http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
시스템 상품에서 요소별 차별화 및 소비자별 사용방식의 차이를 고려한 언번들링의 경제적 효과 분석
최병삼(Choi, Byong-Sam) 한국상품학회 2011 商品學硏究 Vol.29 No.2
본 연구는 기본 서비스(e.g., 통신서비스)와 부가 서비스(e.g., 소프트웨어)로 구성된 시스템 상품에 대한 게임이론모형을 수립하고 이를 통해 언번들링이 산업내 이해 당사자들에게 어떤 경제적 효과를 미칠 것인지를 분석한다. 본 연구는 시스템 상품의 호환성에 관한 대표적 연구인 Matutes and Regibeau(1988)와 모형 및 분석 방법이 유사하지만 크게 2가지 측면에서 차별화된다. 첫째, 시스템이 기본 서비스와 부가 서비스로 구성되고 두 요소의 차별화 정도가 서로 다르다고 가정하였다. 둘째, 본 연구에서는 전체 소비자를 사용방식의 차이에 따라 초보 소비자와 숙련 소비자의 2개 그룹으로 구분하였다. 분석 결과, 소비자의 시스템 상품에 대한 지 불의사가격이 낮은 경우 언번들링은 시스템 상품의 가격을 인하시켜 수요를 증가시키고 기본 서비스 및 부가 서비스 기업의 이윤과 소비자 후생을 증가시켜 사회후생을 증가시킨다. 소비자의 시스템 상품에 대한 지 불의사가격이 높은 경우에도 언번들링 이사회후생을 증가시키는 것은 동일하나, 차별화 정도가 낮은 부가 서비스 기업의 이윤과 초보 소비자의 후생이 감소한다. 이와 같이 언번들링은 시장의 성숙도와 대상 기업 및 소비자 집단에 따라 그 경제적 효과가 달라진다. This study examines the economic effects of unbundling systems goods, which consist of basic service (i.e., telecommunications network service) and additional service (i.e., software). Previous studies in this field propose that unbundling systems goods enables users to mix and match, i.e., compose their ideal systems with components and leads to the increase in social welfare. This study differs from the previous ones mainly at two points: first, it is assumed that the degrees of differentiation of two components are different; second, the consumers are divided into two groups, ‘novice users’ and ‘expert users’, where the former consume only basic service and the latter both of basic service and additional service. By analyzing a game theoretic model, this study shows the following: first, unbundling increases the profits of the firms and social welfare by increasing the variety of systems goods and decreasing their prices; second, however, when the willingness to pay of consumers for systems goods is high, unbundling might decrease the profit of additional service firms and the welfare of novice users.
플랫폼 경제의 부상과 혁신적이고 공정한 산업 생태계 조성 방안
최병삼(Byong-Sam Choi),시새롬(Saerom Si) 과학기술정책연구원 2021 정책연구 Vol.- No.-
A platform economy where platforms bring about huge changes across all areas of the economy is developing around the world. In the past, U.S. and Chinese companies led major platforms in the digital industry. Recently, however, Korean companies are also actively challenging to build platforms. Platforms have the potential to make fundamental changes in the Korean economy, and the next few years will decide whether Korean companies will be able to successfully build platforms and lead the domestic or global ecosystems. It is time for research on platform promotion and regulation measures to promote platform creation and ecosystem leadership of Korean companies. In order to establish national platform policy, it is necessary to understand the characteristics of platforms and to understand the current status of their competition. Major keywords related to the characteristics of platforms include switching costs and multi-homing in the introduction stage, network effects and critical mass in the growth stage, ‘market for lemons’ in the reinforcement stage, two-sided market pricing in the harvest stage, and platform envelopment in the expansion stage. To overview the current status of platform competition at home and abroad, competition for platform leadership has virtually ended in some areas, but fierce competition for leadership is currently underway in many other areas. Taking into account different characteristics of platforms from general products and the current status of competition, we cannot be too cautious when establishing and applying platform policies. Looking at platform policies of other countries, the platform anti-trust bill package was proposed in June 2021 in the United States. Representative bills include American Choice and Innovation Online Act, Ending Platform Monopolies Act, Platform Competition and Opportunity Act, and Augmenting Compatibility and Competition by Enabling Service Switching Act. Representative bills announced in Europe include the Digital Market Act and the Digital Service Act. In Korea, various platform-related bills such as the Online Platform Fairness Act and the Online Platform User Protection Act have been proposed. Although regulations on platforms are generally tightened at home and abroad, it seems that platform policies should be established in consideration of national interests of our country. Considering overseas policy trends and interviews with platform policy experts, this study proposes the following policies. First, it is necessary to support platform companies to solve problems such as conflicts with professionals and consideration for the vulnerable so that they can overcome barriers to entry into the market. Second, in order for platform companies to secure a large number of high-quality participants, different requirements should be identified according to the type and situation of platform workers and solved through social dialogues. Third, in order for platform companies to revitalize ecosystems and transactions, institutional mechanisms should be prepared to make it difficult for platforms to favor their products in sectors with weak market competition, and autonomous regulations should be encouraged in sectors with strong market competition. Fourth, platform companies should be given autonomy to determine appropriate fees, but the government can present guidelines if necessary. Fifth, platform companies should be allowed to acquire competitive startups except in hostile mergers and acquisitions of companies emerging as potential competitors in the existing business area. Sixth, in order to prevent reverse discrimination of domestic companies, regulations that are difficult to apply to overseas companies in reality should not be applied to domestic companies, but should also be applied to overseas companies if regulations are essential. Finally, the platform industry should be promoted by facilitating pilot projects, monitoring the effectiveness of data
한국형 발전모델의 탐색과 성장동력 정책의 전환 - 제1권 총괄보고서 -
최병삼(Byong-Sam Choi),배용호(Yong-Ho Bae),김석관(Seok-Kwan Kim),양희태(Hee Tae Yang),엄미정(Mi-Jung Um),김가은(Gaeun Kim),이예원(Ye Won Lee),추수진(Soo Jin Choo),김단비(Danbi Kim) 과학기술정책연구원 2019 정책연구 Vol.- No.-
A new approach to growth engine policy is needed as the internal and external environment has changed rapidly, our economy and industry have grown more than in the past, and the achievements of the existing growth engine policy have been insufficient. The purpose of this study is to present a long-term vision of the future of the Korean industry, expand the scope of discussion of growth engine policies from policies related to selection and development of growth engines to models of national economic development and global competition analysis, and pursue a direction shift or expansion rather than improvement of existing growth engine policies. The theme of this study is to explore the Korean model of development and propose a shift in the policy of growth engine. (Exploration of the Korean Development Model) Chapter 1 explained the need for the government to play a role by supplementing market failures and expanding industrial infrastructure to enhance growth potential even in the present and future when the nation"s economy has grown to a certain level. Based on the results of analyzing the growth path and characteristics of the Korean economy in Chapter 3 and conducting global competitive analysis in Chapter 4, the future images of Korean industries was suggested in Chapter 4. In comparison to the industrial structure of several advanced countries such as Germany, France and the United Kingdom, the growth of existing companies and the emergence of new companies in materials, parts and equipment (B2B), consumer goods (B2C), and service sectors such as finance are needed. (Change of growth engine policies) The low performance of growth engine policies in the past was due to the narrow range of policies and means. Based on the discussion in Chapter 2, we proposed expanding the policy in a variety of aspects. First, industries or businesses that can generate growth, even if they are not through R&D, should be considered together in the category of growth engine policies. Second, selecting new growth engine items and upgrading existing growth engines are complementary to each other, not substitutes. Third, not only items that are growing at a high level on their own, but also items that are needed to strengthen growth engines are important. Fourth, there is a need to expand the list of candidates for promising items and organize packages and solutions with specific global markets in mind by linking them organically. The policy implications should be shifted from fostering R&D-oriented long-term growth engines to fostering growth engines encompassing the long-term and short-term periods. In terms of promoting growth engine policies, they should include R&D policies, industrial policies and economic policies. In other words, rather than improving the existing policies for growth engines at the level of individual factors, such as the selection of growth engines, the system for promotion and support, the government should increase consistency in every period of growth engine policies such as design, implementation and evaluation, and seek to enhance the overall economy’s performance by linking the policies of growth engines with other policies as well as the success in each area of growth engine.