolution, “On internet connectivity for growth, competitiveness and cohesion: European gigabit society and 5G”82, they observed that «the future of European society and the European economy will strongly rely on 5G infrastructure, the impact of which will go far beyond existing wireless access networks, with the aim of providing high-quality and faster communication services which are affordable for all and available everywhere and at all times»83. For this reason, the Parliament welcomed «the Commission’s proposal to draw up a 5G Action Plan aimed at making the EU a world leader in the deployment of standardized 5G networks from 2020 to 2025 as part of a wider developed strategy for a European gigabit society which is technologically more competitive and inclusive; takes the view that in order to achieve this, adequate coordination among the Member States is crucial, so as to prevent the same kinds of delays in the rollout of 5G that were experienced with 4G, whichhaveresultedinthefactthattoday4Gcoveragestandsat86%and only 36% in rural areas»84. The Parliament stressed that the future of 5G «is more than an evolution of mobile broadband and that it will be a key enabler of the future digital world as the next generation of ubiquitous ultra-high broadband infrastructure that will support the transformation of processes in all economic sectors (public sector, education, converged media content delivery, healthcare, research, energy, utilities, manufacturing, transportation, the automotive industry, audiovisual, virtual reality, online gaming and so forth) and provide affordable, agile, flexible, interactive, reliable and highly personalized services»85. Thus, they should improve the existence of enterprises and citizens. Today, 5G technology represents the evolution «of radio technologies since the launch of analogue cellular systems in 1980s, termed as 1st Generation or simply 1G. Thereafter, digital wireless communication systems are consistently being evolved, one generation being advanced every decade. The Second Generation (2G) happened in 1990s, primarily using the GSM standard and using digital transmission instead of analogue transmission,whichhadthebenefitoflowerbatterypowerconsumption. SMS text messaging was introduced. The Third Generation (3G) came in 2000s, bring in high-speed IP data networking. Packet switching was used 82.EuropeanParliamentresolution,June1,2017. 83.EuropeanParliamentresolution,June1,2017,letterF. 84.EuropeanParliamentresolution,June1,2017,point1. 85.EuropeanParliamentresolution,June1,2017,point20. BERTARINI.indd 56BERTARINI.indd 56 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
63 At the BEREC office, the following objectives are understood: «to provide professional and administrative support services to BEREC»111, «to collect information from NRAs and to exchange and transmit information in relation to the regulatory tasks assigned to BEREC pursuant to Article 4»112, «to produce, on the basis of the information referred to in point (b), regular draftreportsonspecificaspectsofdevelopmentsintheEuropeanelectronic communications market, such as roaming and benchmarking reports, to be submitted to BEREC»113, «to disseminate regulatory best practices among NRAs»114, «to assist BEREC in establishing and maintaining registries and databases»115, «to assist BEREC in establishing and managing an information and communications system»116, «to assist BEREC in conducting public consultations»117, «to assist in the preparation of the work and provide other administrative and content-related support to ensure the smooth functioning of the Board of Regulators»118, «to assist in setting up working groups, upon the request of the Board of Regulators, contribute to the regulatory work and provide administrative support to ensure the smooth functioning of those groups»119 and «to carry out other tasks assigned to it by this Regulation or by other legal acts of the Union»120. The most recent research and development prospects of the European Union are connected to 6G121, with the aim of increasing the adoption of this technology through “Joint Undertakings under Horizon Europe”122 because «Europe needs to develop critical digital infrastructures based on 5G networks and build its technological capacities towards 6G with a time horizon of 2030»123. The “Smart Networks and Services Joint Undertaking” wasestablishedandwilllastuntilDecember31,2031.Itisfinancedunderthe Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027, and one of its objectives must beto«advanceEuropeantechnologicalandscientificexcellencetosupport 111.Art.5.a,Regulation(EU)2018/1971. 112.Art.5.b,Regulation(EU)2018/1971. 113.Art.5.c,Regulation(EU)2018/1971. 114.Art.5.d,Regulation(EU)2018/1971. 115.Art.5.e,Regulation(EU)2018/1971. 116.Art.5.f,Regulation(EU)2018/1971. 117.Art.5.g,Regulation(EU)2018/1971. 118.Art.5.h,Regulation(EU)2018/1971. 119.Art.5.i,Regulation(EU)2018/1971. 120.Art.5.j,Regulation(EU)2018/1971. 121. E. Bertin, N. Crespi, T. Magedanz, Shaping future 6G networks: needs, impacts and technologies, John Wiley & Sons, 2022. 122.Regulation(EU)2021/2085,November19,2021. 123.Whereasn.95,Regulation(EU)2021/2085. BERTARINI.indd 63BERTARINI.indd 63 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
64 European leadership to shape and master 6G systems by 2030»124. Furthermore, it must «prepare the European smart networks and services supply industry for the longer term opportunities emerging from the development of vertical markets for 5G and later 6G infrastructures and services in Europe»125. These perspectives play an important role in the future of Europe in terms of 5G technologies, which remain at the center of many public policies. 6G, the next generation of mobile technologies, represents a revolutionary path that will also be developed thanks to a partnership between the 6G Smart Networks and Services Industry Association (6G-IA) and the European Commission, which deals with European research on the subject of networks and next-generation services. These new technologies inevitably pose ethical and public regulatory challenges, as should be further analyzed. 4.TheroleofDigitalPlatformsandtheaffirmationoftheData Economy In the context of the Digital Single Market, platforms assume central and essential roles that make them fundamental economic players126. Thus, the changing roles of digital platforms during the Covid-19 Pandemic127 is 124.Art.159.1.c,Regulation(EU)2021/2085. 125.Art.159.1.e,Regulation(EU)2021/2085.Art.159.2specifies«theSmartNetworks andServicesJointUndertakingshallalsohavethefollowingspecificobjectives:(a)facilitate the development of technologies able to meet advanced communication requirements while supporting European excellence in smart networks and services technologies and architectures and their evolution towards 6G, including strong European positions on standards, essential patents, and key requirements such as requirements for spectrum bands needed for future advanced smart network technologies; (b) accelerate the development ofenergy-efficientnetworktechnologieswiththeaimofsignificantlyreducingtheenergy and resource consumption of the whole digital infrastructure by 2030 and decreasing the energy consumption of key verticals industries supported by smart networks and services technologies; (c) accelerate the development and widespread deployment of 5G by 2025 and later 6G infrastructure in Europe by, in particular, promoting the coordination and strategic support of 5G deployment for Connected and Automated Mobility along cross-border». 126. L. Ammannati, Verso un diritto delle piattaforme digitali?, in L. Ammannati, A. Canepa, G. Greco, U. Minnici (eds.), Algoritmi, Big Data, piattaforme digitali. La regolazione dei mercati in trasformazione, Giappichelli, 2021. 127. See in particolar: R. Floetgen, J. Strauss, J. Weking A. Hein, F. Urmetzer, M. Böhm, H. Krcmar, Introducing platform ecosystem resilience: leveraging mobility platforms and their ecosystems for the new normal during Covid-19, in European Journal of Information Systems, 2021, n. 3; D. Aryani, R. Nair, D. Hoo, D.K. Hung, D.H. Chew, A. Desai, A study on consumer behaviour: Transition from traditional shopping to online shopping during the Covid-19 pandemic, in International Journal of Applied Business and International BERTARINI.indd 64BERTARINI.indd 64 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
65 notable. That is, «the preventive measures implemented by governments have fundamentally impacted not only the global economy but also the way consumers behave, shop, work or play. Due to the lockdown measures, most businesses and consumers had to move online to be able to pursue their activities. Although digitalization of businesses and consumers was already well underway, the pandemic accelerated this trend, by increasing the number of online users and the breadth of users, including segments of the population that were not using such services before or not as much»128. Platforms are generally known «as “two-sided” or “multi-sided” markets where users are brought together by a platform operator in order to facilitate an interaction (exchange of information, a commercial transaction, etc.). In the context of digital markets, depending on a platform’s business model, users can be buyers of products or services, sellers, advertisers, software developers, etc.»129. Scholars have noted that two-sided markets «are roughly defined as markets in which one or several platforms enable interactions between endusers, and try to get the two (or multiple) sides “on board” by appropriately charging each side. That is, platforms court each side while attempting to make, or at least not lose, money overall»130. Thus, by connecting «two or more sides, the platform ecosystem generates powerful network effects whereby the value increases as more members participate»131. Management, 2021, n. 2; B. Galhotra, A. Dewan, Impact of Covid-19 on digital platforms and change in E-commerce shopping trends, in Fourth International Conference on I-SMAC (IoT in Social, Mobile, Analytics and Cloud), 2020; G.P. Pathak, S. Warpade, Impact of Lockdown due to Covid 19 on Consumer Behaviour while selecting Retailer for Essential Goods, in SSRN, 2020. 128. L. Lechardoy, A. Sokolyanskaya, F. Lupiáñez-Villanueva, Analytical paper on the structure of the online platform economy post Covid-19 outbreak: analytical paper 6, European Commission, Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology,PublicationsOffice,2021,p.19.Moreingeneral«theimpactofthepandemic on the economy and employment affects consumers’ economic situation, including their consumption and savings but also their confidence in the future. Based on the OECD’s ConsumerConfidenceIndex(CCI),consumers’confidencetowardstheirfutureeconomic situationhasstarteddecreasingsignificantlyinFebruary2020beforeimprovinginMayand decreasing again in October, thus following the Covid-19 waves. This indicator provides an indication of future developments of households’ consumption and saving, based on answers regarding their expected financial situation, their sentiment about the general economic situation, unemployment and capability of savings». 129. SWD (2016) 172, May 25, 2016, entitle “Online Platforms. Accompanying the document Communication on Online Platforms and the Digital Single Market”, p. 1. 130. J.C. Rochet, J. Tirole, Two-Sided Markets: A Progress Report, November 2005, p. 2. 131. European Commission, Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises, “Monitoring B2B Industrial Digital Platforms in Europe”, 2020, p. 6. BERTARINI.indd 65BERTARINI.indd 65 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
66 The platform will allow users to be reached very quickly; hence, they play a facilitating role as intermediaries between supply and demand in the digital market132. Additionally, «the new informational and interconnected infrastructure is accompanied by unwanted side effects, namely by new informational imbalances, negative externalities and, sometimes, positions ofentrenchedmarketpower.Platforms,benefitingfrompositivenetwork effects and having disrupted the business model of former gatekeepers, may become gatekeepers themselves. Reach and scale of platforms amplify negative externalities, such as the amount and effects of harmful content. The basic value proposition of platforms to maximize the overall valueoftheplatformforallusersmaybedistortedbyconflictsofinterest, for example in cases of vertical integration, embeddedness in a broader ecosystem with rent-seeking opportunities, or special arrangements with third parties»133. Scholars have emphasized that «a genuine revolution for digital transformation was not so much in the implementation of network systems 132. SWD (2016) 172, p. 2, «as opposed to the conventional “pipeline” business model where value is generated by thesupplier of a product or a service, a large part of the value derived by users of an online platform’s is created by other users. The effects that one user of a good or service has on their value to other users are known as “network effects”. The concept of network effects in online platforms is further discussed in the section “Network effects”. A platform operator can facilitate transactions by reducing transaction costs. For instance, platform operators often provide a convenient way of matching the two sides of an interaction (e.g. search or recommendation function), a physical or virtual space to interact, a code of conduct, dispute resolution mechanisms, instruments that increase trust (e.g. reviews, identity checks), methods of payment or certain units of measurement to which both sides agree. Platforms’ role as facilitators of interactions was brought to light in early literature on multisided markets which emphasised the role of an intermediary in the coordination of interests of the two sides of an interaction. SWD (2016) 172, p. 4 about network effect underlines «in economics and business, a network effect is the effect that one user of a good or service has on the value of that product to other people. When positive network effects are present, the value of a product or service increases with the increasing number of other users. Direct positive network effects apply to the same group of users (e.g. the more users join a telephone network, the more it makes it worthwhile for others to join). In the online world, this is the case with users of social networking platforms (e.g. Facebook). For users of those platforms, the value of using the platform grows as other participants with whom they can interact start joining. Indirect positive networkeffectsexistwhereusersofonegroupbenefitfromanincreasedpresenceofusers fromadifferentgroup(e.g.sellersonanonlinemarketplacebenefitfromahighernumber of buyers). Economic models of platform markets or multi-sided markets emphasize that relatively strong indirect network effects are an important feature distinguishing platforms from one-sided markets». 133. M. Eifert, A. Metzger, H. Schweitzer, G. Wagner, Taming the giants: The DMA/DSA package, in Common Market Law Review,2021,n.4,p.988. BERTARINI.indd 66BERTARINI.indd 66 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
67 in enterprises or e-commerce but online platforms which have worked out operating models based on the advancing use of the internet, proliferation of mobile devices, and massively growing possibilities to collect and process data. The heart of these platforms lies in intermediation in interactions between different types of users: business partners, as well as consumers and buyers of products on offer»134. IntheDigitalSingleMarketStrategy,theroleofplatformsreflectsthat «some online platforms potentially raises concerns, particularly in relation to the most powerful platforms whose importance for other market participants is becoming increasingly critical»135. Moreover, «online platforms (e.g. search engines, social media, e-commerce platforms, app stores, price comparison websites) are playing an ever more central role in social and economic life: theyenableconsumerstofindonlineinformationandbusinessestoexploit the advantages of e-commerce»136. Generally, «Digital platforms have become one of the principal ways of organizing a wide range of human activities, including economic, social, and political interactions»137. However, «there is no general understanding of what an online platform is, especially since it can cover a great variety of differentandunrelatedfields»138. The offer of multiple services made by the platforms has challenged traditional business models considering that currently «some online platforms have evolved to become players competing in many sectors of 134. A. Ambroziak, EU’s perspective on the functioning of giant online platforms in the digital economy,inL.Dąbrowski,M.Suska(eds.),The European Union Digital Single Market Europe’s Digital Transformation, Routledge, 2022, p. 7. 135. COM (2015) 192, p. 9. Among the subjects participating in the platforms, workers have an essential role, see E. Menegatti, Platform workers: employees or not employees? The EU’s turn to speak, in ERA-FORUM, 2023, n. 24. 136. COM (2015) 192, p. 11. Considering the role of e-commerce look at Directive 2000/31/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilof8June2000oncertainlegal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (“Directive on electronic commerce”) the “cornerstone” of internal market. On the topic see: R. Mansell, Platforms of power, in Intermedia, 2015, n. 1; O. Lynsket, Regulating “Platform Power”, in LSE Working papers, 2017, n. 1; O. Lobel, The Law of the Platform, in University of San Diego, Research Paper, 2016, n. 16; J.C. Rochet, J. Tirole, Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets, in Journal of the European Economic Association, 2003, n. 4; D.S. Evans, R. Schmalensee, The Industrial Organization of Markets with Two-Sided Platforms, in Competition Policy International, 2007, n. 3. 137. European Commission, Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises, “Monitoring B2B Industrial Digital Platforms in Europe”, 2020, p. 6. 138.M.Inglese,Regulating the Collaborative Economy in the European Union Digital Single Market, Springer, 2019, p. 12. BERTARINI.indd 67BERTARINI.indd 67 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
68 the economy and the way they use their market power raises a number of issues»139. Platforms «are digital infrastructures that enable two or more groups to interact. They therefore position themselves as intermediaries that bring together different users: customers, advertisers, service providers, producers, suppliers, and even physical objects. More often than not, these platforms also come with a series of tools that enable their users to build their own products, services, and marketplaces»140. However, «the platform concept is not new. For many years, large manufacturersandindustrysectorsasawholehaveachievedefficiencygains by developing common working frameworks and shared environments. This is the case of the automotive industry, where platforms have long formed the basis for several different car models. Digital technologies are now making it possible to extend the industrial platform concept to uncharted territories. New business opportunities can in fact be targeted through the creation of virtual buyer-and-seller communities, thus facilitating interactions of users with diverse but complementary interests. Furthermore, enterprises that are willing to expand their customer base, or are looking for new markets, or are interestedinsellingspecialized,nicheproducts,mayfindnewopportunities by using online platforms. At the same time, platforms offer new ways of maximizing efficiency and improving profitability and are therefore gaining in importance for their economic brokerage and intermediation services – at both the business-to-consumer (B2C) and business-to-business (B2B) levels»141. From a B2B point of view, «platforms can be defined as virtual environments facilitating the exchange and connection of data between different organisations through a shared reference architecture and common governance rules (IDC). By linking different actors that are interested in sharing information in the form of data, industrial digital platforms constitute a composite business ecosystem combining players from disparate backgrounds, thus fostering the creation of new data-driven services and innovative business processes»142. Furthermore, «understanding and provisioning the platforms that will sustain, advance, and scale business and operations, and exert strategic control is essential for every business. A 139. COM (2015) 192, p. 12. 140. N. Srnicek, Platform capitalism, Cambridge, 2016, p. 22. 141. European Commission, Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises, “Monitoring B2B Industrial Digital Platforms in Europe”, 2020, p. 6. 142. European Commission, Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises, “Monitoring B2B Industrial Digital Platforms in Europe”, 2020, p. 7. BERTARINI.indd 68BERTARINI.indd 68 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
69 digital platform is the assembly of technologies, capabilities and data, upon which digitally enabled businesses run. The data exchanges, intelligence and network effect within digital ecosystems generate new value beyond the platform itself. For users and competitors, the value of digital platforms introduces high switching costs and barriers to entry that cannot be easily replicated through the introduction of new products and services alone»143. Data in the digital context are a central element to the EU’s competitiveness: «data is often considered as a catalyst for economic growth, innovation and digitization across all economic sectors»144, but «a fragmented market does not provide sufficient scale for cloud computing, Big Data, data driven science and the Internet of Things to reach their full potential in Europe. To benefitfullyfromthepotentialofdigitalanddatatechnologies,wewillneed to remove a series of technical and legislative barriers»145. In Europe, there is largely a lack of companies investing in data research and innovation compared with the United States, but the current economic and social context is characterized by «the accelerating digitization of public services, driven by the need to modernise, cut costs and provide innovative services, opens up further opportunities to optimise data storage, transfer, processing and analysis»146. Legal frameworks and policies are necessary «to more regulatory certainty for business and creating consumer trust in data technologies»147. Additionally, «data-driven innovation is a key driver ofgrowthandjobsthatcansignificantlyboostEuropeancompetitiveness in the global market. If the right framework conditions are put in place, the European Data Economy could double by 2020»148. Statistical surveys that consider data as a «marketplace where digital data is exchanged as “products” or “services” as a result of the elaboration of raw data»149 have shown that «data Market value in 2025 under the High Growth Scenario continue to showcase a buoyant growth, with IT Spending on Data Market tools almost doubling over the period from 2019 to 2025 for both EU27 and EU27 plus the U.K. This will correspond to a considerable 143. S. Naujoks, L. Veronesi, G. Micheletti, Advanced technologies for industry: B2B platforms: highlighting the relevance of B2B industrial digital platforms in Europe, European Commission,ExecutiveAgencyforSmallandMedium-sizedEnterprises,2021,p.8. 144. COM (2015) 192, p. 14. See S. Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power,Profilebooks,2019. 145. COM (2015) 192, p. 14. 146. COM (2014) 442, July 2, 2014, “Towards a thriving data-driven economy”, p. 3. 147. COM (2014) 442, p. 3. 148.COM(2018)232,April25,2018,“TowardsacommonEuropeandataspace”,p.1. 149. European Commission, Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology, Report “The European Data Market Monitoring Tool”, 2020, p. 37. BERTARINI.indd 69BERTARINI.indd 69 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
70 CAGR for the period 2020-2025 of 11.5% and 12.0% in EU27 and in EU27 plus the U.K. respectively for the High Growth scenario. This is marginally down when compared with the previous publication – mostly as a result of a more buoyant 2020. Our new 2025 baseline scenario, shows the Data Marketwill amountto morethan82 billionEuro inEU27, against58.2 billionEuroin2019(a5.8%CAGR2010-2025),whileundertheChallenge scenario the Data Market will still represent 72.3 billion Euro, growing at a compound annual growth rate of 3.0% from 2020. The Data Market growth willthereforecontinueunabatedin2025,confirmingthetrendsetoutin 2013-2014 while elaborating our initial results of the European Data Market Study (SMART 2013/0063). These forecasts for 2025 are only marginally changed from the previous forecast, with the Challenge and High Growth scenarios down 0.6% and 0.7% respectively, while the baseline scenario is a down 0.7% when compared with the previous forecast for the EU27 plus the U.K»150. Furthermore, the data relating to the “Data Economy” i.e., those that «measures the overall impacts of the Data Market on the economy as a whole. It involves generation, collection, storage, processing, distribution, analysis processing, delivery and exploitation of data enabled by digital technologies»151, show that «the new estimations of the Data Economy see the value of 2019 for EU27 to be more than 325 Billion Euro and reaching nearly 355 Billion Euro in 2020, growing at 9.3%. The estimated CAGR for the period 2020/2025 in EU27 remains healthy along the period, at 9.1% in EU27. The share of the Data Economy on the GDP in the EU27 baseline scenario at 2025 is of 4.%. The CAGR 2020/2025 in EU27 for the High Growth scenario is 18.4%, that will make the Data Economy for EU27 surpass827BillionEuro,andaccountingfor5.9%%oftheGDPat2025.In the Challenge scenario CAGR 2020/2025 for EU27 is 4%, more than halved with respect to the baseline, with the Data Economy being just above 430 Billion Euro, and accounting for 3.3% of the GDP at 2025»152. AlthoughtheDataMarketcanbecomesignificantwithintheEuropean Union, it appears necessary to focus on safeguards relating to the methods of generation, collection, processing, and use of digital data so that once the data are recorded, they can be used without the loss of trust. 150. European Commission, Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content andTechnology,Report“TheEuropeanDataMarketMonitoringTool”,2020,p.38. 151. European Commission, Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content andTechnology,Report“TheEuropeanDataMarketMonitoringTool”,2020,p.38. 152. European Commission, Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology, Report “The European Data Market Monitoring Tool”, 2020, p. 39. BERTARINI.indd 70BERTARINI.indd 70 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
71 The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)153 calls for «a strong and more coherent data protection framework in the Union, backed by strong enforcement, given the importance of creating the trust that will allow the digital economy to develop across the internal market. Natural persons should have control of their own personal data. Legal and practical certainty for natural persons, economic operators, and public authorities should be enhanced»154. The GDPR «lays down rules relating to the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and rules relating to the free movement of personal data»155 and «protects fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons and in particular their right to the protection of personal data. The free movement of personal data within the Union shall be neither restricted nor prohibited for reasons connected with the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data»156. Therefore, «the governance of data is the governance of different interests. As a term, “governance” has become useful for denoting the whole landscape of actors involved in rulemaking and regulating, including but not limited to governments. As such, governing data involves multiple actors whose task is to arbitrate between competing needs, which in turn relate to much more than data or technology itself. Data represents different social and economic interests, so that for any governance arrangement or model to be credible and to gain traction at scale, it has to have a claim to represent plurality of needs and perspectives»157. An important component «of that representation can be framed as “data justice” – the view that data governance should not only seek to do no harm, but should positively contribute to people’s autonomy and to their ability to participate in society and make claims about their needs, on a more general level»158. 153. Regulation (UE) 2016/679, April 27, 2016, on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation). 154. Whereas n. 7, Regulation (UE) 2016/679. See F. Bravo, Data Management Tools and Privacy by Design and by Default, in R. Senigaglia, C. Irti, A. Bernes (eds.), Privacy and Data Protection in Software Services, Springer, 2022. 155. Art. 1.1, Regulation (UE) 2016/679. 156. Art. 1.2 and 1.3, Regulation (UE) 2016/679. 157. J. Lopez Solano, A. Martin, S. Souza, Governing data and artificial intelligence for all: models for sustainable and just data governance, European Parliament, 2022, p. 1. 158.J.LopezSolano,A.Martin,S.Souza,Governing data and artificial intelligence for all: models for sustainable and just data governance, European Parliament, 2022, p. 1. On BERTARINI.indd 71BERTARINI.indd 71 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
72 The European Union must align its approach «to data governance with European values»159 and the fundamental values of the European Union established in the Treaties must represent the basis for the public regulation of any market established in the European Union. the subject of the reform of the Italian tax justice F. Tundo, Giustizia Tributaria: una riforma perfettibile, ma con interventi non negoziabili, in Rivista di diritto tributario, 2022. 159. J. Lopez Solano, A. Martin, S. Souza, Governing data and artificial intelligence for all: models for sustainable and just data governance, European Parliament, 2022, p. 2. BERTARINI.indd 72BERTARINI.indd 72 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
79 provide expertise to the Commission on the need to amend, add or remove rules in this Regulation, to ensure that digital markets across the Union are contestable and fair»28. Meanwhile, the Digital Services Act (DSA)29 highlights the following: «information society services and especially intermediary services have become an important part of the Union’s economy and the daily life of Union citizens. Twenty years after the adoption of the existing legal framework applicable to such services laid down in Directive 2000/31/ EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, new and innovative business models and services, such as online social networks and online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, have allowed business users and consumers to impart and access information and engage in transactions in novel ways. A majority of Union citizens now uses those services on a daily basis. However, the digital transformation and increased use of those services has also resulted in new risks and challenges for individual recipients of the relevant service, companies and society as a whole»30. The DSA is closely connected with the Consumer Rights Directive (CRD), because «the CRD is an instrument that focuses on the direct relationship between traders and consumers inter alia in the context of e-commerce, where intermediation has generally been performed by online marketplaces»31. Furthermore, «the DSA focuses on the responsibility of platforms as intermediaries. As an illustration, according to the CRD, it is up to traders using the Amazon marketplace to make the consumer disclosures embedded in the CRD»32. The DSA aims «to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market for intermediary services by setting out harmonised rules for a safe, predictable and trusted online environment that facilitates innovation and in which fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, including the principle of consumer protection, are effectively protected»33. The DSA further «lays down harmonised rules on the provision of intermediary 28.Art.40.7,Regulation(EU)2022/1925. 29. Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, October 19, 2022, on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC. 30. Whereas n. 1, Regulation (EU) 2022/2065. 31. C. Cauffman, C. Goanta, A new order: The digital services act and consumer protection, in European Journal of Risk Regulation, 2021, n. 4, p. 761. 32. C. Cauffman, C. Goanta, A new order: The digital services act and consumer protection, in European Journal of Risk Regulation, 2021, n. 4, p. 761. 33. Art. 1.1, Regulation (EU) 2022/2065. BERTARINI.indd 79BERTARINI.indd 79 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
80 services in the internal market. In particular, it establishes: (a) a framework for the conditional exemption from liability of providers of intermediary services;(b)rulesonspecificduediligenceobligationstailoredtocertain specificcategoriesofprovidersofintermediaryservices;(c)rulesonthe implementation and enforcement of this Regulation, including as regards the cooperation of and coordination between the competent authorities»34. The Regulation applies to «intermediary services offered to recipients of the service that have their place of establishment or are located in the Union, irrespective of where the providers of those intermediary services have their place of establishment»35. Intermediary service indicates «one of the following information society services: (i) “mere conduit” service, consisting of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, or the provision of access to a communication network; (ii) “caching” service, consisting of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, involving the automatic, intermediate, and temporary storage of that information, performed for the sole purpose ofmakingmoreefficienttheinformation’sonwardtransmissiontoother recipients upon their request; (iii) a “hosting” service, consisting of the storage of information provided by, and at the request of, a recipient of the service»36. 34. Art. 1.2, Regulation (EU) 2022/2065. 35. Art. 2.1 Regulation (EU) 2022/2065; the article continues «2. This Regulation shall not apply to any service that is not an intermediary service or to any requirements imposed in respect of such a service, irrespective of whether the service is provided through the use of an intermediary service. 3. This Regulation shall not affect the application of Directive 2000/31/EC. 4. This Regulation is without prejudice to the rules laid down by other Union legal acts regulating other aspects of the provision of intermediary services in the internal market or specifying and complementing this Regulation, in particular, the following: (a) Directive 2010/13/EU; (b) Union law on copyright and related rights; (c) Regulation (EU)2021/784;(d)Regulation(EU)2019/1148;(e)Regulation(EU)2019/1150;(f)Union law on consumer protection and product safety, including Regulations (EU) 2017/2394 and (EU) 2019/1020 and Directives 2001/95/EC and 2013/11/EU; (g) Union law on the protectionofpersonaldata,inparticularRegulation(EU)2016/679andDirective2002/58/ EC;(h)Unionlawinthefieldofjudicialcooperationincivilmatters,inparticularRegulation (EU) n. 1215/2012 or any Union legal act laying down the rules on law applicable to contractualandnon-contractualobligations;(i)Unionlawinthefieldofjudicialcooperation in criminal matters, in particular a Regulation on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters; (j) a Directive laying down harmonised rules on the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings». 36. Art. 3.1.g, Regulation (EU) 2022/2065. BERTARINI.indd 80BERTARINI.indd 80 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
81 The Regulation defines the liabilities of providers of intermediary services37 and due diligence obligations for a transparent and safe online environment38. In Article 61, the DSA establishes «an independent advisory group of Digital Services Coordinators on the supervision of providers of intermediary services named “European Board for Digital Services”», which provides advice «(a) contributing to the consistent application of this Regulation and effective cooperation of the Digital Services Coordinators and the Commission with regard to matters covered by this Regulation; (b) coordinating and contributing to guidelines and analysis of the Commission and Digital Services Coordinators and other competent authorities on emerging issues across the internal market with regard to matters covered by this Regulation; (c) assisting the Digital Services Coordinators and the Commission in the supervision of very large online platforms»39. Fundamentally, «in the light of potential issues around the readiness of Member States to comply with DSA enforcement obligations from a technical perspective, the cooperation frameworks proposed by the DSA between Member States and with the Commission constitute much-needed support in making sure that digital asymmetry perils will not drastically affect the harmonising impact expected from the DSA»40. The practical application of this broad regulatory framework can only be assessed in the following years. The evolution that the framework will bring about in the digital market and the behavior of subjects operating within it can only be understood in the future. 2.Artificialintelligenceanditsimpactonconsumerchoices The effects of the market governed by digital technologies and the data producedtherein,andtheconnectionbetweenthedevelopmentofartificial intelligence (AI) and its role in the market, on consumer and business behaviorrequirereflection. TheimpactofAIcanbeunderstoodbyrecallingthedefinitionproposedby theEuropeanCommissionin201841,whichstatesthat«artificialintelligence 37. Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, Chapter II. 38.Regulation(EU)2022/2065,ChapterIII. 39. Art. 61.2, Regulation (EU) 2022/2065. 40. C. Cauffman, C. Goanta, A new order: The digital services act and consumer protection, in European Journal of Risk Regulation, 2021, n. 4, p. 774. 41. In 2017 the European Council meeting (October 19, 2017) conclusions underline BERTARINI.indd 81BERTARINI.indd 81 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
82 (AI) refers to systems that display intelligent behaviour by analysing their environment and taking actions – with some degree of autonomy – to achieve specificgoals.AI-basedsystemscanbepurelysoftware-based,actinginthe virtual world (e.g. voice assistants, image analysis software, search engines, speech and face recognition systems) or AI can be embedded in hardware devices (e.g. advanced robots, autonomous cars, drones or Internet of Things applications)»42. ThisdefinitionhighlightshowthedifferentsystemsthroughwhichAI worksprocesslargevolumesofdatausingalgorithmstoachievespecific goals, particularly big data, such as «large amounts of different types of data produced with high velocity from a high number of various types of sources. Handling today’s highly variable and real-time datasets requires new tools and methods, such as powerful processors, software and algorithms»43. TheconceptofAIisevidentlycomplex«andincludesasignificantnumber of technological areas: 1. Machine learning; 2. Deep training; 3. Natural language processing; 4. Machine reasoning; 5. Computer vision; 6. Strong artificialintelligence»44. Amongthevariousinfluencingfactorsofthedigitalmarket,AIplaysan increasingly important role. In 2019, the applications of AI were divided into three key categories: «1. Large data: raw data, such as sensor data, patient information, market indicators, or a list of cyber threats, can be analyzed in order to capture patterns, anomalies, correlations, suggest actions and outcomes; 2. Vision: applications for the collection of images or video information that perform the recognition of objects, people, persons, emotions, «a sense of urgency to address emerging trends: this includes issues such as artificial intelligence and blockchain technologies, while at the same time ensuring a high level of data protection, digital rights, and ethical standards. The European Council invites the CommissiontoputforwardaEuropeanapproachtoartificialintelligencebyearly2018 and calls on the Commission to put forward the necessary initiatives for strengthening the framework conditions with a view to enable the EU to explore new markets through risk-based radicalinnovationsandtoreaffirmtheleadingroleofitsindustry»(p.7).Withreferenceto blockchain R. De Caria, Blockchain and sovereignty, in O. Policino, G. De Gregorio (eds.), Blockchain and Public Law. Global Challenges in the Era of Decentralisation, Edward Elgar, 2021. 42.CommunicationfromtheCommission,COM(2018)237,April25,2018,“Artificial Intelligence for Europe”, p. 1. On the need to rethink legal remedies as we apply them to robot torts see A. Guerra, F. Parisi, D. Pi, Liability for robots I: legal challenges, in Journal of Institutional economics,2022,n.18. 43. Communication from the Commission, COM (2014) 442, July 2, 2014, “Towards a thriving data-driven economy”, p. 4. 44. E. Konnikov, O. Konnikova, V. Leventsov, IT Services market as a driver for the development of the artificial intelligence market, in IOP Conference Series, 2019, n. 1, p. 1. BERTARINI.indd 82BERTARINI.indd 82 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
83 andotherobjectsintherealworld;3.Language:artificialintelligenceisused for processing and recognition of speech, texts, as well as dynamics, syntax, and nuances of natural language»45. AI is needed «to make significant efforts» to ensure that «Europe is competitive in the AI landscape, with bold investments that match its economic weight», «no one is left behind in the digital transformation», and «new technologies are based on values»46. The European Union «should have a coordinated approach to make the most of the opportunities offered by AI and to address the new challenges that it brings. The EU can lead the way in developing and using AI for good and for all, building on its values and its strengths»47. The European initiative on AI «aims to: – Boost the EU’s technological and industrial capacity and AI uptake across the economy, both by the private and public sectors. This includes investments in research and innovation and better access to data. – Prepare for socio-economic changes brought about by AI by encouraging the modernization of education and training systems, nurturing talent, anticipating changes in the labor market, supporting labor market transitions and adaptation of social protection systems. – Ensure an appropriate ethical and legal framework, based on the Union’s values and in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. This includes forthcoming guidance on existing product liability rules, a detailed analysis of emerging challenges, and cooperation with stakeholders, through a European AI Alliance, for the development of AI ethics guidelines»48. There are several challenges for a common strategy at the European level, requiring substantial economic investments and the full involvement of the Member States, underlining the general need «to join forces at European level, to ensure that all Europeans are part of the digital transformation»49. One of «the main challenges for the EU to be competitive is to ensure the take-up of AI technology across its economy»50. AI is a phenomenon that «like electricity in the past, is transforming our world»51 which can generate concerns. The European Commission 45. E. Konnikov, O. Konnikova, V. Leventsov, IT Services market as a driver for the development of the artificial intelligence market, in IOP Conference Series, 2019, n. 1, p. 2. 46.COM(2018)237,p.2. 47.COM(2018)237,p.2. 48.COM(2018)237,p.3. 49.COM(2018)237,p.19. 50.COM(2018)237,p.5. 51. Communication from the Commission, COM (2018) 795, December 7, 2018, “CoordinatedPlanonArtificialIntelligence”,p.1. BERTARINI.indd 83BERTARINI.indd 83 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
84 proposed an approach «that places people at the centre of the development of AI (human-centric AI) and encourages the use of this powerful technology tohelpsolvetheworld’sbiggestchallenges:fromcuringdiseasestofighting climate change and anticipating natural disasters, to making transport safer andfightingcrimeandimprovingcybersecurity»52. For these reasons, Member States are encouraged to develop national AI strategies. Europe aims «to develop trusted AI based on ethical and societal values building on its Charter of Fundamental Rights. People should not only trustAI, but also benefit from the use ofAI for their personal and professional lives. Europe aims at creating an innovation friendly ecosystem for AI: an environment where economic players find the infrastructure, researchfacilities,testingenvironments,financialmeans,legalframework, and adequate skills levels to invest in and deploy AI»53. Overall, the goal is «for Europe to become the world-leading region for developing and deploying cutting-edge, ethical and secure AI, promoting a human-centric approach in the global context»54. However, a positive vision of AI seems to be required, «as contributing to public goods and creating public value, through governance approaches that distribute power over AI systems and the data ecosystems they rely on, and that strongly incentivise good behaviour on the part of those developing and deploying those systems»55. Otherwise, «developing and deploying AI systems at scale is and will remain for the foreseeable future, a privilege that is mainly accessible to the most powerful actors in society, whether commercial or public-sector»56. AI «is a collection of technologies that combine data, algorithms and computing power. Advances in computing and the increasing availability of data are therefore key drivers of the current upsurge of AI. Europe can combine its technological and industrial strengths with a high-quality digital infrastructure and a regulatory framework based on its fundamental values to 52.COM(2018)795,p.1. 53.COM(2018)795,Annex,p.1. 54.COM(2018)795,Annex,p.1. 55. J. Lopez Solano, A. Martin, S. Souza, L. Taylor, Governing data and artificial intelligence for all: models for sustainable and just data governance, European Parliament, 2022,p.65,define«fourareaswhichdataandAIgovernancecouldserveinordertobe qualified as good: preserving and strengthening public infrastructure and public goods; inclusiveness; contestability and accountability, and global responsibility». 56. J. Lopez Solano, A. Martin, S. Souza, L. Taylor, Governing data and artificial intelligence for all: models for sustainable and just data governance, European Parliament, 2022, p. 65. BERTARINI.indd 84BERTARINI.indd 84 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
85 become a global leader in innovation in the data economy and its applications as set out in the European data strategy»57. To enable trustworthy and secure AI development in Europe while respecting the values and rights of EU citizens, the «main building blocks are: – The policy framework setting out measures to align efforts at European, national and regional level. In partnership between the private and the public sector, the aim of the framework is to mobilise resources to achieve an “ecosystem of excellence” along the entire value chain, starting in research and innovation, and to create the right incentives to accelerate the adoption of solutions based on AI, including by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). – The key elements of a future regulatory framework for AI in Europe that will create a unique “ecosystem of trust”. To do so, it must ensure compliance with EU rules, including the rules protecting fundamental rights and consumers’ rights, in particular for AI systems operated in the EU that pose a high risk. Building an ecosystem of trust is a policy objective in itself, and should give citizens the confidence to take up AI applications and give companies and public organisations the legal certainty to innovate using AI»58. Using AI correctly and profitably plays a significant role in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, the European Green Deal, and supporting democratic processes and social rights. In particular, in the Digital Europe Programme59, various factors that characterize the digital context are outlined in five objectives. The general objectives of the Program «shall be to support and accelerate the digital 57. COM (2020) 65, February 19, 2020, White Paper “On artificial intelligence: A European approach to excellence and trust”, p. 2. 58. COM (2020) 65, p. 3. The Digital transformation scoreboard (who monitoring the transformation of existing industry and enterprises, in particular, the scoreboard adopts national indicators to monitor digital) in 2018 shows that “the adoption of artificial intelligence by businesses has gained speed in recent years. Currently, the share of adoption of artificial intelligence amongst firms is relatively even and low across small firms of less than 250 employees. The share of adoption ranges from 4% in very small firms of less than 10 employees, up to 9% in firms of between 10 and 250 employees. As for large companies in the sample, artificial intelligence is only adopted by 20% of companies in this category. In addition, amongst the firms in the sample, artificial intelligence was mainly adopted by very young companies under 5 years old (22% for firms between 3 and 5 years old), indicating that although artificial intelligence has been around for some time, its business use by firms is only just taking off, mainly in younger firms» see European Commission, “Digital transformation scoreboard 2018: EU businesses go digital: opportunities, outcomes and uptake”, Publications Office, 2019, p. 50. 59. European Union, Regulation (EU) 2021/694, April 29, 2021, establishing “the Digital Europe Programme and repealing Decision (EU) 2015/2240. BERTARINI.indd 85BERTARINI.indd 85 28/04/23 09:3728/04/23 09:37 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
86 transformation of the European economy, industry and society, to bring its benefits to citizens, public administrations and businesses across the Union and to improve the competitiveness of Europe in the global digital economy while contributing to bridging the digital divide across the Union and reinforcing the Union’s strategic autonomy, through holistic, crosssectoral and cross-border support and a stronger Union contribution»60. The five interrelated specific objectives are high-performance computing,AI, cybersecurity and trust, advanced digital skills, deployment, and best use of digital capacity and interoperability61. The Digital Europe Programme aims «to strengthen and promote Europe’s capacities in key digital technology areas through large-scale deployment; in the private sector and in areas of public interest, to widen the diffusion and uptake of Europe’s key digital technologies, promoting the digital transformation and access to digital technologies»62. With reference to the specific objective of “artificial intelligence”, the Digital Europe Programme aim to «(a) build up and strengthen core AI capacities and knowledge in the Union, including building up and strengthening quality data resources and corresponding exchange mechanisms, and libraries of algorithms, while guaranteeing a humancentric and inclusive approach that respects Union values; (b) make the capacities referred to in point (a) accessible to businesses, especially SMEs andstart-ups,aswellascivilsociety,not-for-profitorganisations,research institutions, universities and public administrations, in order to maximise theirbenefittotheEuropeansocietyandeconomy;(c)reinforceandnetwork AI testing and experimentation facilities in Member States; (d) develop and reinforce commercial application and production systems in order to facilitate the integration of technologies in value chains and the development of innovative business models and to shorten the time required to pass from innovation to commercial exploitation and foster the uptake of AI-based solutions in areas of public interest and in society»63. Meanwhile, the Proposal for a Regulation on “Artificial intelligence (ArtificialIntelligenceAct)andamendingcertainUnionlegislativeacts”, April 21, 2021, n. 206, states «by improving prediction, optimising operations and resource allocation, and personalising service delivery, the use of artificial intelligence can support socially and environmentally beneficial 60. Art. 3.1, Regulation (EU) 2021/694. 61. Art. 3.2, Regulation (EU) 2021/694. 62. Art. 3.1, Regulation (EU) 2021/694. 63. Art. 5.1, Regulation (EU) 2021/694. BERTARINI.indd 86BERTARINI.indd 86 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
87 outcomes and provide key competitive advantages to companies and the European economy»64. However, «the same elements and techniques that powerthesocio-economicbenefitsofAIcanalsobringaboutnewrisksor negative consequences for individuals or the society»65. ConsideringthebalancebetweenrisksandbenefitsofAI,«theEUis committed to strive for a balanced approach. It is in the Union interest to preserve the EU’s technological leadership and to ensure that Europeans canbenefitfromnewtechnologiesdevelopedandfunctioningaccordingto Union values, fundamental rights and principles»66. Using AI brings the implications of modifying traditional types of consumption, helping make consumers more aware of their choices; however AI may be able to direct purchasing choices67 such that the consumer is not fully aware of them68. There is «a potential paradox that can characterize choice in the age of automation, artificial intelligence and data-driven marketing» in fact, «someofthebenefitsthatimprovethewell-beingofthesetechnologiescan backfireandgenerateconsumerreactivityiftheyunderminethesenseof 64. Communication from the Commission, COM (2021) 206, April 21, 2021, “Proposal for regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonized rules onartificialintelligence(ArtificialIntelligenceAct)andamendingcertainunionlegislative acts”, p. 1. See M. Rabitti, A. Sciarrone Alibrandi, La proposta di Regolamento europeo sull’Intelligenza Artificiale nel prisma del settore finanziario: uno sguardo critico, in M. Passalacqua (ed.), Diritti e mercati nella transizione economica e digitale. Studi dedicati a Mauro Giusti, Cedam, 2022. 65. COM (2021) 206, p. 1. 66. COM (2021) 206, p. 1. 67. The most recent study perspectives on the choices that consumers make show how the digital market can “assist” them in their choices through the so-called “Digital assistants”, that is «Digital Agents based on algorithms that can handle entire transactions: from using data to predict consumers’ preferences, to choosing the products or services to purchase, to negotiating and executing the transaction, and even automatically forming coalitions of buyers to secure optimal terms and conditions. Human decision-making could be completely bypassed. Such algorithms may be written by consumers for their own use or supplied by externalfirms.Wecallthesedigitalassistants“algorithmicconsumers”»seeM.Gal,N.Elkin Koren, Algorithmic consumers, in Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, 2017; and K.N. Lemon, P.C. Verhoef, Understanding customer experience throughout the customer journey, in Journal of Marketing, 2016, n. 6. 68. The challenges associated with consumer protection are such that in 2018, the EuropeanCommissionissuedtheCommunicationCOM(2018)183,April11,2018,“ANew Deal for Consumers”, «the “New Deal for Consumers” builds on the existing consumer policy frameworkandtakesitastepfurtherbyproposingmodernrulesfitfortoday’schanging markets and business practices, stronger public and private enforcement tools, and better redress opportunities» (p. 3). BERTARINI.indd 87BERTARINI.indd 87 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
88 autonomy consumers seek in their decision-making. This can occur when consumers feel deprived of their ability to control their choices: predictive algorithms are getting better and better at anticipating consumer preferences and decision aids are often too opaque for consumers to understand (how theymightinfluencepreferencesanddecisions)»69. Several studies «suggest that consumers oppose algorithmic advice, a phenomenon described as algorithm aversion. Dietvorst et al., for example, found that individuals were less likely to choose algorithmic advice over inferior human advice to predict student performance after seeing an algorithm err. In the medical domain, scholars have shown that patients do not trust algorithmic advice, arguing that patients are afraid that it neglects human uniqueness. In a similar vein, Castelo et al. found that algorithm aversion was higherforintuitive,subjectivetasksthanforquantifiable,objectivetasks. However, a study by Logg et al. has called algorithm aversion into question. Focusing on different domains such as business forecasts or prediction of romantic attraction, they found that people generally appreciated advice from an algorithm over human advice. Hildebrand and Bergner showed that peopleappreciatedalgorithmicfinancialadvicemorestronglyifituseda human-like, conversational style. In sum, these contradictory results point to the existence of additional factors which may affect adoption of algorithmic advice»70. The situation is subject to continuous changes and developments that can generate positive and negative impacts concerning the consolidated protections provided by the EU for consumers. 3. From Industry 4.0 to Industry 5.0, the role of social and environmental factors The digital transition underway in the global economy affects the industrial sector as well. Digital technologies represent a determining factor for an increase in productivity; digital innovations have been increasingly integrated into all sectors, including industries. Progress «in digital technologies in 69. A. Quentin, C. Ziv, W. Klau, A. Crum, F. Douglas, Consumer Choice and Autonomy in the Age of Artificial Intelligence and Big Data, in Customer Needs and Solutions,2018, n. 1-2, p. 29. 70. B. von Walter, D. Kremmel, B. Jäger, The impact of lay beliefs about AI on the adoption of algorithmic advice, in Marketing Letters, 2022, n. 1, p. 144. BERTARINI.indd 88BERTARINI.indd 88 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
95 a multisectoral roadmap that «aims to transform the EU into a fair and prosperous society, with a modern, resource-efficient and competitive economy where there are no net emissions of greenhouse gases in 2050 and where economic growth is decoupled from resource use»92. This broad connection to the transition requires «a realignment of policy, to support business innovation and transformation aligned with regenerative circular economy principles and to encourage all companies to orient away from linear, extractive, wasteful and polluting practices»93. A «regenerative vision for industry through an Industry 5.0 approach would offerthetimelyopportunitytoincludespecificholisticsustainabilityand resilience targets within Europe’s digital roadmap, so digitalisation becomes a lever for lowering the carbon and material footprint of Europe’s economy and industry within it and shifts to a people and planet-centred approach. Digital technologies could be harnessed to deliver on climate commitments, bringingdigitalandgreenproperlytogether.ArtificialIntelligence(AI),for example, can and should be designed and deployed for sustainability rather than being independent or ignorant of it. Distributed ledger technologies, smart contracts and NFTs can be coded for radical transparency, shared ownership of the commons and automation on the principles of resilience, regeneration and sustainability»94. The governance of these changes and challenges requires public policies that are able to face these challenges and define regulatory frameworks within which the complex system can develop. The system must consider the role of “Society 5.0”, that is, a society that «attempts to balance economic development with the resolution of societal and environmental problems. Society 5.0 is a society in which advanced IT technologies,InternetofThings,robots,artificialintelligenceandaugmented reality are actively used in everyday life, industry, healthcare and other spheresofactivity,notprimarilyforeconomicadvantagebutforthebenefit and convenience of each citizen»95. Therefore, balancing the many factors connected to the transition represents the real future challenge for European Institutions. 92. Communication form the Commission, COM (2019) 640, December 11, 2019, “The European Green Deal”, p. 2. 93. European Commission, Industry 5.0, a transformative vision for Europe: governing systemic transformations towards a sustainable industry, December 2022, p. 10. 94. European Commission, Industry 5.0, a transformative vision for Europe: governing systemic transformations towards a sustainable industry, December 2022, p. 12. 95. European Commission, Industry 5.0: toward a sustainable, human-centric, and resilient European industry, January 2021, p. 9. BERTARINI.indd 95BERTARINI.indd 95 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
96 4.Monetaryinnovations:VirtualcurrenciesandDigitaleuro Theaffirmationofthedigitalcontextisconnectedtothedevelopment of a multiplicity of phenomena, among which different ways of saving and paying can be analyzed. Digitization has a transversal relevance, and «money is no exception. The ways in which we pay and save are changing, driven by considerations of convenience and a demand for immediacy»96. The various payment methods are now well known and connected to the affirmationofe-commerce,increasinglyleadingtothedematerializationof money97. In such a case, the creation of different currencies in this digital context cannot be overlooked, such as fiat currency, which refers to the creation of virtual currency. Historically,thefirstreferencetovirtualcurrencyiscontainedinapaper by Satoshi Nakamoto entitled “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System”. The author underlines: «commerce on the Internet has come to rely almostexclusivelyonfinancialinstitutionsservingastrustedthirdpartiesto processelectronicpayments[…]butnomechanismexiststomakepayments over a communications channel without a trusted party» and then proposes «an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party»98. The regulatory implications associated with this phenomenon are immediately evident at the European and international level. Thus, in 2012, the European Central Bank, in a report entitled “Virtual Currency Schemes”, noted, «virtual currency schemes have become relevant in several areas that 96. S. Grünewald, C. Zellweger-Gutknecht, B. Geva, Digital euro and ECB powers, in Common Market Law Review, 2021, n. 4, p. 1029. In general, we can consider the importance of the European Union’s Digital Financial Regulation Package, which «consists of 4 “subpackages” the Digital Finance Strategy, the Retail Payments Strategy, the Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on crypto-asset markets – MiCA – and the Digital Operational Resilience Act – DORA», see Z. Varga, The innovative response of the European union to managing the Digital finance, in European Integration Studies,2021,n.2,p.108. 97. See A. Canepa, The Role of Payment Services in the Development of the Big Tech Ecosystem, in European Business Law Review, 2022, n. 7. 98.S.Nakamoto,Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System, p. 1; which continues to highlight how «transactions that are computationally impractical to reverse would protect sellers from fraud, and routine escrow mechanisms could easily be implemented to protect buyers. In this paper, we propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer distributed timestamp server to generate computational proof of the chronological order of transactions. The system is secure as long as honest nodes collectively control a more CPU power than any cooperating group of attacker nodes». BERTARINI.indd 96BERTARINI.indd 96 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
97 traditionallyfallwithinthescopeofthefinancialsystemandespeciallysoin relation to the tasks of central banks». In this report, the European Central Bank stressed «virtual currency schemes visibly lack a proper legal framework, as wellasacleardefinitionofrightsandobligationsforthedifferentparties.Key paymentsystemconceptssuchasthefinalityofthesettlementdonotseemto beclearlyspecified»99. Therefore, it becomes relevant to «consider the extent to which they might affect a central bank’s tasks in the areas of payment systems,regulation,financialstability,monetarypolicyandpricestability»100. Therefore, observing how the phenomenon appears to be new, such that thereisnotevenacommondefinitionisimportant.In2012,theEuropean Central Bank defined virtual currency as «a type of unregulated, digital money, which is issued and usually controlled by its developers, and used andacceptedamongthemembersofaspecificvirtualcommunity»101. In their subsequent 2015 report, “Virtual Currency Schemes – a further analysis”, the EuropeanCentralBankbroadenedtheirpreviousdefinitionbyconsidering virtual currencies as «a digital representation of value, not issued by a central bank, credit institution or e-money institution, which in some circumstances can be used as an alternative to money»102.Thereportspecifiedthattheterm virtual currency is used «to describe both the aspect of value and that of the inherent or in-built mechanisms ensuring that value can be transferred»103. In 2014, the European Banking Authority (EBA) defined virtual currency in the document “Opinion on virtual currencies”104 «as a digital representation of value that is neither issued by a central bank or public authoritynornecessarilyattachedtoafiatcurrency,butisusedbynaturalor legal persons as a means of exchange and can be transferred, stored or traded electronically»105. The EBA focuses primarily on the difference between money and virtual currency, specifying that money is characterized by being 99. European Central Bank, Virtual currency schemes, 2012, p. 42. 100. European Central Bank, Virtual currency schemes, 2012, p. 33. 101. European Central Bank, Virtual currency schemes, 2012, p. 13. 102. European Central Bank, Virtual Currency Schemes – A further analysis, 2015, p. 4. 103. European Central Bank, Virtual Currency Schemes – A further analysis, 2015, p. 4. 104. The European Banking Authority in September 2013 underlines «virtual currencies emerged on the EBA’s radar as one of the many innovations to monitor. Following three months of analysis, the EBA issued a public warning on 13 December 2013, making consumers aware that VC are not regulated and that the risks are unmitigated as a result», and in autumn 2013, «the EBA noticed increased VC activity across EU Member States, with a growing number of VC schemes being launched, an increasing number of merchants, and a rising number of individuals using VCs, and Bitcoins in particular, not only as an investment but as a means of paying for goods and services» (p. 6). 105. European Banking Authority, EBA Opinion on “virtual currencies”, p. 19. BERTARINI.indd 97BERTARINI.indd 97 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
98 a «unit of account, a means of exchange and a store of value»106. Virtual currency does not satisfy these requirements. InJune2014,theeFinancialActionTaskForce(FATF)definedvirtual currency as «a digital representation of value that can be digitally traded and functions as (1) a medium of exchange; and/or (2) a unit of account; and/or (3) a store of value, but does not have legal tender status (i.e., when tendered to a creditor, is a valid and legal offer of payment) in any jurisdiction. It is notissuednorguaranteedbyanyjurisdiction,andfulfilstheabovefunctions only by agreement within the community of users of the virtual currency»107. The Bank for International Settlements, while not providing a legal definitionofvirtualcurrency,intheirNovember2015Reporton“Digital currencies”, released by the Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures, identified three key aspects relating to virtual currencies. First, relating to assets108, and second, with «the way in which these digital currencies are transferred, typically via a built-in distributed ledger»109. The third aspect is connected to the «variety of third-party institutions, almost exclusively non-banks, which have been active in developing and operating digital currency and distributed ledger mechanisms»110. The distinction between virtual currency and electronic money is also underlined by the European Central Bank, which highlights that «electronic money schemes are regulated and electronic money institutions that issue means of payment in the form of electronic money are subject to prudential supervisory requirements. This is not the case for virtual currency schemes111». Furthermore, «electronic money is primarily subject to the operational risk associated with potential disruptions to the system on which the electronic money is stored. Virtual currencies are not only affected by credit, liquidity 106. European Banking Authority, EBA Opinion on “virtual currencies”, p. 24. 107. Financial Action Task Force (FATF), Virtual currencies: Key definitions and potential AML/CFT risks, 2014, p. 4. 108. Bank for International Settlements, Committee on payments and Market Infrastructures, Report Digital currencies,November2015,p.1,specifiesthat«theseassets typically have some monetary characteristics (such as being used as a means of payment), but are not typically issued in or connected to a sovereign currency, are not a liability of any entity and are not backed by any authority. Furthermore, they have zero intrinsic value, and, as a result, they derive value only from the belief that they might be exchanged for other goods or services, or a certain amount of sovereign currency, at a later point in time». 109. Bank for International Settlements, Committee on payments and Market Infrastructures, Report Digital currencies, November 2015, p. 1. 110. Bank for International Settlements, Committee on payments and Market Infrastructures, Report Digital currencies, November 2015, p. 1. 111. European Central Bank, Virtual Currency Schemes, p. 17. BERTARINI.indd 98BERTARINI.indd 98 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
99 and operational risk without any kind of underlying legal framework, these schemes are also subject to legal uncertainty and fraud risk, as a result of their lack of regulation and public oversight»112. The different ways of “creating” and using virtual currency are interesting because they allow us to analyze the impact it can have on the real economy: thefirstschemeiscalled“closedvirtualcurrencyschemes”andallowsthe creation and use of a virtual currency within a “virtual game”. In the second scheme,the“virtualcurrencyschemeswithunidirectionalflow”,thevirtual currencyispurchasedwithfiatmoneyandusedinthescheme.Thismethod impactstherealeconomybychangingtheamountoffiatmoneyincirculation, affecting «the demand for the central bank’s liabilities and interfere in the control of the supply of money through open market operations»113. In particular,“virtualcurrencyschemeswithbidirectionalflow”canimpactthe real economy because people can buy and sell virtual currency with real currency and buy virtual and real goods and services. We have thus discussed how virtual currency clearly cannot be considered money and how it is actually created and used through a system of network relationships. The different ways in which virtual currency is used and the risks connected to it allow us to understand how virtual currency had no referenceregulatorycontextbefore2018. In2018,severalissuesconnectedtothedisseminationanduseofvirtual currencyledtheEuropeanlegislatortodefinevirtualcurrencywithinthe Directive(EU)2018/843oftheEuropeanParliamentandtheCouncilof May30,2018“amendingDirective(EU)2015/849onthepreventionofthe useofthefinancialsystemforthepurposesofmoneylaunderingorterrorist financing”. The directive in Article 1.2 states that “virtual currencies” refer to «a digital representation of value that is not issued or guaranteed by a central bank or a public authority, is not necessarily attached to a legally established currency and does not possess a legal status of currency or money, but is accepted by natural or legal persons as a means of exchange and which can be transferred, stored and traded electronically». 112. European Central Bank, Virtual Currency Schemes, p. 17. Equally, the Financial Action Task Force, Virtual currencies: Key definitions and potential AML/CFT risks, p. 4, underlinesthatvirtualcurrenciesdifferfromfiatcurrencybecausefitcurrenciesare«coinand paper money of a country that is designated as its legal tender, circulates; and is customarily used and accepted as a medium of exchange in the issuing country»; and from e-money becausee-money is«digitalrepresentationoffiat currencyusedtoelectronicallytransfer valuedenominatedinfiatcurrency». 113. European Central Bank, Virtual Currency Schemes, p. 37. BERTARINI.indd 99BERTARINI.indd 99 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
100 This reference is extremely interesting because it unmistakably recalls Article128.1oftheTreatyontheFunctioningoftheEuropeanUnion,which states «the European Central Bank shall have the exclusive right to authorise the issue of euro banknotes within the Union. The European Central Bank and the national central banks may issue such notes. The banknotes issued by the European Central Bank and the national central banks shall be the only such notes to have the status of legal tender within the Union». In connection with Article 16 of the Consolidated version of the Treaty on the European Union, Protocol n. 4 on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks andtheEuropeanCentralBankstates,«inaccordancewithArticle128(1)of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Governing Council shall have the exclusive right to authorise the issue of euro banknotes within the Union. The ECB and the national central banks may issue such notes. The banknotes issued by the ECB and the national central banks shall be the only such notes to have the status of legal tender within the Union. The ECB shall respect as far as possible existing practices regarding the issue and design of banknotes». Ontheissueofthedigitaleuro,thisstudyfitsthecontext114. The digital eurorepresentsasignificantnoveltyinmonetarypolicyandisconnected totheideathatinthedigitalage,analyzingandreflectingonhowmoney changes is needed. In addition to considering the growing role that digital currencies have in the life of citizens and businesses, an essential factor in this study is related to the change characterizing the payment system. Currently, the payment systems are registering trends toward the shift to electronic payments. The “Study on the payment attitudes of consumers in the euro area (SPACE) – 2022” shows that «all day-to-day payments, 17% were made online in 2022, compared with only 6% in 2019. In terms of value, the shareofonlinepaymentsin2022was28%(upfrom14%),indicatingthat online payments were more frequently used for larger payment amounts»115. 114.Onthesubjectsee:R.Adalid,Á.Álvarez-Blázquez,K.Assenmacher,L.Burlon,M. Dimou, C. López-Quiles, N.M. Fuentes, B. Meller, M.A. Muñoz, P. Radulova, C. Rodriguez d’Acri,T.Shakir,G.Šílová,O.Soons,A.V.Veghaz,Central bank digital currency and bank intermediation. Exploring different approaches for assessing the effects of a digital euro on euro area banks, Occasional Paper Series, European Central Bank – Eurosystem, May 2022; R. Aneja, R. Dygas, Digital Currencies and the New Global Financial System, Routledge, 2022; and S. Grünewald, C. Zellweger-Gutknecht, B. Geva, Digital euro and ECB powers, in Common Market Law Review, 2021, n. 4. 115. European Central Bank, Study on the payment attitudes of consumers in the euro area (SPACE) – 2022, 2022, p. 11. BERTARINI.indd 100BERTARINI.indd 100 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
101 Meanwhile, «the share of cash payments at the point of sale in terms of volume has declined in recent years. This decline accelerated during the pandemic. In 2022, 59% of transactions were carried out using cash. Three years earlier the share of cash transactions was 72%; in 2016 the figure was 79%. However, cash remained the most frequently used method for payments at the POS in the euro area. When measuring POS transactions in terms of value, the share of card transactions in 2022 (46%) was higher thantheshareofcashtransactions(42%)forthefirsttime.In2019theshare of cash transactions by value was 47% and the equivalent share of card transactions 43%. Consumers were making payments using mobile phone apps more often than before. However, their share in total POS payments was still relatively low compared to cash and card payments. Mobile phone payments accounted for 3% of the number of transactions in 2022 (up from 1% in 2019) and 4% of the value (up from 1%)»116. A strong network effect characterizes payment systems, because payment systems increase their importance in the context by increasing the number of users. The “Report on a digital euro” by European Central Bank – Eurosysem, October 2020, examined «the issuance of a central bank digital currency (CBDC) – the digital euro – from the perspective of the Eurosystem. Such a digital euro would be a central bank liability offered in digital form for use by citizens and businesses for their retail payments. It would complement the current offering of cash and wholesale central bank deposits»117. The considerations expressed in this report led to the subsequent “Investigation phase of the digital euro project”, launched in July 2021 for 24 months. This phase «aim to address key issues regarding design and distribution. A digital euro must be able to meet the needs of Europeans while at the same time helping to prevent illicit activities and avoiding any undesirableimpactonfinancialstabilityandmonetarypolicy.Thiswillnot prejudge any future decision on the possible issuance of a digital euro, which will come only later. In any event, a digital euro would complement cash, not replace it»118. The recent “Progress on the investigation phase of a digital euro” report119 underlines that «a digital euro would preserve the role of public money as the anchor of the payments system in the digital age. It would 116. SPACE 2022, p. 12. 117. European Central Bank, Report on a digital euro, 2020, p. 3. 118.EuropeanCentralBank–Eurosystem,2021. 119. European Central Bank – Eurosystem, Progress on the investigation phase of a digital euro, September 2022. BERTARINI.indd 101BERTARINI.indd 101 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
102 ensure the smooth coexistence, convertibility, and complementarity of the variousformsthatmoneytakes.Peopleneedtohaveconfidencethatprivate money can always be converted into central bank money. By providing a monetary anchor, central bank money plays a key role in maintaining a wellfunctioningpaymentsystem,financialstability,and,ultimately,trustinthe currency. This in turn is a pre-condition for preserving the transmission of monetary policy, and hence for protecting the value of money»120. The role that the digital euro can play in the system is so important that in January 2023, “The Digital Euro Scheme Rulebook Development Group” was established aiming to «develop a draft digital euro rulebook building on the design decisions taken by the Governing Council of the Eurosystem»121. Furthermore, the group «will develop as main deliverable a draft digital euro rulebook which will consist of a set of rules, practices and “standards” that will allow the distribution of digital euro through intermediaries by the means of (a) User management i.e., lifecycle management of digital euro users and their payment instruments. (b) Liquidity management i.e., funding and defunding of end users’ holdings from commercial bank sources, or from cash (c) Transaction management i.e., initiation, authentication, validation, settlement instructions and post settlement activities incl. reconciliation»122. As highlighted above, the Digital Euro project continues to be studied and requires regulators to carefully analyze its impact on citizens and businesses and,moregenerally,onbankingandfinancialsystems. 120. European Central Bank – Eurosystem, Progress on the investigation phase of a digital euro, September 2022, p. 3. 121. Art. 1, Mandate of the digital euro scheme Rulebook Development Group. 122. Art. 2, Mandate of the digital euro scheme Rulebook Development Group. Art. 3 specifies“Key guiding working principles”: «1)The digital euro RDG shall developthe digital euro rulebook based on the design decisions taken by the Governing Council or any delegated body. 2) Digital euro solutions as enabled by the Eurosystem and potentially being voluntarily complemented by the market shall be attractive to all actors in the European retail payment market, but most importantly to the users of the digital euro. 3) The design of the digital euro rulebook shall enable the market to develop further services and digital euro solutions on top of the initial scope foreseen for the digital euro. The digital euro however shall function as a basic means of payment in the euro zone for payment users without any such additional market-driven developments. 4) The digital euro RDG shall leverage and progress on existing standards and scheme solutions to the degree possible, while not limiting the Eurosystem’s freedom of choice in the further development of the digital euro». BERTARINI.indd 102BERTARINI.indd 102 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
103 The importance of digital technologies for consumers and enterprises in Europe is now well established. In the European context, the creation of the strategy for the Digital Single Market marks an important point in the construction of a legal framework that is developing over time. In fact, if the historic European single market was the result of a mediation between the different values1 and objectives of the founding member states of the Union, which, in being built, became a union of their different regulatory approaches, the context for the historic single market is partially different fromtheeventsthatledtothedefinitionoftheDigitalSingleMarket. ThedefinitionoftheDigitalSingleMarketStrategyof2015tookplace on the basis of principles and values that already belonged to the European Union, which, at that historical moment, considered the future of the economy andsocietyinthedigitalcontext.Therefore,thedefinitionoftheDigital SingleMarketrepresentsthefirstsignificantsteptowardthedevelopment of new regulatory frameworks concerned with the various phenomena of the digital world. In the European and global economic and cultural contexts, there are two main challenges, the transition to a digital and green future2, Europe wants to «lead the transition to a healthy planet and a new digital world. This twin challenge of a green and digital transformation has to go hand-in-hand»3. 1. L.S. Rossi, Il valore giuridico dei valori. L’Articolo 2 TUE: relazioni con altre disposizioni del diritto primario dell’UE e rimedi giurisdizionali, in Federalismi.it, 2020, n. 19. 2. See United Nations General Assembly, A/RES/70/1 Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on September 25, 2015, “Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”. With reference to Italy see M. Belletti, Dinamiche evolutive delle materie trasversali, tra tentativi di stabilizzazione e prospettive di involuzione, in Federalismi.it, 2022, n. 20 and N. Zorzi, L’ambiente come nuovo bene costituzionalmente protetto, in F. Galgano (ed.), Diritto privato, Wolters Kluwer Italia, 2022. 3. Communication from the Commission, COM (2020) 67, February 19, 2020, “Shaping Europe’s digital future”, p. 1. Conclusion BERTARINI.indd 103BERTARINI.indd 103 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
104 Inageneralsense,themainobjectivesdefinedbytheEuropeanUnion definedin2020forthedigitalcontextintendedtobuilda«clearframework that promotes trustworthy, digitally enabled interactions across society, for people as well as for businesses»4. These objectives are as follows: «– Technology that works for people: Development, deployment and uptake of technology that makes a real difference to people’s daily lives. A strong and competitive economy that masters and shapes technology in a way that respects European values. – A fair and competitive economy: A frictionless single market, where companies of all sizes and in any sector can compete on equal terms, and can develop, market and use digital technologies, products and services at a scale that boosts their productivity and global competitiveness, and consumers can be confident that their rights are respected. – An open, democratic and sustainable society: A trustworthy environment in which citizens are empowered in how they act and interact, andofthedatatheyprovidebothonlineandoffline.AEuropeanwayto digital transformation which enhances our democratic values, respects our fundamental rights, and contributes to a sustainable, climate-neutral and resource-efficienteconomy»5. The role of the Digital Single Market in the European Union is such that constantattentionisdedicatedtoitsaffirmation,asisdemonstratedbythe consideration of a digital transformation in the regulation establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility6 following the Covid-19 pandemic7. The regulation, which is mentioned in article 175 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, states that «Member States are to coordinate their economic policies in such a way as to attain the objectives on economic, social and territorial cohesion»8 and underlines that «the Covid-19 outbreak in early 2020 changed the economic, social and budgetary outlook in the Union and in the world, calling for an urgent and coordinated response both at Union and national level in order to cope with the enormous economic and social consequences as well as asymmetrical effects for Member States». In 4. Communication from the Commission, COM (2020) 67, February 19, 2020, “Shaping Europe’s digital future”, p. 2. 5. Communication from the Commission, COM (2020) 67, February 19, 2020, “Shaping Europe’s digital future”, p. 3. 6. Regulation (EU) 2021/241, February 12, 2021, establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility. 7. The role of the Next generation EU is also essential, see M. Lamandini, D. Ramos, C. Bosque, Next Generation EU: its meaning, challenges, and link to sustainability, in Financial Stability Amidst the Pandemic Crisis: On Top of the Wave, European Banking Institute, 2021. 8.Whereasn.2,Regulation(EU)2021/241;seeC.Golino,L’intervento pubblico per lo sviluppo economico delle aree depresse tra mercato e solidarietà,Giappichelli,2018. BERTARINI.indd 104BERTARINI.indd 104 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
111 Adalid R., Álvarez-BlázquezÁ., Assenmacher K., Burlon L., Dimou M., López- Quiles C., Fuentes N.M., Meller B., Muñoz M.A., Radulova P., Rodriguez d’Acri C., Shakir T., Šílová G., Soons O., Veghaz A.V., Central bank digital currency and bank intermediation. Exploring different approaches for assessing the effects of a digital euro on euro area banks, Occasional Paper Series, European Central Bank – Eurosystem, May 2022. AleksejevaV.,LavrinenkoO.,BetlejA.,DanilevičaA.,Analysis of disparities in the use of information and communication technology (ICT) in the Eu Countries, in Entrepreneurship and Sustainability, 2021, n. 2. Ambroziak A., EU’s perspective on the functioning of giant online platforms in the digital economy,inDąbrowskiL.,SuskaM.(eds.),The European Union Digital Single Market Europe’s Digital Transformation, Routledge, 2022. Ammannati L., Verso un diritto delle piattaforme digitali?, in Ammannati L., Canepa A., Greco G., Minnici U. (eds.), Algoritmi, Big Data, piattaforme digitali. La regolazione dei mercati in trasformazione, Giappichelli, 2021. Andriychuk O., Shaping the New Modality of the Digital Markets: The Impact of the DSA/DMA Proposals on Inter-platform Competition, in World Competition: Law and Economics Review, 2021. Aneja R., Dygas R., Digital Currencies and the New Global Financial System, Routledge, 2022. Angelopoulos C., On Online Platforms and the Commission’s New Proposal for a Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, in SSRN, 6 April 2017. Aryani D., Nair R., Hoo D., Hung D.K., Chew D.H., Desai A., A study on consumer behaviour: Transition from traditional shopping to online shopping during the Covid-19 pandemic, in International Journal of Applied Business and International Management, 2021, n. 2. Bartosik-Purgat M., Filimon N., Digital Consumer Behaviour in Europe. Implications of Technology, Media and Culture on Consumer Behavior, Routledge, 2022. Barzilai-Nahon K., Toward a theory of network gatekeeping: A framework for exploring information control, in Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,2008,n.9. References BERTARINI.indd 111BERTARINI.indd 111 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
112 Basedow J., The EU Digital Single Market Strategy and Insurance Law, in The Journal of Business Law,2018,n.6. Bassan F., Digital Platforms and Global Law, Cheltenham, 2021. Baumann S., Handbook on digital business ecosystems: strategies, platforms, technologies, governance and societal challenges, Edward Elgar, 2022. Bayer J., Holznagel B., Korpisaari P., Woods L., Perspectives on platform regulation: Concepts and models of social media governance across the globe, Nomos, 2021. Bayertz K., Four uses of “Solidarity”, in Bayretz K. (eds.), Solidarity, Springer, 1999. Belletti M., Dinamiche evolutive delle materie trasversali, tra tentativi di stabilizzazione e prospettive di involuzione, in Federalismi.it, 2022, n. 20. Bertin E., Crespi N., Magedanz T., Shaping future 6G networks: needs, impacts and technologies, John Wiley & Sons, 2022. Best M., Can the Internet be a Human Right?, in Human Rights & Human Welfare, 2004, n. 4. Bodiroga-VukobratN.,PošćićA.,“Old economy” restrictions in the digital market for services, in Journal for International and European Law, Economics and Market Integrations,2018,n.2. Bower J., Christensen C., Disruptive technologies: Catching the Wave, in Harvard Business Review, January-February 1995. BrătucuG.,NichiforE., SumedreaS., ChițuI.,Lixăndroiu R.,Avoiding Digital Divide in European Union through European Green Deal, in Amfiteatru Economic, 2022, n. 4. Bravo F., Data Management Tools and Privacy by Design and by Default, in Senigaglia R., Irti C., Bernes A. (eds.), Privacy and Data Protection in Software Services, Springer, 2022. Briglauer W., Cambini C., Fetzer T., Hüschelrath K., The European Electronic Communications Code: A critical appraisal with a focus on incentivizing investment in next-generation broadband networks, in Telecommunications Policy, 2017, n. 41. Broadbent M., The digital services act, the digital markets act, and the new competition tool, Center for Strategic & International Studies, 2020. Calderaro A., Digital politics divide. The digital divide in building political e-practices, in European University Institute, February 2020. Campanile G., Artificial intelligence and emotional intelligence, the contribution of women 4.0: training course of empowerment for women in Industry 4.0, in Form@re, 2019, n. 1. Canepa A., The Role of Payment Services in the Development of the Big Tech Ecosystem, in European Business Law Review, 2022, n. 7. Carbonara E., Tagliaventi M.R. (eds.), SMEs in the Digital Era, Edward Elgar, 2023. Cassese S., La nuova costituzione economica, Laterza, 2023. Cauffman C., Goanta C., A New Order: The Digital Services Act and Consumer Protection, in European Journal of Risk Regulation, 2021, n. 4. BERTARINI.indd 112BERTARINI.indd 112 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
113 Collingridge D., The social control of technology,PalgraveMacmillan,1980. Crawford S., The origin and development of a concept: the Information Society, in Bulletin of the Medical Library Association,1983,n.4. DąbrowskiL.,SuskaM.(eds.),The European Union Digital Single Market Europe’s Digital Transformation, Routledge, 2022. De Caria R., Blockchain and sovereignty, in Policino O., De Gregorio G. (eds.), Blockchain and Public Law. Global Challenges in the Era of Decentralisation, Edward Elgar, 2021. De Franceschi A. (eds.) European contract law and the digital single market: the implications of the digital revolution, Intersentia, 2016. De Hert P., Kloza D., Internet (access) as a new fundamental right. Inflating the current rights framework?, in European Journal of Law and Technology, 2012, n. 3. Dobrazanski D., The concept of solidarity and its properties, in Buksinski T., Dobrazanksi D. (eds.), Eastern Europe and the Challenges of Globalization, Washington, 2005. Dougan M., Spaventa E., Wish you weren’t here! New models of social solidarity in the European Union, in Dougan M., Spaventa E. (eds.), Social welfare and EU law, Oxford, 2005. Downey J., XS 4 All? “Information Society” Policy and Practice in the European Union, in Downey J., McGuigan J. (eds.), Technocities: The Culture and Political Economy of the Digital Revolution, SAGE Publications, 1999. Eifert M., Metzger A., Schweitzer H., Wagner G., Taming the giants: The DMA/DSA package, in Common Market Law Review, 2021, n. 4. Erixon F., Lamprechet P., The Next Steps for the Digital Single Market: From Where do We Start?, European Centre for international political economy, Policy Brief, 2018,n.2. Evangelista R., Guerrieri P., Meliciani V., The economic impact of digital technologies in Europe, in Economics of Innovation and New Technology,2014,n.8. Evans D.S., Schmalensee R., The Industrial Organization of Markets with Two- Sided Platforms, in Competition Policy International, 2007, n. 3. FernándezC.,A regulation to strengthen competition in digital markets – a note for an effective interaction of the DMA with competition law, in Competition Law International, 2021, n. 2. Ferretti F., Consumers in the Digital Single Market, in European Business Law Review, 2022, n. 33. Ferri F., Il bilanciamento dei diritti fondamentali nel mercato unico digitale, Giappichelli, 2022. Floetgen R., Strauss J., Weking J., Hein A., Urmetzer F., Böhm M., Krcmar H., Introducing platform ecosystem resilience: leveraging mobility platforms and their ecosystems for the new normal during Covid-19, in European Journal of Information Systems, 2021, n. 3. Frericks P., Capitalist welfare societies trade-off between economic efficiency and social solidarity, in European Societies, 2010, n. 5. BERTARINI.indd 113BERTARINI.indd 113 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
114 Gal M., Elkin Koren N., Algorithmic Consumers, in Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, 2017, n. 3. Galhotra B., Dewan A., Impact of Covid-19 on digital platforms and change in E-commerce shopping trends, in Fourth International Conference on I-SMAC (IoT in Social, Mobile, Analytics and Cloud), 2020. Ganzarain J., Errasti N., Three stage maturity model in SME’s toward industry 4.0, in Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 2016, n. 1. Garnham N., Europe and the Global Information Society: The history of a troubled relationship, in Telematics and Informatics, 1997, n. 4. Genus A., Stirling A., Collingridge and the dilemma of control: Toward responsible and accountable innovation, in Research Policy,2018,n.1. Gilchrist A., Industry 4.0: The Industrial Internet of Thing, Apress, 2016. Gill L., Towards digital constitutionalism? Mapping attempts to craft an internet bill of rights, Berkman Center Research Publication, 2015, n. 15. Golino C., L’intervento pubblico per lo sviluppo economico delle aree depresse tra mercato e solidarietà,Giappichelli,2018. Gorwa R., What is platform governance?, In Information, Communication & Society, 2019, n. 6. Grabowska S., Saniuk S., Gajdzik B., Industry 5.0: improving humanization and sustainability of Industry 4.0, in Scientometrics, 2022, n. 6. Grünewald S., Zellweger-Gutknecht C., Geva B., Digital euro and ECB powers, in Common Market Law Review, 2021, n. 4. Guerra A., Parisi F., Pi D., Liability for robots I: legal challenges, in Journal of Institutional economics,2022,n.18. Hallward M., Driemeier-Gaurav N., Trouble in the Making? The Future of Manufacturing-Led Development,WorldBank,2018. Havu K., The Eu digital Single Market from a consumer standpoint: how do promises meet means?, in Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice, 2017, n. 2. Hoffman J., Crossing borders in the digital market: a proposal to and copyright territoriality and geo-blocking in the European Union, in The George Washington International Law Review, 2017, n. 1. Hubregtse S., The digital divide within the European Union, in New Library World, 2005, n. 3-4. Inglese M., Regulating the Collaborative Economy in the European Union Digital Single Market, Springer, 2019. Išoraitė M., Gulevičiūtė G.,Ambrusevič N., Impact of Industry 4.0 on business studies, in Entrepreneurship and Sustainability, 2022, n. 3. João P., The New Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive: A Critical Look, in European Intellectual Property Review, 2020, n. 1. Jordana J., Introduction: Regulating telecommunications and enforcing the Information Society in Europe, in Jordana J. (ed.), Governing telecommunications and the new Information Society in Europe, Edward Elgar, 2002. Kenner J., Economic and Social Cohesion. The Rocky Road Ahead, in Legal Issues of European Integration, 1991, n. 1. BERTARINI.indd 114BERTARINI.indd 114 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
115 Kofler A., Digital Europe 1998: Policies, technological development and implementation of the emerging information society, in Innovation,1998,n.1. Konnikov E., Konnikova O., Leventsov V., IT Services market as a driver for the development of the artificial intelligence market, in IOP Conference Series, 2019, n. 1. Kritikos K., Bolle F., Tan J., The economics of solidarity: a conceptual framework, in The Journal of socio-economics, 2007, n. 1. Lamandini M., Ramos D., Bosque C., Next Generation EU: its meaning, challenges, and link to sustainability, in Financial Stability Amidst the Pandemic Crisis: On Top of the Wave, European Banking Institute, 2021. Laux J., Wachter S., Mittelstadt B., Taming the few: Platform regulation, independent audits, and the risks of capture created by the DMA and DSA, in Computer Law & Security Review, 2021, n. 2. LechardoyL.,SokolyanskayaA.,Lupiáñez-VillanuevaF.,Analytical paper on the structure of the online platform economy post Covid-19 outbreak: analytical paper 6, European Commission, Directorate-General for Communications Networks,ContentandTechnology,PublicationsOffice,2021. Lemme G., La transizione giuridica. La crisi del diritto di fronte alla sfida tecnologica, Giappichelli, 2023. Lemon K.N., Verhoef P.C., Understanding customer experience throughout the customer journey, in Journal of Marketing, 2016, n. 6. Liebert W., Schmidt J., Collingridge’s dilemma and technoscience: An attempt to provide clarification from the perspective of the philosophy of science, in Poiesis & Praxis, 2010, n. 1-2. Lindroos P., Pinkhasov M., Information society: The ICT challenge, in Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, December 2003. Lobel O., The Law of the Platform, in University of San Diego, Research Paper, 2016, n. 16. Lopez Solano J., Martin A., Souza S., Governing data and artificial intelligence for all: models for sustainable and just data governance, European Parliament, 2022. Lo Sapio G., Il regolatore alle prese con le tecnologie emergenti. La regulatory sandbox tra principi dell’attività amministrativa e rischio di illusione normativa, in Federalismi.it, 2022, n. 3. Lynsket O., Regulating “Platform Power”, in LSE Working papers, 2017, n. 1. Mansell R., Platforms of power, in Intermedia, 2015, n. 1. Mantovani M.O., Profili penali del Cyberbullismo: la L. 71 del 2017, in L’indice penale,2018,n.2. Manzini P., Diritto antitrust dell’Unione europea, Giappichelli, 2022. Menegatti E., Platform workers: employees or not employees? The EU’s turn to speak, in ERA-FORUM, 2023, n. 24. Mildebrath, H., Internet access as a fundamental right: exploring aspects of connectivity, European Parliament, 2021. Musi M., The phenomenon of “MASS”: is it time to rethink the current meritime liability regime?, in Rivista del diritto della navigazione, 2021, n. 2. BERTARINI.indd 115BERTARINI.indd 115 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
116 Nakamoto S., Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. Naujoks S., Veronesi L., Micheletti G., Advanced technologies for industry: B2B platforms: highlighting the relevance of B2B industrial digital platforms in Europe, European Commission, Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises, 2021. O’Neill M., Swinton K., Challenges and Critiques of the EU Internal Security Strategy. Rights, Power and Security, Cambridge University Press, 2017. Paardekooper W., van de Ven M., van Esdonk A., Cattel A.Y., Tax Considerations for the European Union’s Digital Single Market Strategy, in Intertax, 2016, n. 6-7. Pantea S., Martens B., Has the Digital Divide Been Reversed? Evidence from Five EU Countries, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies Digital Economy Working Paper, 2013, n. 6. Parker G., VanAlstyne M., Choudary S., Platform Revolution, Norton & Company, 2017. Pathak G.P., Warpade S., Impact of Lockdown due to Covid 19 on Consumer Behaviour while selecting Retailer for Essential Goods, in SSRN, 2020. Pini R., Argomenti seminaristi di Diritto Pubblico. Itinerari della Repubblica verso una società nuova, Giappicchelli, 2023. Pini R., Democrazia bella, Democrazia incompiuta, Democrazia infranta, Giappichelli, 2019. Proietti P., Sulis P., Perpiña Castillo C., Lavalle C., Aurambout J.P., Batista F., Bosco C., Fioretti C., Guzzo F., Jacobs C., Kompil M., Kucas A., Pertoldi M., Rainoldi A., Scipioni M., Siragusa A., Tintori G., Woolford J., New perspectives on territorial disparities,PublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion,2022. Quentin A., Ziv C., Klau W., Crum A., Douglas F., Consumer Choice and Autonomy in the Age of Artificial Intelligence and Big Data, in Customer Needs and Solutions, 2018,n.1-2. Rabitti M., Sciarrone Alibrandi A., La proposta di Regolamento europeo sull’Intelligenza Artificiale nel prisma del settore finanziario: uno sguardo critico, in Passalacqua M. (ed.), Diritti e mercati nella transizione economica e digitale. Studi dedicati a Mauro Giusti, Cedam, 2022. Ragnedd M., Muschert G.W., The Digital Divide: The Internet and Social Inequality in International Perspective, Taylor & Francis, 2013. Rao S.K., Presad R., Impact of 5G Technologies on Industry 4.0, in Wireless Personal Communications,2018,n.1. Resta G., Digital Platforms and the Law: Contested Issues, in Media Laws,2018, n. 1. Ricci A., Measuring Information Society: Dynamics of European data on usage of information and communication technologies in Europe since 1995, in Telematics and Informatics, 1995, n. 1-2. Rochet J.C., Tirole J., Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets, in Journal of the European Economic Association, 2003, n. 4. Rochet J.C., Tirole J., Two-Sided Markets: A Progress Report, November 2005. Rossi L.S., Il valore giuridico dei valori. L’Articolo 2 TUE: relazioni con altre BERTARINI.indd 116BERTARINI.indd 116 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
117 disposizioni del diritto primario dell’UE e rimedi giurisdizionali, in Federalismi. it, 2020, n. 19. Santuari A., Ugolini C., Verso una nuova sanità europea: reti integrate e livelli assistenziali condivisi?, in Golino C., Martelli A. (eds.), Un modello sociale europeo? Itinerari dei diritti di welfare tra dimensione europea e nazionale, FrancoAngeli, 2023. Sarikakis K., Terzis G., Pleonastic exclusion in the European Information Society, in Telematics and Informatics, 2000, n. 1-2. Schiller D., Digital Capitalis. Networking the Global Market System, Cambridge, 2000. Schroff S., Street J., The politics of the Digital Single Market: culture vs. competition vs. copyright, in Information, Communication & Society,2018,n.10. Schwab K., The Industrial Revolution, World Economic Forum, 2016. Servaes J., Burgelmann J.C., In search of a European model for the Information Society, in Telematics and Informatics, 2000, n. 1-2. Soldati N., L’arbitro per le controversie finanziarie (ACF) tra ruolo di regolazione del mercato finanziario e di conformazione degli intermediari, in Contratto e impresa, 2022, n. 2. Srnicek N., Platform capitalism, Cambridge, 2016. Stefanelli M.A., Small business enterprises and “the digitale revolution” in EU regulation, in Marrella F., Soldati N. (eds.), Arbitration, contracts and international trade law, Giuffrè, 2021. Stockmann D., Tech companies and the public interest: the role of the state in governing social media platforms, in Information, Communication & Society, 2023, n.1. Suska M., The European Union digital single market: Europe digital transformation, Routledge, 2022. Tarrant A., Di Mauro L., Increasing the Benefits from the Digital Single Market, in European Networks Law and Regulation Quarterly, 2016, n. 2. Ter Muelen R., Muffels R. (eds.), Solidarity in health and social care in Europe, Dordrecht, 2001. Tundo F., Giustizia Tributaria: una riforma perfettibile, ma con interventi non negoziabili, in Rivista di diritto tributario, 2022. Van Deursen A., Mossberger K., Any thing for anyone? A new digital divide in internet-of-things skills, in Policy and Internet,2018,n.2. Van Deursen A.J.A.M., Van Dijk J.A.G.M., Towards a multifaceted model of internet access to understand digital divides: An empirical investigation, in Information Society, 2015, n. 5. Varga Z., The innovative response of the European union to managing the Digital finance, in European Integration Studies, 2021, n. 2. Von Walter B., Kremmel D., Jäger B., The impact of lay beliefs about AI on the adoption of algorithmic advice, in Marketing Letters, 2022, n. 1. Woersdoerfer M., The Digital Markets Act and E.U. Competition Policy: A Critical Ordoliberal Evaluation, in Philosophy of Management, 2023, n. 1. BERTARINI.indd 117BERTARINI.indd 117 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
118 Wolfrum R., Kojima C. (eds.), Solidarity: a structural principle of international law, Berlin, 2010. Yu B., Ndumu A., Mon L., Fan Z., E-inclusion or digital divide: an integrated model of digital inequality, in Journal of Documentation,2018,n.3. Zhao F., Wallis J., Singh M., E-government development and the digital economy: A reciprocal relationship, in Internet Research, 2015, n. 5. Zizic M., Mladineo M., Gjeldum N., Celent L., From Industry 4.0 toward Industry 5.0: A Review and Analysis of paradigm Shift for the People, Organization and Technology, in Energies, 2022, n. 14. Zorzi N., L’ambiente come nuovo bene costituzionalmente protetto, in Galgano F. (ed.), Diritto privato, Wolters Kluwer Italia, 2022. Zuboff S., The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power,Profilebooks,2019. Zunarelli S., Il Diritto dei trasporti come “pioniere” dell’elaborazione giuridica, in Aa.Vv., Anuario de estudios maritimos, Thomson Reuters Aranzadi, 2022. BERTARINI.indd 118BERTARINI.indd 118 27/04/23 14:1127/04/23 14:11 Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
Our rich catalogue of publications includes hundreds of English-language monographs, as well as many journals that are published, partially or in whole, in English. The FrancoAngeli, FrancoAngeli Journals and FrancoAngeli Series websites now offer a completely dual language interface, in Italian and English. Since 2006, we have been making our content available in digital format, as one of the first partners and contributors to the Torrossa platform for the distribution of digital content to Italian and foreign academic institutions. Torrossa is a pan-European platform which currently provides access to nearly 400,000 e-books and more than 1,000 e-journals in many languages from academic publishers in Italy and Spain, and, more recently, French, German, Swiss, Belgian, Dutch, and English publishers. It regularly serves more than 3,000 libraries worldwide. Ensuring international visibility and discoverability for our authors is of crucial importance to us. a strong international commitment FrancoAngeli FrancoAngeli Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460
Management, finanza, marketing, operations, HR Psicologia e psicoterapia: teorie e tecniche Didattica, scienze della formazione Economia, economia aziendale Sociologia Antropologia Comunicazione e media Medicina, sanità Architettura, design, territorio Informatica, ingegneria Scienze Filosofia, letteratura, linguistica, storia Politica, diritto Psicologia, benessere, autoaiuto Efficacia personale Politiche e servizi sociali Vi aspettiamo su: www.francoangeli.it per scaricare (gratuitamente) i cataloghi delle nostre pubblicazioni DIVISI PER ARGOMENTI E CENTINAIA DI VOCI: PER FACILITARE LE VOSTRE RICERCHE. FrancoAngeli La passione per le conoscenze Copyright © 2023 Beatrice Bertarini. ISBN 9788835152460