The role of digital intermediation platforms in opening up international markets

DIPs are expanding, but along very different paths across sectors

The uptake of DIPs has grown markedly in recent years, fundamentally transforming how goods and services are accessed and consumed. This expansion is reflected in a notable increase in traffic per capita across all three sectors examined, underscoring a broader societal shift towards digital intermediation. However, this growth has been uneven, shaped by sector-specific dynamics and external shocks, notably the COVID-19 pandemic, which have influenced platform uptake trajectories over time.

Figure 3 illustrates these sectoral trends in DIPs traffic per capita over the past decade, highlighting the differential impacts of the pandemic on platform usage. The travel and accommodation sector saw a sharp decline in traffic during 2020, coinciding with global lockdowns, followed by a gradual recovery, with usage returning to pre-pandemic levels by 2023. Similarly, ride-hailing and carpooling experienced a steep pandemic-induced downturn; while some recovery has been observed, traffic levels in 2024 remain below those seen in 2019. In contrast, X2C online marketplaces – particularly those with hybrid business models such as Amazon – witnessed a pronounced pandemic surge in activity, peaking around 2022 before stabilising closer to pre-pandemic levels by late 2023.

The observed patterns around the COVID-19 period for travel and accommodation as well as ride-hailing align with broader economic evidence. For example, growth estimates for related sectors such as rideshare services and travel services from the U.S. BEA corroborate the pandemic’s significant impact on these industries (Highfill and Quistorff, 2023[16]). This suggests that web traffic can serve as a reasonable proxy for consumer uptake and may provide insights into the overall evolution of digital intermediation markets. It is important to note that traffic does not necessarily reflect where value is being created. Indeed, in many instances, like accommodation or ride-sharing, DIPs point towards domestic suppliers generating important domestic value added.

Figure 3. DIPs uptake has expanded rapidly with marked differences across sectors

Traffic per capita, OECD average, by sector and type, 2012-2024

Notes: The dark blue line depicts the evolution of traffic per capita across all countries for pure DIPs, while the light blue line represents hybrid DIPs. The grey dotted vertical line indicates that data before January 2016 covers 23 countries for which information is available throughout the entire period; from January 2016, the sample includes all 38 countries. The vertical orange dotted line marks the approximate start of the COVID-19 pandemic and initial lockdowns or restrictions affecting the movement of people implemented in many countries in early 2020.

Sources: Author’s elaboration based on data from Semrush and Crunchbase.

The rapid growth of DIPs across sectors has not only transformed consumer engagement but also reshaped market structures. These shifts raise important questions about competition and concentration among leading platforms, explored further in Box 3.

Box 3. How competitive are digital intermediation markets?

Digital intermediation markets have expanded rapidly, but the extent to which activity is concentrated among a few dominant players varies across sectors. Analysing market concentration using the Herfindahl–Hirschman Index (HHI) (Rhoades, 1993[19]) helps assess market power, competition resilience, and whether observed shifts in platform usage reflect structural change rather than temporary fluctuations. Balanced-panel HHIs, which include only platforms continuously active from 2014 to 2024, provide reassurance that observed trends reflect structural shifts in market power rather than transient entry or exit (Figure 4).*

In ride-hailing and carpooling, the median HHI across the OECD approaching 1.0 in 2014. Since then, competition has intensified steadily, lowering median HHI to around 0.51 by 2024, with balanced-panel HHI following a similar trajectory (0.40). This decline illustrates meaningful structural competition among the largest platforms rather than fluctuations caused by smaller, short-lived entrants.

By contrast, travel and accommodation booking remains more fragmented. Multiple global platforms, including Airbnb, Booking.com, and Expedia, operate alongside numerous local intermediaries. Median HHI is relatively stable at approximately 0.36, with balanced-panel HHI closely aligned (0.33), indicating a competitive market where no single platform exerts dominant monopoly power.

X2C online marketplaces exhibit moderate concentration. A small number of global platforms, such as Amazon and eBay, retain substantial shares. Median HHI has declined modestly from 0.44 in 2014 to 0.42 in 2024, with balanced-panel HHI showing a similar pattern (0.43). These figures suggest that competitive pressures on the largest platforms remain limited, while smaller entrants contribute little to changes in overall market structure.

Note: * Please see Annex Table A.D.1. for a list of countries included in the analysis.

Figure 4. Ride-hailing markets have become more competitive, while travel and accommodation booking and X2C marketplaces remain more concentrated

Median HHI and balanced-panel HHI for DIPs across sectors, 2014-2024

Notes: HHI refers to the Herfindahl–Hirschman Index calculated from platform traffic shares. Balanced-panel HHI includes only platforms continuously active throughout the period.

Sources: Author’s elaboration based on data from Semrush and Crunchbase.

Cross-country patterns in the presence of foreign-headquartered DIPs in 2024 reveal considerable heterogeneity across sectors and countries. As shown in Figure 5, the penetration of foreign platforms into domestic markets varies not only by country but also by sector, reflecting differences in market structure, platform business models, and consumer behaviour (Costa et al., 2021[4]). This cross-sectoral perspective highlights that while DIPs have achieved broad global reach, their geographic footprints remain uneven – some national markets are dominated by foreign providers, while others continue to be served primarily by domestic platforms. These patterns are in part shaped by the presence of a few dominant global DIPs that operate in multiple countries, rather than by evenly distributed foreign competition across all markets.

Figure 5. Foreign platform penetration varies widely across sectors and countries

Total traffic, traffic from foreign-headquartered firms, and traffic per capita, by sector and type, 2024

Notes: “Traffic” refers to the number of unique visits to each platform, measured by country, sector, DIP type (pure or pure & hybrid), and headquarter origin (domestic or foreign). Traffic per capita for each country is calculated as total annual traffic in 2024 divided by the annual population in 2024, while the OECD value is a population-weighted average across all OECD countries. The data reflect relative platform usage across countries and sectors in 2024 and are intended as a proxy for the uptake and diffusion of DIPs.

Sources: Author’s elaboration based on data from Semrush, Crunchbase and (OECD, 2026[20]).

The travel and accommodation booking sector exhibits a diverse pattern of foreign platform penetration across countries. In 2024, platform diffusion in Canada, Colombia, France and Greece is largely attributable to foreign-headquartered firms, reflecting the global reach of major intermediaries such as Booking.com, Expedia, and Airbnb.1 Sweden and the United Kingdom similarly report substantial foreign platform traffic, underscoring the competitive nature and openness of these markets to cross-border DIPs. By contrast, Japan and the Netherlands show relatively lower foreign traffic shares, indicating the continued importance of domestic platforms or more limited foreign penetration in these markets. The average share of foreign platform traffic across the OECD in this sector stands at around 54%, reflecting the strong presence of global intermediaries.

In the ride-hailing and carpooling sector, foreign platforms have a pronounced presence in many countries, often accounting for most of the traffic. Austria, Belgium, Italy and Mexico exemplify markets where foreign-headquartered firms dominate, capturing virtually all platform traffic in 2024. High foreign penetration is also observed in Canada, Colombia and Portugal. By contrast, the United States represents a significant outlier, exhibiting virtually no traffic from foreign firms, likely shaped by early market entry, strong network effects, and high concentration in the domestic ride-hailing market. Japan shows a moderate foreign presence, with foreign platforms accounting for roughly half of platform traffic, while Korea reports low foreign penetration, underscoring the strength of domestic DIPs or fragmented markets in certain regions. The OECD average stands at around 46% of total ride-hailing and carpooling traffic coming from foreign platforms, indicating widespread foreign presence across countries.2

The X2C online marketplace sector displays complex dynamics with foreign platforms playing a pivotal role in many countries, especially in highly digitalised economies. In France, Germany and in the United Kingdom, foreign platforms account for a substantial majority of marketplace traffic in 2024, supported by global giants like Amazon and eBay. This dominance is consistent across both pure and hybrid DIPs, underscoring the strong position of foreign intermediaries. Colombia and Mexico also show nearly complete foreign platform traffic, reflecting strong international market presence. By contrast, Japan and Korea stand out as notable exceptions where foreign penetration remains relatively low, even when considering hybrid platforms, pointing to strong domestic ecosystems that continue to shape consumer behaviour and market structure. Across the OECD, foreign DIPs represent roughly 33% of traffic when considering only pure DIPs, and 45% when hybrid models are included, indicating a substantial, though somewhat more limited, foreign presence compared to other sectors.

Notes

← 1.  High traffic attributed to foreign-headquartered platforms does not imply that there is no domestic value added. Many of these platforms intermediating domestic suppliers, so the analysis focuses on where the value of intermediation is captured rather than the geographic origin of underlying services.

← 2.  The domestic classification is based on the location of a platform's global headquarters. Consequently, countries that host the headquarters of major global DIPs will naturally exhibit lower foreign traffic shares. This headquarters effect reflects domestic market leadership and early-mover advantages rather than regulatory restrictiveness per se.