Document Actions

Citation and metadata

Recommended citation

Can Atik, Bertin Martens, Competition Problems and Governance of Non-personal Agricultural Machine Data: Comparing Voluntary Initiatives in the US and EU, 12 (2021) JIPITEC 370 para 1.

Download Citation

Endnote

%0 Journal Article
%T Competition Problems and Governance of Non-personal Agricultural Machine Data: Comparing Voluntary Initiatives in the US and EU
%A Atik, Can
%A Martens, Bertin
%J JIPITEC
%D 2021
%V 12
%N 3
%@ 2190-3387
%F atik2021
%X The arrival of digital data in agriculture opens the possibility to realise productivity gains through precision farming. It also raises questions about the distribution of these gains between farmers and agricultural service providers. Farmers’ control of the data is often perceived as a means to appropriate a larger share of these gains. We show how data-driven agricultural business models lock farm data into machines and devices that reduce competition in downstream agricultural services markets.  Personal data protection regulation is not applicable to non-personal agricultural machine data. Voluntary data charters in the EU and US emulate GDPR-like principles to give farmers more control over their data but do not really change market-based outcomes due to their legal design.Third-party platforms are a necessary intermediary because farmers cannot achieve the benefits from applications that depend on economies of scale and scope in data aggregation. Data lock-in, combined with the low marginal value of individual farm data, puts farmers in a weak bargaining position. Neutral intermediaries that are not vertically integrated into agricultural machines, inputs or services may help farmers to circumvent monopolistic data lock-ins. However, unless these neutral intermediaries find a way to generate and monetise economies of scale and scope with their data, their business model may not be sustainable. Regulatory intervention that facilitates portability and interoperability might be useful for farmers to overcome data lock-ins, but designing data access rights is a complicated issue as many parties contribute data in the production process and may claim access rights. Minor changes in who gets access to which data under which conditions may have significant effects on stakeholders. We conclude that digital agriculture still has some way to go to reach equitable and efficient solutions to data access rights. Similar situations are likely to occur in other industries that rely on non-personal machine data.
%L 340
%K agricultural data
%K competition policy
%K data access rights
%K data governance
%K non-personal machine data
%K smart farming
%U http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-53365
%P 370-396

Download

Bibtex

@Article{atik2021,
  author = 	"Atik, Can
		and Martens, Bertin",
  title = 	"Competition Problems and Governance of Non-personal Agricultural Machine Data: Comparing Voluntary Initiatives in the US and EU",
  journal = 	"JIPITEC",
  year = 	"2021",
  volume = 	"12",
  number = 	"3",
  pages = 	"370--396",
  keywords = 	"agricultural data; competition policy; data access rights; data governance; non-personal machine data; smart farming",
  abstract = 	"The arrival of digital data in agriculture opens the possibility to realise productivity gains through precision farming. It also raises questions about the distribution of these gains between farmers and agricultural service providers. Farmers' control of the data is often perceived as a means to appropriate a larger share of these gains. We show how data-driven agricultural business models lock farm data into machines and devices that reduce competition in downstream agricultural services markets.  Personal data protection regulation is not applicable to non-personal agricultural machine data. Voluntary data charters in the EU and US emulate GDPR-like principles to give farmers more control over their data but do not really change market-based outcomes due to their legal design.Third-party platforms are a necessary intermediary because farmers cannot achieve the benefits from applications that depend on economies of scale and scope in data aggregation. Data lock-in, combined with the low marginal value of individual farm data, puts farmers in a weak bargaining position. Neutral intermediaries that are not vertically integrated into agricultural machines, inputs or services may help farmers to circumvent monopolistic data lock-ins. However, unless these neutral intermediaries find a way to generate and monetise economies of scale and scope with their data, their business model may not be sustainable. Regulatory intervention that facilitates portability and interoperability might be useful for farmers to overcome data lock-ins, but designing data access rights is a complicated issue as many parties contribute data in the production process and may claim access rights. Minor changes in who gets access to which data under which conditions may have significant effects on stakeholders. We conclude that digital agriculture still has some way to go to reach equitable and efficient solutions to data access rights. Similar situations are likely to occur in other industries that rely on non-personal machine data.",
  issn = 	"2190-3387",
  url = 	"http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-53365"
}

Download

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Atik, Can
AU  - Martens, Bertin
PY  - 2021
DA  - 2021//
TI  - Competition Problems and Governance of Non-personal Agricultural Machine Data: Comparing Voluntary Initiatives in the US and EU
JO  - JIPITEC
SP  - 370
EP  - 396
VL  - 12
IS  - 3
KW  - agricultural data
KW  - competition policy
KW  - data access rights
KW  - data governance
KW  - non-personal machine data
KW  - smart farming
AB  - The arrival of digital data in agriculture opens the possibility to realise productivity gains through precision farming. It also raises questions about the distribution of these gains between farmers and agricultural service providers. Farmers’ control of the data is often perceived as a means to appropriate a larger share of these gains. We show how data-driven agricultural business models lock farm data into machines and devices that reduce competition in downstream agricultural services markets.  Personal data protection regulation is not applicable to non-personal agricultural machine data. Voluntary data charters in the EU and US emulate GDPR-like principles to give farmers more control over their data but do not really change market-based outcomes due to their legal design.Third-party platforms are a necessary intermediary because farmers cannot achieve the benefits from applications that depend on economies of scale and scope in data aggregation. Data lock-in, combined with the low marginal value of individual farm data, puts farmers in a weak bargaining position. Neutral intermediaries that are not vertically integrated into agricultural machines, inputs or services may help farmers to circumvent monopolistic data lock-ins. However, unless these neutral intermediaries find a way to generate and monetise economies of scale and scope with their data, their business model may not be sustainable. Regulatory intervention that facilitates portability and interoperability might be useful for farmers to overcome data lock-ins, but designing data access rights is a complicated issue as many parties contribute data in the production process and may claim access rights. Minor changes in who gets access to which data under which conditions may have significant effects on stakeholders. We conclude that digital agriculture still has some way to go to reach equitable and efficient solutions to data access rights. Similar situations are likely to occur in other industries that rely on non-personal machine data.
SN  - 2190-3387
UR  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-53365
ID  - atik2021
ER  - 
Download

Wordbib

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<b:Sources SelectedStyle="" xmlns:b="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography"  xmlns="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography" >
<b:Source>
<b:Tag>atik2021</b:Tag>
<b:SourceType>ArticleInAPeriodical</b:SourceType>
<b:Year>2021</b:Year>
<b:PeriodicalTitle>JIPITEC</b:PeriodicalTitle>
<b:Volume>12</b:Volume>
<b:Issue>3</b:Issue>
<b:Url>http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-53365</b:Url>
<b:Pages>370-396</b:Pages>
<b:Author>
<b:Author><b:NameList>
<b:Person><b:Last>Atik</b:Last><b:First>Can</b:First></b:Person>
<b:Person><b:Last>Martens</b:Last><b:First>Bertin</b:First></b:Person>
</b:NameList></b:Author>
</b:Author>
<b:Title>Competition Problems and Governance of Non-personal Agricultural Machine Data: Comparing Voluntary Initiatives in the US and EU</b:Title>
<b:Comments>The arrival of digital data in agriculture opens the possibility to realise productivity gains through precision farming. It also raises questions about the distribution of these gains between farmers and agricultural service providers. Farmers’ control of the data is often perceived as a means to appropriate a larger share of these gains. We show how data-driven agricultural business models lock farm data into machines and devices that reduce competition in downstream agricultural services markets.  Personal data protection regulation is not applicable to non-personal agricultural machine data. Voluntary data charters in the EU and US emulate GDPR-like principles to give farmers more control over their data but do not really change market-based outcomes due to their legal design.Third-party platforms are a necessary intermediary because farmers cannot achieve the benefits from applications that depend on economies of scale and scope in data aggregation. Data lock-in, combined with the low marginal value of individual farm data, puts farmers in a weak bargaining position. Neutral intermediaries that are not vertically integrated into agricultural machines, inputs or services may help farmers to circumvent monopolistic data lock-ins. However, unless these neutral intermediaries find a way to generate and monetise economies of scale and scope with their data, their business model may not be sustainable. Regulatory intervention that facilitates portability and interoperability might be useful for farmers to overcome data lock-ins, but designing data access rights is a complicated issue as many parties contribute data in the production process and may claim access rights. Minor changes in who gets access to which data under which conditions may have significant effects on stakeholders. We conclude that digital agriculture still has some way to go to reach equitable and efficient solutions to data access rights. Similar situations are likely to occur in other industries that rely on non-personal machine data.</b:Comments>
</b:Source>
</b:Sources>
Download

ISI

PT Journal
AU Atik, C
   Martens, B
TI Competition Problems and Governance of Non-personal Agricultural Machine Data: Comparing Voluntary Initiatives in the US and EU
SO JIPITEC
PY 2021
BP 370
EP 396
VL 12
IS 3
DE agricultural data; competition policy; data access rights; data governance; non-personal machine data; smart farming
AB The arrival of digital data in agriculture opens the possibility to realise productivity gains through precision farming. It also raises questions about the distribution of these gains between farmers and agricultural service providers. Farmers’ control of the data is often perceived as a means to appropriate a larger share of these gains. We show how data-driven agricultural business models lock farm data into machines and devices that reduce competition in downstream agricultural services markets.  Personal data protection regulation is not applicable to non-personal agricultural machine data. Voluntary data charters in the EU and US emulate GDPR-like principles to give farmers more control over their data but do not really change market-based outcomes due to their legal design.Third-party platforms are a necessary intermediary because farmers cannot achieve the benefits from applications that depend on economies of scale and scope in data aggregation. Data lock-in, combined with the low marginal value of individual farm data, puts farmers in a weak bargaining position. Neutral intermediaries that are not vertically integrated into agricultural machines, inputs or services may help farmers to circumvent monopolistic data lock-ins. However, unless these neutral intermediaries find a way to generate and monetise economies of scale and scope with their data, their business model may not be sustainable. Regulatory intervention that facilitates portability and interoperability might be useful for farmers to overcome data lock-ins, but designing data access rights is a complicated issue as many parties contribute data in the production process and may claim access rights. Minor changes in who gets access to which data under which conditions may have significant effects on stakeholders. We conclude that digital agriculture still has some way to go to reach equitable and efficient solutions to data access rights. Similar situations are likely to occur in other industries that rely on non-personal machine data.
ER

Download

Mods

<mods>
  <titleInfo>
    <title>Competition Problems and Governance of Non-personal Agricultural Machine Data: Comparing Voluntary Initiatives in the US and EU</title>
  </titleInfo>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart type="family">Atik</namePart>
    <namePart type="given">Can</namePart>
  </name>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart type="family">Martens</namePart>
    <namePart type="given">Bertin</namePart>
  </name>
  <abstract>The arrival of digital data in agriculture opens the possibility to realise productivity gains through precision farming. It also raises questions about the distribution of these gains between farmers and agricultural service providers. Farmers’ control of the data is often perceived as a means to appropriate a larger share of these gains. We show how data-driven agricultural business models lock farm data into machines and devices that reduce competition in downstream agricultural services markets.  Personal data protection regulation is not applicable to non-personal agricultural machine data. Voluntary data charters in the EU and US emulate GDPR-like principles to give farmers more control over their data but do not really change market-based outcomes due to their legal design.Third-party platforms are a necessary intermediary because farmers cannot achieve the benefits from applications that depend on economies of scale and scope in data aggregation. Data lock-in, combined with the low marginal value of individual farm data, puts farmers in a weak bargaining position. Neutral intermediaries that are not vertically integrated into agricultural machines, inputs or services may help farmers to circumvent monopolistic data lock-ins. However, unless these neutral intermediaries find a way to generate and monetise economies of scale and scope with their data, their business model may not be sustainable. Regulatory intervention that facilitates portability and interoperability might be useful for farmers to overcome data lock-ins, but designing data access rights is a complicated issue as many parties contribute data in the production process and may claim access rights. Minor changes in who gets access to which data under which conditions may have significant effects on stakeholders. We conclude that digital agriculture still has some way to go to reach equitable and efficient solutions to data access rights. Similar situations are likely to occur in other industries that rely on non-personal machine data.</abstract>
  <subject>
    <topic>agricultural data</topic>
    <topic>competition policy</topic>
    <topic>data access rights</topic>
    <topic>data governance</topic>
    <topic>non-personal machine data</topic>
    <topic>smart farming</topic>
  </subject>
  <classification authority="ddc">340</classification>
  <relatedItem type="host">
    <genre authority="marcgt">periodical</genre>
    <genre>academic journal</genre>
    <titleInfo>
      <title>JIPITEC</title>
    </titleInfo>
    <part>
      <detail type="volume">
        <number>12</number>
      </detail>
      <detail type="issue">
        <number>3</number>
      </detail>
      <date>2021</date>
      <extent unit="page">
        <start>370</start>
        <end>396</end>
      </extent>
    </part>
  </relatedItem>
  <identifier type="issn">2190-3387</identifier>
  <identifier type="urn">urn:nbn:de:0009-29-53365</identifier>
  <identifier type="uri">http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-53365</identifier>
  <identifier type="citekey">atik2021</identifier>
</mods>
Download

Full Metadata

JIPITEC – Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law
Article search
Extended article search
Newsletter
Subscribe to our newsletter
Follow Us
twitter
 
Navigation