Market studies continue to be an important tool for competition authorities. They can have multiple purposes but generally seek to promote competition in a sector, targeting a gap between traditional enforcement and competition issues driven by other factors, such as regulations, market features or non-illegal conduct that otherwise affects competition. Market studies improve knowledge and, while their outcomes can vary, they often result in recommendations that advocate to promote competition.
There are differences across authorities in how they approach market studies, but overall there are many similarities. This suggests that there is significant common ground for best practices, consistent with previous work by the OECD and ICN in the area.
There are significant convergences in the legal powers that competition authorities possess regarding market studies, with most authorities appearing able to conduct them, often at their own initiative and sometimes at the request of government. In general, most competition authorities can compel the provision of information during a study and take appropriate measures to protect its confidentiality. There are also common approaches to ensure that market studies remain proportionate and transparent tools, including through practices to identify the scope of studies at the beginning and to consult on findings with relevant stakeholders.
While each study is different, competition authorities appear to take relatively common approaches to market studies, including placing importance on stakeholder feedback. Market studies also provide the opportunity to explore more advanced analytical techniques when appropriate, such as econometrics, large-scale surveys of consumers or even behavioural economics techniques.
While important, market studies are not without limits or free from challenges. In particular, while useful to identify competition issues, they should not be seen as a substitute for enforcement, or other tools, in all circumstances. As advocacy tools, whether they make an impact in improving competition, usually relies on bodies other than competition authorities taking action, which can raise challenges. Further, market studies should be carefully selected as they can also impose significant costs on market participants.
A significant extension of market studies would be to provide competition authorities with powers to remedy competition issues that are identified, through market investigations tools. Such tools are still rare and overall experience with them is low but nonetheless interest appears to be increasing. Monitoring developments in this space will be interesting to understand their relative costs and benefits, which may vary by jurisdiction.
Ex-post assessments of market studies appear rare but, given their importance and the emergence of market investigations, authorities should consider if it is possible to give more focus to this area, despite the many competing demands. Academic institutions and international organisations, such as the OECD, may be able to help close this gap.
Finally, as with many areas of competition policy, co‑operation between competition authorities in relation to market studies promises many benefits, and competition authorities are already active in this space. Nonetheless, there may be scope for greater co-ordination between authorities in conducting market studies, particularly considering whether there is a greater role for joint studies.