Do sandboxes favor big firms?

Lens adapted to this topic: Open-access and pro-competition reform

A serious dissenting position argues that the problem is not sandboxes as such but closed, discretionary models. Application-based permission can screen out frontier innovators while attracting firms already near compliance. Replacing permission-first systems with open safe harbors, clear eligibility rules, and broader access could make sandboxes more competition-enhancing, though this view still recognizes that poorly designed schemes can create privilege.

• Closed sandboxes can function as costly permission systems that screen out frontier innovators and attract firms already close to compliance.
• Open sandboxes using default safe harbors could broaden access by protecting eligible firms from specified authorization requirements unless excluded by clear rules.
• Sandboxes were created to lower regulatory barriers and can promote innovation and consumer benefits when oversight, disclosure, and compensation protections are maintained.
• The benefits of sandboxes may accrue mainly to participating technology firms, so claims that they improve the wider regulatory system or public welfare require more evidence.

Featured sourceDone right, regulatory sandboxes can promote competition | American Bankeramericanbanker.com4 sourcesView sources