The writer is a professor on european university institute, florence, and the writer of big tech & digital economy

Europe is dropping behind the us and asia regarding economic dynamism, start-ups, productivity and recent years, numerous europeans took great pride in a brussels effect, the concept that the continents relative advantage lies in shaping the guidelines of worldwide trade. unfortuitously, this badge of honour distracts attention from a brussels problem the complete lack of superstar organizations considering that the beginning associated with the net.

There are many reasons for europes sluggish performance: poor investment capital markets, fragmented study abilities, reasonable employee mobility and frustrated business owners. general public policy and attitudes give an explanation for relative technological decline and not enough economic dynamism. since the 2008 economic crisis, europes developing share of zombie organizations those struggling to cover the expense of capital features put a brake on dynamism by crowding down efficient businesses and start-ups. expansive financial and financial policy, weak financial reform and fragmented bankruptcy regimes tend to be on the list of culprits.

For decades, europe has actually did not address its not enough dynamism. actually, its going to increase down with increased innovation-disabling policies, for instance the suggested digital services act. the eu management wants lawmakers to prohibit business designs and techniques that gatekeeper platforms employ. oddly, it doesn't appear to realize that big tech is certainly not like big pharma. pharma takes refuge from me too common drugs with strong patents and other intellectual residential property liberties that assure there are adequate earnings to operate a vehicle the next round of threat using and development. these days big tech must definitely provide commanding advantageous assets to consumers as well as other people while trying to various other systems, such as for example marketing, to aid great margins.

Exactly what do europe do about that? initially, it will declare a good plan tilt towards entrepreneurship and innovation. second, it will abandon its obsession with small is beautiful. in digital sectors, economic focus generally reflects innovation and powerful efficacy and effectiveness, maybe not dominance. europe needs a moratorium on broad rules that restrict company size, restrict development into brand-new markets and stop the purchase of start-ups. using fixed competitors policy approaches whenever dynamic competition could be the handmaiden of growth and success is foolhardy.

Third, europe should embrace change, not strangle it. an important supply of innovation arises when incumbents pivot far from historical markets, repurpose their particular resources and explore new business opportunities. in the california gold rush, wells fargo had been a courier organization; it is now the biggest united states financial institutions. nokia started as a forest items organization and it is today an important telecommunication gear provider. the european commission, but last year buried the suggested alstom-siemens merger. it would not credit alstoms long-term method of exit from energy and expansion in train. in effect, your decision squandered a chance to repurpose and reinvigorate european capabilities in the transport industry.

The california gold-rush metaphor is informative from another point of view. record implies that probably the most successful organizations, like levi-strauss, couldn't make a lot of money by mining silver, but by supplying shovels, pickaxes and tents to miners. the overriding point is whenever a brand new business opportunity emerges, there is less revenue in rushing to replicate it compared to developing complementary products, solutions and applications.

Yet europe prioritises imitative competition. simply take digital industries. the french and german governments are trying to establish a data infrastructure, gaiax, to contend with united states and chinese cloud players. this targets a crowded technological area. a much better plan is to help allowing technologies that could provide european-based companies to be able to lead-in brand new application areas.

Fifty years ago inside united states challenge, jean-jacques servan-schreiber warned their other europeans our problems tend to be rooted inside want to change the hopelessly ossified european communities which believe it is so difficult to become more flexible. their admonitions ring true these days. a european policy complement the electronic age should not subsidise survival, catch-up and imitator competition. it must reward pioneering and dynamic abilities, and favour risk-taking and innovation-led competition.

David teece, a teacher at theinstitute for company innovation, haas class, u.c. berkeley, contributed for this article