2018年4月22日 星期日

What is the Competition Market for Uber? An Empirical Assessment in Taiwan

It is my honor that Professor Chang agrees to post his article regarding Uber competition on my blog.  Professor Chang is one of the excellent scholars in the field of competition issue  in Taiwan. 



What is the Competition Market for Uber? An Empirical Assessment in Taiwan
Hung-Hao Chang


Ridesharing companies such as Uber are examples of companies taking advantage of advanced digital technology to disrupt the traditional transportation market. Uber, the most successful ride sharing economy business model, was launched in San Francisco city in U.S. in 2009, and it has expanded to many major countries worldwide. Registered as a technology company that manages a ridesharing platform to connect service providers and consumers, Uber uses a mobile application to match passengers with drivers of private vehicles through the application of an internet platform. Because Uber does not own its vehicles but only works with privately licensed drivers, Uber claims itself as a platform matchmaker rather than a transport provider. Uber drivers therefore do not have to comply with transportation and communication laws which are applied to taxi drivers.

Severe protests from taxi drivers against Uber have been found in many countries. Taxi drivers claim that Uber’s service is unregulated and uses potentially dangerous vehicles and untested private drivers to operate. Taxi drivers have urged the government to take legal action on Uber to avoid the unfair competition between Uber and taxi companies. Two interesting questions are then raised: (1) Does Uber compete with taxicabs in the same market? If not, there is no ground for taxi drivers to complain about. (2) Should Uber be regulated in the same way as taxis? From the view of competition laws, the answers of these two questions are closely relevant to an appropriate definition of a competition market for Uber. Although market definition is a longstanding research topic in antitrust analysis, defining a competition market for Uber is not obvious since it is registered as an IT company.

An empirical analysis was recently completed to address the above policy issues by assessing the impacts of Uber on taxi drivers’ economic outcomes and business strategies in Taiwan. The theoretical framework of this study is based on the theory of harm. If the presence of Uber affects taxi drivers, then Uber and taxi industry should be defined in the same competition market. Given that Uber entered Taipei city of Taiwan in 2013, this study examines the effect of Uber on taxi industry by comparing the performance of taxi drivers in Taipei City and the ones in other cities before and after the presence of Uber. Using a solid econometric analysis on a population-based survey of taxi drivers, it was found that Uber significantly reduced the service revenue and profit margin of taxi drivers who are the members of a taxi motorcade. In esponse to competition from Uber, it was also found that taxi drivers in Taipei City were more likely to adopt advertisements in or on their taxicabs compared to taxi drivers in other cities without Uber service. Additionally, there was a lower incidence rate of car accidents among taxi drivers in Taipei City, which may indicate that taxi drivers are providing better ride service as a strategy to cope with the competitive pressure from Uber.

To sum, a negative impact of Uber on taxi drivers' service revenue may suggest a substitution between Uber service and taxi operation. Taxi motorcades are directly competing with Uber which is because both taxi motorcades and Uber use a dispatching system in business operation. Accordingly, this study suggests that Uber probably has to be considered in the same competition market as the one with taxi motorcades.

The above post draws on material discussed at greater length in “The Economic Effects of Uber on Taxi Drivers in Taiwan”, recently published in volume 13, issue 3 of the Journal of Competition Law and Economics.

The author is a commissioner of the Taiwan Fair Trade Commission (TFTC), and a professor at the National Taiwan University. The view of the paper is on the author, but not the TFTC. E-mail: hunghaochang@ntu.edu.tw




沒有留言:

走向更激進的結合管制 --美國2023年《結合處理原則》出爐了

  2023 年 12 月 18 日,美國司法部和聯邦交易委員會聯合公布了期待已久的《結合處理原則》 (Merger Guidelines) ,正式宣告向更激進的結合管制前進。 前言     歷經了 4 次公聽會 、 3 場研討會以及徵詢了超過 3 萬 5000 餘件公眾意見...