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 370-396Download
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. ERDownload
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
Bibliographic Citation | Journal of intellectual property, information technology and electronic commerce law 12 (2021) 3 |
---|---|
Title |
Competition Problems and Governance of Non-personal Agricultural Machine Data: Comparing Voluntary Initiatives in the US and EU (eng) |
Author | Can Atik, Bertin Martens |
Language | eng |
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. |
Subject | agricultural data, competition policy, data access rights, data governance, non-personal machine data, smart farming |
DDC | 340 |
Rights | DPPL |
URN: | urn:nbn:de:0009-29-53365 |