IESET.
Policies·eu_data_governance_act_2022

Data Governance Act 2022

DEU, FRA, ITA, ESP, NLD, BEL, POL, SWE, IRL, AUT·2016 – presentcandidate
movesproduct market competition~sectoral licensing↑trade openness↓

What the policy did

Regulation (EU) 2022/868 — the Data Governance Act — sets EU-wide rules on the re-use of protected public-sector data, registers and supervises data intermediation services and "data altruism" organisations, and establishes the European Data Innovation Board. It complements the GDPR by enabling controlled, neutral data sharing across sectors and member states under a harmonised governance framework, with national competent bodies overseeing intermediaries.

Policy-content fingerprint — what this policy moved, on which axes

Per invariant 3, reforms are scored by what they did on each channel-separated axis, not by the party that enacted them. This fingerprint is how the policy-match engine finds historical analogues.

intended
~
product market competition
regulatory.product_market_competition
Product-market regulation, entry barriers, licensing burdens, network-industry regulation, price controls.
mixed · weak
New neutral data intermediation channels open while mandatory neutrality limits commercial models.
↑
sectoral licensing
regulatory.sectoral_licensing
Sector-specific licensing regimes, concentration / quota allocation, state-controlled entry (energy, telecoms, healthcare, banking).
increased · weak
tighter sectoral licensing / more state gating
Data intermediaries and altruism entities must notify and register with national authorities.
↓
trade openness
regulatory.trade_openness
Trade policy openness — tariffs, non-tariff barriers, FTAs, industrial protection.
decreased · weak
more protectionist
Restrictions on non-EU government access to public-sector data limit cross-border re-use.

Enacted by

Empirical evidence — linked hypotheses

Explicit links are curated by the author. Inferred links are hypotheses in the library that test the same axes this policy moved — the framework's answer to "what does the data say about a policy like this?".

Estonia adopted among the most radical market-liberalisation packages of any post-Soviet state — flat tax (26% universal rate, 1994), currency board (EEK pegged to DM/EUR, 1992), rapid privatisation, unilateral free trade, and minimal capital controls — and by 2007 had recovered to Soviet-era GDP per capita levels and substantially exceeded them, while Belarusian and Ukrainian peers had not recovered comparably.
estonia_market_reform_post_soviet_growth_1991_2007inferred
viaregulatory.trade_opennessregulatory.product_market_competition
PARTIAL — recovery threshold pass=True (year_recovered=1998, 2007 vs 1991 = 70.53282727739165); Baltic−CIS gap pass=False (gap=5.1509956229348575)
partial
Across a broad panel of economies 1980-2020, market reforms (privatisation, trade liberalisation, and price decontrol) produce durable gains in real GDP per capita growth only when rule-of-law scores exceed a minimum threshold (WGI Rule of Law > -0.5, approximately the 40th percentile of the global distribution).
rule_of_law_market_reform_complementarityinferred
viaregulatory.product_market_competitionregulatory.trade_openness
REFUTED — coef=-0.1483 (sign opposite claim +), p=0.00481
refuted
Among high-income economies 1990-2020, services-sector competition — measured by low barriers to entry, low incumbent-protection scores, and high churn in retail, transport, communications, and professional services — predicts long-run prosperity (real GDP per capita growth and labour-productivity growth) better than manufacturing-specific industrial policy spending.
sectoral_competition_services_productivityinferred
viaregulatory.product_market_competitionregulatory.sectoral_licensingregulatory.trade_openness
PARTIAL — coef=+0.000842, p=0.361 (above α=0.05); direction inconclusive
partial
Canada’s long-run prosperity after the Canada–US Free Trade Agreement (1988) and NAFTA (1994) is more associated with market openness than with national industrial-policy initiatives.
canada_market_liberalisation_vs_state_industry_1988_2024inferred
viaregulatory.trade_opennessregulatory.product_market_competition
INCONCLUSIVE_DATA_PENDING — treatment 'canada_post_1988' has no within-country variation under country fixed effects
run pending
Australia’s long expansion after the Hawke-Keating reforms (1983–1996) — including tariff cuts, financial deregulation, competition-policy introduction, and fiscal consolidation — is better predicted by market liberalisation than by sector-specific state direction.
australia_hawke_keating_reform_long_runinferred
viaregulatory.trade_opennessregulatory.product_market_competition
PARTIAL — coef=-0.03935, p=0.076 (above α=0.05); direction inconclusive
partial
The Soviet central-planning system, having already exhibited TFP stagnation 1970-1989, underwent a canonical institutional and economic collapse 1989-1998 as plan-enforcement was withdrawn without functioning market institutions in place.
soviet_union_central_planning_gdp_collapse_1989_1991inferred
viaregulatory.product_market_competition
INCONCLUSIVE_DATA_PENDING — no outcome variable loaded; missing: ['derived: count of canonical_metrics with threshold met']
run pending
NZ Rogernomics 1984–1993 liberalisation (tariff removal, SOE corporatisation, financial-market liberalisation) produced productivity acceleration and real-income gains over 1990s–2000s relative to pre-reform trend.
nz_rogernomics_productivity_effectinferred
viaregulatory.trade_opennessregulatory.product_market_competition
refuted — NZ synthetic-control log-TFP gap mean over 1995-2005 = -3.80% (<= 0); informative log GDP-pc gap = -22.70%. Productivity acceleration claim not suppor…
refuted
Singapore's long-run prosperity and frontier convergence are better predicted by extreme trade openness, strong rule of law, competitive product and services markets, and high economic freedom than by state ownership or industrial targeting alone.
singapore_state_capacity_market_openness_comboinferred
viaregulatory.trade_opennessregulatory.product_market_competition
PARTIAL — coef=-0.0001143, p=0.713 (above α=0.1); direction inconclusive
partial

Similar historical policies

Ranked by axis-fingerprint overlap with this policy. Direction match bolded — those are the closest historical analogues. Shape of the match is what drives policy-outcome comparison, not the country or party label.

State Foreign Trade Monopoly and Autarkic Controls
MMR·1964
match
1.5
trade opennessproduct market competitionsectoral licensing
EU AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689)
DEU, FRA, ITA, ESP, NLD, BEL, POL, SWE, IRL, AUT·2021
match
1.4
sectoral licensingproduct market competitiontrade openness
Jokowi nickel ore export ban 2020
IDN·2020
match
1.3
trade opennesssectoral licensing
Heavy and Chemical Industrialisation (HCI) drive — South Korea 1973-1979
KOR·1973
match
1.3
trade opennesssectoral licensing
UK Brexit implementation — EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement 2020
GBR·2020
match
1.3
trade opennesssectoral licensing
Oil nationalisation — Ley 5 de 1975 (Venezuela)
VEN·1975
match
1.3
sectoral licensingtrade openness
EU Digital Markets Act + Digital Services Act (2022)
DEU, FRA, ITA, ESP, NLD, BEL, POL, SWE, IRL, AUT·2020
match
1.2
product market competitionsectoral licensingtrade openness
Data Act 2023
DEU, FRA, ITA, ESP, NLD, BEL, POL, SWE, IRL, AUT·2016
match
1.2
product market competitionsectoral licensingtrade openness