E-Hailing Transportation and the Issue of Competition in Indonesia

Rizaldy Anggriawan

Abstract


E-hailing transportation can be an alternative solution for both fulfilling the increasing demand for public transportation and reducing the number of vehicles on the road. As a populated country, Indonesia has benefited much from the emergence of e-hailing transportation. Unfortunately, despite positive impacts that have been enjoyed, numerous issues have arisen along with the growth of e-hailing transportation in the country. There are several indications that e-hailing companies have been involving in an unfair competition, including predatory pricing. This is done by offering very low fare of transportation services (commonly referred to as promotion fare) whose purpose is to eliminate their competitors. As such, the winner will be monopolizing the market and harming the ecosystem in it. The aims of this paper is to examine whether the Indonesian competition law can address the unfair business competition within e-hailing industry. It is found that e-hailing industry in Indonesia has been exposed to the practice of cash-burning by the business players. Competition law is needed to foster fair competition among the business players in e-hailing industry. Furthermore, the Government needs to formulate the good competition policy and ensure its enforcement.

Keywords


E-Hailing Transportation, Predatory Pricing, and Competition Law

Full Text:

PDF

References


Book

Frederic M. Scherer. (1980). Industrial Market Structures and Economic Performance. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Hermawan Kartajaya & Hooi Den Huan. (2019). Asian Competitors Case Book: Marketing for Competitiveness in the Age of Digital Consumers. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.

Martyn Taylor. 2006. International Competition Law: A New Dimension for the WTO?. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richard A. Posner. (1976). Antitrust Law: An Economic Perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Legislations

Law No.5 Year 1999 on Prohibition of Monopoly Practices and Unfair Business Competition

Ministry of Transportation Regulation No. 12 of 2019 on Safety Protection of Motorcycle Users Used for Public Interest

Ministry of Transportation Regulation No. 118 Year 2018 on the Special Rental Services

Ministry of Transportation Regulation No. 108 Year 2017 on Non-Route People Public Transportation

Decree of the Minister of Transportation of the Republic of Indonesia Number KP 348 of 2019 on Guidelines for Calculating Fare for the Use of Motorbike Services Used for Public Interest through the Application

Singapore Competition Act

Court Decision

Acquisition of Uber's Southeast Asian business by Grab and Uber's acquisition of a 27.5 per cent stake in Grab. 500/001/18 CSSS. 142. The Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (2018).

Journal

Abdul Adhim Azzuhri, Aisyah Syarafina, Frendy Tanoto Yoga, & Reski Amalia. (2018). “A Creative, Innovative, and Solutive Transportation for Indonesia with Its Setbacks and How to Tackle Them: A Case Study of the Phenomenal GOJEK”. Review of Integrative Business and Economics Research, 7(1).

Athapol Ruangkanjanases & Chayanee Techapoolphol. (2018). “Adoption of E-hailing Applications: A Comparative Study between Female and Male Users in Thailand”. Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering, 10(1-10).

Boon-Chui Teo, Muhammad Azimulfadli Mustaffa, & Amir Iqbal Mohd Rozi. (2018). “To Grab or Not to Grab?: Passenger Ride Intention towards E-Hailing Services”. Malaysian Journal of Consumer and Family Economics, 21.

Brett P Matherne & Jay O’toole. (2017). “E-hailing: Aggressive Management for Growth”. The Case Journal, 13(4).

Laurence Todd, Adli Amirullah, & Chiang Hui Xing. (2018). “E-hailing Regulations: Striking the Right Balance”. Policy Ideas, 57.

Listia Natadjaja & Paulus Benny Setyawan. (2016). “Creating Community through Design: The Case of Go-Jek Online”. International Journal of Cultural and Creative Industries, 4(1).

Margherita Colangelo & Mariateresa Maggiolino. (2017). E-hailing: A New Challenge for Regulation and Competition Law?. Market and Competition Law Review. Available from: https://www.academia.edu/35236191/E-HAILING_A_NEW_CHALLENGE_FOR_REGULATION_AND_COMPETITION_LAW. [Accessed on October 4, 2019 at 9.34 am].

Matthew Wigginton Conway, Deborah Salon & David A. King. (2018). Trends in Taxi Use and the Advent of Ridehailing, 1995–2017: Evidence from the US National Household Travel Survey. Urban Science Journal, 2(3).

Philip Areeda, and Donald F. Turner. (1975). “Predatory Pricing and Related Practices under Section 2 of the Sherman Act”. Harvard Law Review, 88(4).

Rezmia Febrina. (2017). "Dampak Kegiatan Jual Rugi (Predatory Pricing) yang Dilakukan Pelaku Usaha dalam Perspektif Persaingan Usaha". Jurnal Selat, 4(2).

Thomas J. DiLorenzo. (1991). The Myth of Predatory Pricing. Cato Institute Policy Analysis, 169.

William E. Kovacic. (2012). Competition in High-Tech Industries: Improving the Federal Competition Joint Venture. George Mason Law Review, 19(5).

Paper

Ahmad Sahir Jais & Azizan Marzuki. (2018). Urban Mobility Using E-Hailing in the Historic City of Melaka, Malaysia: Preliminary Findings. Paper presented at the Seventh International Conference on Built Environment in Developing Countries. Kuching Sarawak, Malaysia.

David S. Evans & Richard Schmalensee. (2010). Failure to Launch: Critical Mass in Platform Businesses. Available from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1353502. [Accessed on October 4, 2019 at 10.13 am].

Report

Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (1989). Predatory Pricing. Retrieved from: http://www.oecd.org/competition/abuse/2375661.pdf. [Accessed on October 12, 2019 at 3.43 pm].

World Wide Web

Bisnis.com. (2019). Wah, Ada Persaingan Tak Sehat dalam Industri Ojek Online? Available from: https://ekonomi.bisnis.com/read/20190520/98/924905/wah-ada-persaingan-tak-sehat-dalam-industri-ojek-online. [Accessed on October 12, 2019 at 2.03 pm].

CNN Indonesia. (2018). Singapura Denda Rp137 M Atas Akuisisi Uber-Grab. Available from: https://www.cnnindonesia.com/teknologi/20180924142809-185-332720/singapura-denda-rp137-m-atas-akuisisi-uber-grab. [Accessed on October 12, 2019 at 4.05 pm].

Liputan 6. (2019). KPPU Diminta Waspadai Praktik Monopoli di Bisnis Ojek Online. Available from: https://www.liputan6.com/bisnis/read/3961099/kppu-diminta-waspadai-praktik-monopoli-di-bisnis-ojek-online. [Accessed on October 11, 2019 at 5.12 pm].

Sama.id. (2018). Predatory Pricing Pasca Grab Akuisisi Uber. Available from: http://www.sama.id/2018/07/09/predatory-pricing-pasca-grab-akuisisi-uber/. [Accessed on October 12, 2019 at 4.32 pm].

Tempo. (2019). Grab, Gojek Respond to Ban on Online Ojek Discounts. Available from: https://en.tempo.co/read/1213997/grab-gojek-respond-to-ban-on-online-ojek-discounts. [Accessed on September 28, 2019 at 12.35 pm].

The Inside Stories. (2018). Indonesia Revises Online Transportation Rule. Available from: https://theinsiderstories.com/indonesia-revises-online-transportation-rule/. [Accessed on September 28, 2019 at 6.34 pm].




DOI: https://doi.org/10.18196/iclr.2116

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Rizaldy Anggriawan

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.