Anu Bradford - Digital empires: The global battle to regulate technology
Summary
TLDRAnu Bradford discusses the concept of 'digital empires' in global tech regulation, highlighting three models: the American market-driven, Chinese state-driven, and European rights-driven approaches. She predicts the decline of the US model due to a shift towards privacy and competition regulations, while the EU model gains traction. However, concerns about European innovation, enforcement, and the appeal of the Chinese model in authoritarian states pose challenges. The future of liberal democracy in the digital age is at stake, with the need for effective governance by democratic entities, not just tech companies or authoritarian regimes.
Takeaways
- 📚 Anu Bradford's work revolves around the concept of 'digital empires', focusing on the regulatory models of the US, China, and the EU in the digital realm.
- 🌎 The US model is market-driven, prioritizing free speech and innovation with minimal government intervention, often leaving tech governance to private companies.
- 🏗 China's approach is state-driven, aiming to become a technological superpower while using technology for surveillance and censorship to maintain political stability.
- 🌍 The EU model is rights-driven, emphasizing the protection of individual rights, democratic structures, and a fair distribution of digital transformation benefits.
- 🔄 Each 'empire' is exporting its model differently: the US exports the power of its tech companies, China exports infrastructure, and the EU exports regulatory superpower.
- 🛑 The 'Brussels effect' is noted, where the EU's regulations influence global tech companies, leading them to adopt these standards worldwide.
- 💡 Bradford argues that the EU is not just reacting to US and China but is a significant player in shaping global digital governance with its distinct approach.
- 🔄 The script discusses 'horizontal battles' between these empires and 'vertical battles' within each empire against tech companies over regulation.
- 📉 There's a predicted decline in the American digital empire's influence as the world moves away from the market-driven model towards more regulated environments.
- 🏆 The EU's regulatory model is gaining traction globally, especially in democratic countries, but faces challenges in authoritarian regions and within its own enforcement capabilities.
- ⚖️ The final battle is for the soul of liberal democracy, where the effectiveness of democratic governance of technology is critical to prevent authoritarian or corporate control of the digital economy.
Q & A
What is the main theme of Anu Bradford's book 'The Brussels Effect'?
-The main theme of Anu Bradford's book 'The Brussels Effect' is how the European Union's regulations are influencing the global digital economy and the world, highlighting the EU's role as a regulatory superpower.
What are the three primary models of digital regulation according to Anu Bradford?
-The three primary models of digital regulation according to Anu Bradford are the American market-driven model, the Chinese state-driven model, and the European rights-driven model.
How does the American market-driven model approach digital regulation?
-The American market-driven model prioritizes free speech, free internet, and incentives to innovate, with the government playing a minimal role and tech companies largely self-regulating.
What is the focus of the Chinese state-driven model in terms of technology?
-The Chinese state-driven model focuses on making China a technological superpower, leveraging state resources for this goal, and using technology as a tool for surveillance, propaganda, and censorship to maintain political power and social stability.
What does the European rights-driven model emphasize in digital regulation?
-The European rights-driven model emphasizes human-centric digital transformation, maximizing individual fundamental rights, preserving democratic structures, and ensuring a fair distribution of gains from digital transformation.
Why are the three leading technology regulatory powers referred to as 'digital empires' in Anu Bradford's discourse?
-Anu Bradford refers to the three leading technology regulatory powers as 'digital empires' to metaphorically illustrate their global influence and proactive exportation of their regulatory models beyond their jurisdictions.
How does the concept of the 'Brussels Effect' relate to digital regulation?
-The 'Brussels Effect' in digital regulation refers to the tendency of European regulations to shape global standards and practices, as tech companies often adopt these regulations globally to streamline their operations.
What are the horizontal and vertical battles mentioned in the script?
-Horizontal battles are conflicts between the empires themselves, such as the US-China Tech War, while vertical battles are the efforts by governments to regulate tech companies within their own markets.
What does Anu Bradford predict about the future of the American digital empire?
-Anu Bradford predicts a decline in the American digital empire's influence due to a global shift away from the market-driven model towards more rights-driven regulations.
What are the concerns Anu Bradford raises about the European regulatory model's global adoption?
-Anu Bradford raises concerns about the European regulatory model's compatibility with innovation, effective enforcement of regulations, and its appeal in authoritarian or authoritarian-leaning countries.
Why is the battle over the future of liberal democracy considered the most important by Anu Bradford?
-The battle over the future of liberal democracy is considered the most important because it determines whether digital economies are governed by democratic principles or by authoritarian regimes or tech companies, both of which could undermine liberal democracy.
Outlines
📚 Introduction to the Speaker and the Topic
The speaker, Anu Bradford, is introduced as an influential authority on the concept of the 'Brussels Effect,' which she first explored in her book published in 2020. Her new book, which is the focus of the discussion, has been recognized by the Financial Times as a best book. The moderator expresses excitement, particularly due to their own work on 'Governing Digital China,' and invites the audience to engage with Anu's work. Anu begins by addressing the global consensus on the need for technology regulation, despite the lack of agreement on its form. She outlines three primary models of digital regulation: the American market-driven model, the Chinese state-driven model, and the European rights-driven model. Each model is characterized by different approaches to balancing innovation, state control, and individual rights.
🌐 The Concept of Digital Empires
Anu Bradford discusses the term 'digital empires,' which she uses metaphorically to describe the global influence of the United States, China, and the European Union in technology regulation. Each empire is characterized by its unique approach to exporting its regulatory model. The US is noted for its tech companies' global reach, China for its infrastructure projects, and the EU for its regulatory superpower status. The speaker argues that these empires are not just coexisting but also competing in the global digital governance landscape, leading to both horizontal and vertical regulatory battles. Horizontal battles involve conflicts between the empires themselves, such as the US-China Tech War, while vertical battles are internal struggles within each empire's tech industry.
🛡️ The Decline of the American Digital Empire
The speaker predicts the decline of the American digital empire due to a loss of trust in the market-driven model of technology governance. She notes a global shift towards privacy regulations and competition laws, moving away from the US model. The European rights-driven model is gaining traction, especially in democratic countries. However, there are concerns about the European model's compatibility with innovation, given Europe's lack of leading tech companies. The speaker suggests that factors other than digital regulation, such as market integration, capital markets, risk-taking culture, and global talent attraction, better explain Europe's position in the tech industry.
🌟 Innovation and the European Regulatory Model
Anu Bradford addresses the myth that European digital regulation hinders innovation, arguing that other factors like market fragmentation, capital market structure, cultural attitudes towards risk, and the attraction of global talent are more significant. She emphasizes that the US's success in tech innovation is partly due to its ability to attract immigrant founders and foster a culture that embraces failure as a stepping stone to success. The speaker also raises concerns about the European model's enforcement, suggesting that without effective implementation, the regulatory victories could be hollow, and the American model might still prevail.
🌍 The Battle for Liberal Democracy in the Digital Age
The speaker concludes with a discussion on the battle for the future of liberal democracy in the digital age. She expresses concern that liberal democracy could deteriorate if the US and EU lose the horizontal battle to China or the vertical battle to tech companies. She calls for liberal democracies to demonstrate an effective way to govern technology that aligns with democratic values. The speaker also highlights the challenge posed by China's tech industry, which has thrived without political freedom, and the potential for generative AI to become a battleground where the correlation between freedom and innovation could be tested.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Brussels Effect
💡Digital Regulation
💡Market-driven Model
💡State-driven Model
💡Rights-driven Model
💡Horizontal Battles
💡Vertical Battles
💡Techno Libertarian
💡Splinternet
💡GDPR
💡Digital Empires
Highlights
Introduction of Anu Bradford, the author who coined the term 'Brussels Effect' and her influential books.
The concept of 'Brussels Effect' and its significance in global governance.
Three primary models of digital regulation: American market-driven, Chinese state-driven, and European rights-driven.
The American model's emphasis on free speech, free internet, and minimal government intervention.
China's focus on becoming a technological superpower and using technology for surveillance and social control.
Europe's unique approach to digital regulation, prioritizing human rights and democratic values.
The 'digital Empires' concept, explaining the global influence of the US, China, and EU in technology regulation.
How each 'Empire' exports different aspects of their regulatory models: private power, infrastructure, and regulation.
The coexistence and collision of digital Empires in the global marketplace.
Horizontal battles: conflicts between the US, China, and EU over technology regulation.
Vertical battles: governments' efforts to regulate tech companies within their own markets.
Prediction of the decline of the American digital Empire due to a loss of trust in tech company governance.
The growing appeal of the European rights-driven model outside the EU, especially in democratic countries.
Concerns about the European model's compatibility with innovation and the lack of leading European tech companies.
The challenge for the US and EU to persuade countries not to emulate the Chinese model, given China's tech success without political freedom.
The high stakes in the battle for the future of liberal democracy in the digital age.
The need for liberal democracies to demonstrate effective governance of technology to maintain their values.
Transcripts
let me introduce to to you our speaker
of course many of you joined because you
know Anu Bradford about the term that
she coined the Brussels effect um and
her first uh book which was called the
Brussels effect how the European Union
rules the world published in 2020 which
was named one of the best books um of
2020 by Foreign Affairs her new book
that she will speak about today has also
already been been named a best book by
the financial times we're very much
looking forward um to to learning more
about it uh of course I'm particularly
excited because I'm currently also
writing a book finishing up a book
project and who knows a little bit about
called governing digital China so um so
I see my role later on to sort of use my
China and also Europe head to POS some
questions but um as I said before please
um please use this opportunity really to
um to pose any questions you may have
about anus work so um alna without
further Ado the floor is all
yours wonderful thank you so much
Daniela and uh and thank you all for
joining this is truly um an exciting uh
audience for me to engage with there's
incredible work that is being done uh at
hery so I am very eager to hear your
questions and comments and and then
after the initial remarks move to that
conversation so let me maybe start with
the uh some um General premises for the
book why I wrote it and what the
starting point is so I start from this
assumption that I'm observing that there
is increasingly now globally a consensus
that technology needs to be regulated
but there is no consensus on what that
regulation would look like so in the
digital Empires I argue that there are
three primary ways to think about
digital regulation there is the American
Market driven model there is the Chinese
State driven model and and then there's
a European what I call a rights driven
model so the American uh Market driven
model really prioritizes free speech
free internet and incentives to innovate
so the government is reserved only a
minimal role and the governance of
technology is basically handed over
largely to the tech companies so it is a
technol Libertarian techno Optimist VI
of the world the Chinese on the other
hand they are very focused on making
China a technological superpower and
under the state driven model they are
prepared to leverage State resources to
meet the goal but China is also
leveraging technology as a tool for
surveillance and propaganda and
censorship in an effort to preserve the
political power of the Communist party
and then to ensure social stability in
the nation so in this debate the
Europeans are often portrayed as being
forced to to choose between the US and
China because the Europeans lack a
thriving technology industry on its own
that would be comparable to the two uh
superpowers in the domain of Technology
but in the book I argue that the
Europeans are not prepared to nor are
they forced to to choose between the
Chinese and the American model the
Chinese model for the Europeans is
simply too oppressive but at the same
time the American model is viewed as to
permissive so the Europeans have carved
out their own third path forward and
this is premised on a human Centric
digital transformation a regulatory
model on under which the Europeans are
maximizing the fundamental rights of
individuals the preservation of
democratic structures of the society and
they also incorporate a notion of a more
fair distribution of the gains from
digital transformation so the idea is
that we are redistributing power away
from large platforms to smaller
companies to digital citizens and to the
public and Society at large so these are
the primary regulatory models that I'm
using as an analytical framework but you
may wonder why I call these three
leading technology and Regulatory Powers
digital Empires so Empires is a big term
it is a provocative term but and I use
it more metaphorically but at the same
time I think it is conceptually helpful
for us for the following reason is that
none of the three regulatory models are
confined to the jurisdictions themselves
instead each Empire is proactively
exporting its own regulatory model aboad
but what is interesting is that each of
the regulatory powers are exporting
something different the Americans are
primarily exporting the private power of
US tech companies which basically were
set free to take over the world which
they have uh uh effectively done so
companies like meta's Facebook has three
billion users in 160 countries and
through this Global Presence by offering
the services and products to the users
around the world they are also exporting
this American Market driven model that
all of us are now accustomed to the
Chinese are exporting something
different they are primarily exporting
infrastructure power so Chinese tech
companies are building 5G networks
undersea cables um data centers smart
Cities Safe cities along this digital
Silk Road that reaches across Asia many
parts of Africa Latin America and even
Europe so if the American s export the
private power of the tech companies
Chinese are building the infrastructures
what is the export of the Europeans
Europeans are exporting the superpower
they have which is regulation so this is
now tying to my earlier work on the
Brussels effect and I argue it is also
taking place in the domain of digital
economy so Europe often takes the lead
in drafting regulations for the
technology companies and then through
the globalization of practices of tech
companies they business decision to
often adopt those those standards across
their Global conduct or Global
Production these companies are then
exporting the European digital
regulations across the global
Marketplace so if the first argument of
the book was that this is not just a us
China game the EU is also an Empire the
EU is a player we should focus on three
players the second argument is that this
is not just a digital world that we
would think think about in terms of a
splinternet where we would have these
separate spheres of influence that do
not overlap because each Empire is
contributing a different layer to the
global digital governance you have many
nonaligned markets or unaligned powers
where you see Chinese infrastructure
American tech companies and European
regulations present at the same time
which means that these digital Empires
are coexisting and at times colliding in
the global Marketplace and this really
leads to the kind of battles that the
book then talks about and I distinguish
between two levels of regulatory battles
I talk about horizontal battles and
vertical battles and these two intersect
so horizontal battles are really the
battles between the empires themselves
the most notorious battle being the
ongoing and constantly escalating us
China Tech War it is a war for
technological Supremacy a battle for
economic geopolitical military and
ideological strength in the domain of
Technology but we also can witness a
regulatory battles another horizontal
battle mainly taking place between the
United States and Europe where the US
companies have come to the European
marketplace where Europeans feel that
they are
overextending they they their power they
are EX exercising the kind of economic
power political power cultural power
informational power that is too much for
the Europeans which is why the Europeans
have asserted themselves and then
extended their regulations to to reach
those American tech companies which has
then occasionally led to criticism in
the US saying it's not that our
companies are overreaching it's your
Regulators that are overreaching and
seeking to govern our companies as well
so in addition to those those horizontal
battles between the empires each Empire
is battling vertically the tech
companies in their own Marketplace so we
see constant efforts by the governments
to regulate their tech companies in
their own markets even the United States
government is now rethinking its techn
libertarian convictions and is looking
to start regulating the US tech
companies many of you may have looked at
the may have seen the executive order by
president Biden in the domain of
artificial intelligence that's pretty
far removed from a pure Market driven
model that has a very much the same tone
as the European rights driven model but
at the same time the the Americans are
considering digital regulation in the
shadow of that horizontal battle they
are worried that if they are too
vigorous in restraining the tech
companies in the domestic Market they
are eroding the very asset they need to
Prevail in the horizontal battle they
need these tech companies to be
successful they need them to innovate
they need them to lead in AI so that
they win the horizontal battle which
means we will see more restraint in
those vertical battles it's only so far
the Americans are willing to go but the
same way we see restrain in the
horizontal battle the Americans are not
going all the way restricting the flow
of American Technology to the Chinese
market because the American companies
need access to that Chinese market so we
see more restraint alongside rivalry in
these various
battles so let me now move to the
question that may interest many of you
which is who wins these battles who
prevails what happens in the horizontal
battle and what happens in the vertical
battle and here I'm prepared to make a
couple of predictions uh in the in the
book and one of them is that I predict
the decline line of the American digital
Empire the US is losing the ideological
battle there are very few individuals or
governments around the world that
anymore trust the governance of
technology to the tech companies
themselves instead there is now move
away from the the techn libertarian
worldview whereby governments around the
world are adopting privacy regulations
asserting they antitrust their
competition regul ulations rethinking
the disinformation looking for ways to
regulate content and now there's a
global conversation on the need to
regulate artificial intelligence so this
all is a move away clearly from the
American Market driven model that is
widely seen as un inept uh inep today to
govern the challenges of today's digital
economy so if the American Market driven
model is no longer having the same kind
of global appeal that is good news for
the European rights driven model which
is gaining more attaction also outside
of the EU especially in the Democratic
World in countries like Canada Australia
or South Korea or Japan or New Zealand
the governments are looking to the ways
that Europe is governing the digital
economy however there are potentially
three concerns that I want to share with
you that are are giving government some
PS as as to whether the European
regulatory model is the right one the
first concern is this idea that can the
European rights driven reg regulatory
model actually be compatible with
Innovation will it mean that if we move
towards the European model we will see
less successful tech companies emerge
and this is driven really by this uh uh
visible OBS this observation that that
Europeans are very good good at at
writing regulations we all know about
the gdpr but it takes us a longer time
to name a European tech company Europe
does not produce leading tech companies
which many attribute to excessive
digital
regulation I don't think digital
regulation is the problem even though I
do worry about European competitiveness
and I think there are other reasons that
explain why the Europeans haven't
managed to compete with for instance
Americans that have very little to do
with the European commitment to protect
the fundamental rights or otherwise
regulate the digital economy so let me
just mention four that I think are much
more important so one is that compared
to the United States there is no
integrated digital single Market in the
EU it is very hard for tech companies to
grow in the EU they cannot scale if they
face barriers that that follow the
national boundaries in the EU second
there is no deep IND created robust
Capital markets in the EU Capital
markets are also balkanized which makes
it much harder to fund your Innovations
in the EU third issue risk-taking is
actively discouraged under European
cultural Outlook but also under European
legislative Frameworks I blame
bankruptcy laws which are punitive in
most European countries it is often
fatal to f in the EU you cannot take
risks because if you fail you cannot
raise money again and you are not given
a second chance whereas failure is built
into the Silicon Valley and American
whole Tech ecosystem and that regulatory
model we want the entrepreneurs to try
big things to kind of head head towards
the cliff and some fall off the cliff
but but that's just part of the system
it's a right of passage you fail then
you raise money again and maybe the next
time you very very successful so
Americans are much more comfortable with
failure which also means they are much
more comfortable for pursuing disruptive
risky Innovations which is absolutely
critical for Tech economy and let me
name a fourth issue that I think really
explains why the Europeans are not
succeeding at the level of Americans
which is Americans are much better inh
harnessing the Global Talent to benefit
American innovation base so over 50% of
over $1 billion startups in the US have
an immigrant founder and if we for a
moment just look at the household names
the leading platform companies and they
Founders Steve Jobs of Apple is a son of
a Syrian immigrant Jeff basos of Amazon
is the second generation Cuban immigrant
um Elon Musk of Tesla is South African
Serge Brin the co-founder of uh of
Google is a Russian and Edward sain a
co-founder of Facebook is Brazilian
these are just examples of how America
has been so successful on being a magnet
for Global Talent the Europeans are not
succeeding at the same rate so I spent
some extra time laying this out because
I want to debunk this myth that somehow
Europeans are behind because they
committed to digital regulation I don't
think that if we now decided to scrap
the gdpr or decide never to go ahead
with the AI act that somehow a year from
now or five years from now there would
be massive Tech economy emanating from
Europe there are all these other
elements other pillars of the tech
ecosystem that the Europeans need to
work on which also means that if the
Americans that still remain somewhat
hesitant now where to move towards the
European rights Ren model it's not that
somehow we would not have uh uh
Innovation coming from the United States
the federal Privacy Law in the US would
not dismantle the US capital markets so
prevent the Global Talent from finding
their way to the United States so back
to my my question what are the potential
hesitations about the growing success of
of the EU regulatory model I don't think
overregulation is the problem I'm much
more worried about the Europeans
underdoing it by which I mean the
Europeans are very good at writing
regulations but they don't have the good
track record of en forcing uh the
regulations so we do not see as
successful implementation and as
effective enforcement of that ambitious
regulatory agenda which if the Europe
which means if the Europeans fail to
really translate these regulations into
effective Market outcomes they victory
in this horizontal battle is a hollow
one in practice the American Market
driven model prevails if these
regulations cannot be effectively
enforced
third concern that I have about the
European uh uh models Victory it's doing
well in the Democratic world but it
doesn't have many takers in the
authoritarian or authoritarian leaning
world and that part of the world is
constantly growing there are many
developing countries many countries that
are authoritarian that have no interest
in right driven model rights driven
model they are much more drawn to the
Chinese State driven model and I think
there are a couple of reasons why it is
very difficult for Europeans and for the
Americans if they try to work with the
Europeans and persuade the rest of the
world not to emulate the Chinese model
not to take the Chinese infrastructure
and rather align themselves with the the
global techn democracies one issue is
that I mentioned this Chinese
infrastructure power that infrastructure
is vital for many countries digital
development that is the path that they
cannot afford to to say no to especially
if there is no alternative Chinese
infrastructure is pretty good and it is
Affordable and often it is the only game
in town the Europeans have a couple of
alternatives to Huawei Nokia and Ericson
they don't come with the kind of
financial uh subsidies that allow the
countries to acquire them at a
reasonable rate that the Chinese
government is providing to support the
Chinese infrastructure Acquisitions
second issue and this is something that
I was very uncomfortable writing in the
book I I wrote this paragraph and I I
did not like it but it had to be there
because I think it happens to be
intellectually honest and true China has
shown to the world that political
freedom is not necessary for Innovation
they have managed to create a thriving
Tech economy without being free so it's
very hard for the US and the EU to go to
the rest of the world and tell them that
look you should not take the Chinese m
model because if you follow the Chinese
model the state driven one you will gain
control but you will not see economic
growth these countries look at China and
say look I think we can get both we can
have the political control and we can
have Innovation and economic growth here
my slide caveat is which I'm watching
very carefully right now is that in
generative AI the Chinese companies are
lagging behind the US counterpart and
one challenge for Chinese compan here is
that any generative AI model needs to be
consistent with the censorship regime
which limits the amount of data that you
can use and the ways that you can use
the data to train these models so there
may be a chance for the US and the EU to
say that we are Vindicated ultimately
Freedom does correlate with greater
Innovation but let me now uh move to the
to uh the the the most important Battle
of all the one that I think really has
the highest stake and that is the battle
over the future of liberal democracy and
this is the one the battle that leaves
me most concerned and I would want to
invite you to all to consider that this
battle can be lost in one of two ways
liberal democracy will deteriorate if
the US and the EU lose the horizontal
battle to China and I have given some
suggestions why it might be that that
that could be the case second we also
need to realize that liberal democracy
will also deteriorate if the US and the
EU lose their vertical battle to tech
companies a digital economy governed by
tech companies and not democratic
governments is also not consistent with
liberal democracy and here I am worried
because the United States even though
it's now rethinking its commitment to
markets and and is willing to regulate
it its Congress is not capable of
legislating China is capable of
legislating the Europeans are able to
legislate but they have a hard time
enforcing China doesn't have a hard time
enforcing if the Chinese Communist Party
decides it's time to crack down on big
Tech the Chinese Communist Party does
crack down on the big Tech so what
really needs to be done is for Liberal
democracies like the EU to show to the
world that there is a liberal Democratic
way to govern technology that will be
effective that will be shaping the
outcomes otherwise we are forced to
concede that Li that digital economy is
either governed by
authoritarians whereby democratic
governments are destined to fail in that
same Endeavor or in Liberal democracies
the digital economies governed by tech
companies and neither is a good outcome
for anybody who believes in Liberal
democracy as a foundation of Digital
Society and human engagement because
that would force us to conclude that the
true digital Empires are the
authoritarians and the tech companies
Ver Más Videos Relacionados
Professors in Print: "Digital Empires" by Anu Bradford
Anu Bradford - The Brussels Effect: How the European Union Rules the World
Draghi sull’UE: "Proporrò un cambiamento radicale"
The CCP Feels Threatened by India
More freedom, less privacy: The digital economy is changing the way we work | CNBC Reports
L'eurodeputato Danti: "C'è bisogno degli Stati Uniti d'Europa, non di tornare alle piccole patrie"
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)