Capitalisn’t: Ask Luigi Zingales Anything
The Chicago Booth finance professor and Capitalisn’t cohost fields questions on everything from competition policy to his favorite soccer team.
Capitalisn’t: Ask Luigi Zingales AnythingUber has tried to avoid regulation in Europe and elsewhere by claiming that it is a tech platform, not a transportation service—and therefore not subject to the same rules as taxi companies. In most European countries, authorities have found that argument unconvincing, but the European Court of Justice will have the last word when it rules on the issue later this year. If the court follows the recommendation of its top adviser, Uber would remain, for legal purposes, a transportation service. A ruling against Uber would presumably make taxi companies rejoice, but what would it mean for consumers?
To find out, Chicago Booth’s Initiative on Global Markets posed three questions to its panel of European economic experts. (IGM’s panel of US-based experts has previously expressed enthusiasm for Uber’s pro-competitive influence on the transportation market.) First, it asked whether consumers would benefit from Uber (and Uber-like companies) being treated differently from taxi companies. Second, it asked whether, all else equal, consumers would benefit from Uber being allowed to operate without restrictions on prices or routes. It also asked, more generally, whether existing regulations on taxis, imposed by European cities, are harmful to consumers by limiting competition.
In all three cases, the economists were overwhelmingly on the side of competition. “Competition is always good for consumers, so they clearly gain,” writes Nicholas Bloom of Stanford in agreeing that Uber should be allowed to operate without restrictions. “Taxi companies of course hate it—nobody likes having to compete!” But others were careful to point out that Uber itself may be monopolistic. “Ride-sharing platforms need to be regulated to avoid monopoly power related to large network effects,” writes Agnès Bénassy-Quéré of the Paris School of Economics.
Jan Pieter Krahnen, Goethe University Frankfurt
“Exempting ride-sharing services from existing regulations would put taxi firms at an imposed disadvantage, undermining efficiency.”
Response: Disagree
John Vickers, Oxford University
“New technology changes the nature and extent of market failure. (De)regulation should reflect that.”
Response: Agree
Hans-Joachim Voth, University of Zurich
“Uber, etc., are monopolization plays; where taxi regulation works today, as in most European cities, the long-run impact may be negative.”
Response: Uncertain
Pol Antras, Harvard
“A positive effect on consumer surplus seems clear; on the producer side, there are winners and losers.”
Response: Strongly Agree
Agnès Bénassy-Quéré, Paris School of Economics
“Ride-sharing platforms need to be regulated to avoid monopoly power related to large network effects.”
Response: Disagree
Richard Portes, London Business School
Licensed taxis should retain privileges (bus/taxi lanes, authorization to pick up passengers hailing them on the street…) and compete.”
Response: Agree
Nicholas Bloom, Stanford
“Many taxi regulations help taxi firms and harm consumers—they restrict choice and keep prices high. It’s a classic producer union.”
Response: Strongly Agree
Karl Whelan, University College Dublin
“Restrictive regulations related to pricing or quantity supplied are rarely a good idea unless there is a clear market failure.”
Response: Strongly Agree
Martin Hellwig, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods
“Key issues are price regulation and entry regulation. We need significant empirical information to assess their effects on consumers.”
Response: Uncertain
The Chicago Booth finance professor and Capitalisn’t cohost fields questions on everything from competition policy to his favorite soccer team.
Capitalisn’t: Ask Luigi Zingales AnythingTwo economists with very different views on inequality discuss the magnitude of the problem.
Is Wealth Inequality Overstated?A system of international payments could benefit Brazil and the whole world.
Paying Up to Save the Amazon May Be Cheaper than the AlternativeYour Privacy
We want to demonstrate our commitment to your privacy. Please review Chicago Booth's privacy notice, which provides information explaining how and why we collect particular information when you visit our website.