Failing to deter: analysing Spain’s ineffective antitrust measures and cartelist activities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper critically examines the effectiveness of Spain’s antitrust measures in deterring cartel behaviour. Despite aligning with EU standards, Spain’s penalties for anticompetitive practices have proven ineffective. An analysis of sanctions imposed reveals that both the 2009 Communication and the post-2015 framework fail to deter cartel formation effectively. Evidence suggests that both the 2009 Communication and the post-2015 framework have failed to prevent cartel formation effectively. Corporate fines often do not exceed the expected benefits of collusion, undermining their deterrent function. While increasing fines might enhance effectiveness, such measures risk unintended consequences, including firm insolvency and reduced market competition. Therefore, implementing complementary sanctions could serve as a valuable addition. While Spain’s enforcement system already includes fines for individuals and bidder exclusion, these measures face significant challenges. The lack of detailed definitions and the absence of clear guidelines on the subjects considered liable make imposing these fines more difficult. Additionally, the bidder exclusion mechanism was not properly transposed into Spanish legislation, leading to its temporary suspension by the National High Court pending resolution of appeals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it